Arpege: dinner and lunch; 2002-2004

[Fat Guy]

Excellently constructed sentence, especially the rhythmic flow without the use (or need) for commas.

Thank you. I was a bit concerned about the awkwardness of the plural form of "consensus" but I figured I could muscle through the sentence anyway.

[lxt]

And I'm certainly not going to accept the premise from a professional that I am mistaken unless I accept his point of view just because he is a professional.

There is no one who could better appraise the aesthetic value of the product be it in food, art or music than the professional, the equal to the creator. The “academy” of chosen, the ones who are able to see atoms, to comprehend the whole while browsing through the particulars are people whose role is not as much to “dictate to the consumer” but rather to educate them as well as to set new trends for the future artists. However, if you consider chefs following Ducasse’s trend in admiration for his techniques being an imposition on the public, then your assertion must be correct.

To turn your back resolutely on the philosophy of others may be heroic or commendable, but it is not undogmatic and open-minded. A possibility of self-assertion, a sense that all our theories are provisional, a constant realization that after all the hypotheses of others, especially experts in the area of our interest, may be the right ones, always characterizes the truly empirical temper and perhaps even common sense. How else would one learn if not from the professionals?

[Bux]

This thread seems to be verging on a "my chef is better than yours." AD/PA was perhaps not the most compelling meal or dining memory I've had, but the food was mostly drop dead stunning. I think I posted this, and more, sometime back in reference to my meal last November"

In addition to some canapés, we were brought an amuse bouche of what we believe was a sort of warm molded savory soft meringue sitting in a bit of lemony sauce. There was a parmesan tuille on top and some herring roe scattered about. Inside was a warm thick egg yolk. This was about the most exquisite egg we've seen. We were fully prepared to rave about this egg for some time to come had our plan not been upset by our the art and craft of our ordered courses, which were of such a high order as to make us re-evaluate the language with which we, or others, have used to describe fine food in the past.

Although as often as not, our dishes appeared devoted to the eye, it became clear that taste was the objective in each dish.

The service may have been a bit too aloof for me and maybe it's not my kind of room, but the food was impressive. When chocolate sauce on scallops becomes the standard for "inventive," Ducasse's food cannot be described as inventive. On the basis of my meal at AD/PA, which I may have noted was less joyous than my meal at AD/NY but which I felt offered more incredible food, I am ready to believe that Ducasse could set a bowl of cepes in olive oil before me and have me come away feeling I had never understood either olive oil or cepes until then--or maybe it will be boring, but it's patently absurd to dismiss his food because you haven't tasted it. I certainly wouldn't dismiss that kind of creativity that allows the diner to revisit food as it he's never tasted it before.

[Fat Guy]

This thread seems to be verging on a "my chef is better than yours."

Yes, and the reason it's so fun to watch Plotnicki wriggle on this particular hook is that by his own pop-culture, market-driven, reductionist standards, my chefs are better than his.

[marcus]

lxt -- I can decode what you're saying, but it ultimately comes across as gobbledygook. In the business that I'm in, we used to believe that we could tell customers what they wanted and needed. We've since learned that as professionals, its better to ask them.

[Bux]

In the business that I'm in, we used to believe that we could tell customers what they wanted and needed.  We've since learned that as professionals, its better to ask them.

Does that mean you were using the wrong approach or that you're in the wrong business.

[lxt]

Well it's like that in everything that the public does. They have their own reality of the world. That's because the purpose of things aesthetic is to communicate something to the diner. Once you get into what the technical aspects are, and you place greater or undue emphasis on them, the thrust of the communication changes from aesthetics to communicating technique. That's the difference between the trade and the public.

This happens with every aspect of consumerism.

Consumerism is a mechanism to set a monetary value on the product and has little to do with assessing it from the artistic perspective. The purpose of any product is to appeal to a consumer or to “communicate… to the diner.” However, the inability of the general population to accept or make the right choice based on the true values of the product doesn’t undermine its aesthetic value. If the general public were the only judge, we wouldn’t have Matisse and Prokofiev.

[Fat Guy]

Haute cuisine may be starting to resemble modern abstract art more than anything else. As painting stopped being about representation and the telling of stories to the illiterate, it stopped speaking to every one and in many cases only spoke to a very small group, at least until they made converts. Haute cuisine has, at least until recently, still been about an incremental refinement in what we normally eat for lunch and dinner. Fashion came and went in representational art, but abstract art was far harder to digest, appreciate or even understand. Negative comments about revolutionary or even major evolutionary movements become irrelevant. It's best to either ignore what you don't like or understand and concentrate on what you like or find interesting and explain what you find of interest.

Haute cuisine probably hasn't entered the parallel to what in art is the abstract phase, but even accepting the premise I'm not sure I can follow you along to your conclusion. I'm no art expert, but I thought the key to criticism of abstract art is that it should still be judged by the same standards as representational art, such as color, form, composition, and perspective (to cite one formulation I've seen, with respect to paintings); the difference being that there are no objects being represented so you have to work a lot harder to apply the standards. So I don't see how jumping from representational to abstract suddenly frees one up to say essentially "in matters of taste there's no dispute." In fact I don't see how it changes anything, because art can and must still be judged by a set of standards that have relevance.

It's the same with cuisine, which is always going to be about contrasts, extremes, and balances of flavor, texture, and temperature (my formulation). When you come to dishes where you have no reference points, just as with the art situation you have to work a little harder. But if you know food you can still use the same tools to perform the analysis. The first thing that, try as I might, I just couldn't get over about Passard was his decision to present several consecutive courses that could be eaten through a straw. That is downright bad culinary judgment by any well-grounded standard.

And in the end I think that to "ignore what you don't like or understand and concentrate on what you like or find interesting" is not the path I'd recommend to someone who is serious about comprehending the whole of a discipline.

[Steve Plotnicki]

All the positive posts about Ducasse on this thread add up to one thing, luxury (and proficency is part of luxury.) I am sure you are all right when you say, as Marcus did, that the meal was "succulent." But so what? I keep talking about creativity and cooking that is interesting. So far nobody has offered anything about Ducasse that is interesting. In fact, even among the positive reports there is an admission that the goal of the food isn't to be creative.

There is no one who could better appraise the aesthetic value of the product be it in food, art or music than the professional, the equal to the creator. The “academy” of chosen, the ones who are able to see atoms, to comprehend the whole while browsing through the particulars are people whose role is not as much to “dictate to the consumer” but rather to educate them as well as to set new trends for the future artists. However, if you consider chefs following Ducasse’s trend in admiration for his techniques being an imposition on the public, then your assertion must be correct.

Lxt - But there are many different types acadamys. There is the Chicago School of Business and what a disaster the world would be if their view was the exclusive school of thought. Then there is the UC Davis school of winemaking and look how their philosophy took the joy and complexity out of the finished product of wine. Then if you have been reading your recent publications, there is the Columbia School of Journalism who is the loftiest in its field and who managed to make their degree worthless. Then of course there are places like the Bauhaus where the contribution of the "Acadamy" is enormous.

For someone who strongly promotes objectivity and standards in taste and food set by the professionals in the culinary field, your current assertion that “what chefs think has nothing to do with what the paying public thinks” contradicts your previous statements

Gee you really don't pay attention do you. I have said that Ducasse, in spite of his technical proficiency does not convert it into an intersting aesthetic. In fact if you read the thousands of posts I have placed on this board, that is always my theme. So you don't ever forget it again I will repeat the phrase I must have used 100 times;

"the application of technique"

So it isn't enough to be a great carpenter. One has to build a fantastic cabinet with the technique. And what I have said in this instance is that I often find that professionals in a field (including in my own industry) are more interested in how the cabinet is built, and make decisions about quality based on that standard, and relegate how beautiful or interesting the cabinet is to a secondary position. Well they don't put a piece of cabinetry in a museum because the tongue and groove technique is perfect. They put it in because of the aesthetic it communicates to the viewer. It can be glued together for all they care. Good cabinetmaking is not a preprequisite to greatness in design.

But there is no disconnect between the trade and the public when it comes to Ducasse. The only disconnect is between you and those who say what you want to hear on the one hand, and the rest of the world on the other hand. Who do you think is eating in his restaurants? Other chefs?

Fat Guy - People who don't really know about haute cuisine and people who have heard about his greatness from publications. It's the same crowd who goes to see Wynton Marsalis because they heard that "jazz is good." There's a guy who is the greatest jazz musician of his time, and who has never made a single recording that anybody I know who knows anything about jazz likes. And don't get me wrong. Wynton Marsalis is a fabulous musician with technique that is worthy of being the definition of the word in the dictionary. I have seen the guy play in a tiny club and he is fantastic. But his recordings are institutionalized. They are without the spirit that made the music great in the first place. That is exactly how I feel about Ducasse. Like Wynton he knows how to hit all the right notes, but he plays them with no soul. He has eliminated spirit, creativity and soulfulness from the dining experience because his business plan demands

that he institutionalize and internationalize haute cuisine.

Bux - I have tasted his food. If you read above, I was at ADNY in March 2000 and Monte Carlo 10 years ago. And I haven't said his food is bad. His food can be very good. But I have said that his food isn't creative and is uninteresting and those are the reasons I frequent restaurants in this category. And more importantly, I've said that I don't have much desire to go back. That's the biggest statement I can make.

Marcus - Oh how easy business would be if people in the trade were always right and consumers were always wrong.

The first thing that, try as I might, I just couldn't get over about Passard was his decision to present several consecutive courses that could be eaten through a straw. That is downright bad culinary judgment by any well-grounded standard.

Fat Guy - I'm going to remember you said this when we are sitting at El Bulli and the first 17 courses are liquids or are served on popsicle sticks.

[g.johnson]

There is no one who could better appraise the aesthetic value of the product be it in food, art or music than the professional, the equal to the creator.

This is the intentional fallacy.

[g.johnson]

Yes, and the reason it's so fun to watch Plotnicki wriggle on this particular hook is that by his own pop-culture, market-driven, reductionist standards, my chefs are better than his.

Does he contradict himself? Very well, then he contradicts himself, he is large, he contains multitudes.

[Steve Plotnicki]

As much as it pains me , I have to agree with Monsieur Johnson here. I am of the school that believes that creators should be given an opportunity to explain their work. But their explanation or reasoning shouldn't be binding on people assessing the quality of the work.

As for this particular comment;

Yes, and the reason it's so fun to watch Plotnicki wriggle on this particular hook is that by his own pop-culture, market-driven, reductionist standards, my chefs are better than his.

I am consistant in my statements. It's not a popularity contest among everyone, I keep limiting my comments to the people I know who eat at that level and their opinions. It's my own Acadamy. And quite deserving as well. The rest of you can buy into a different theory of aesthetics. Not me.

[cabrales]

Breach #2, but worth it: There have been some references to the chef community. May I ask whether this is the US/Canadian chef community, or the chef community in France? And the chef community at what level -- e.g., two and three Michelin stars in France? Are members who have expressed the views of the chef community purporting to speak for an amorphous group, or can they articulate who within the chef community has articulated a viewpoint? May I add that Ducasse is self-aggrandizing and promotes himself, including through publicity received in the US in connection with opening up ADNY, the creation of his array of misguided establishments, etc. That is part of why the public (speaking of the overall population of diners with respect to all restaurants) might know of his name better. Ducasse might be like a chain store that offers appropriate work clothes. However, other cuisiniers might be like Giorgio Armani black label or Cerrutti with respect to work clothes -- they don't seek to appeal to everybody and in fact prefer a more limited, but appropriately appreciative, audience.

[Bux]

I'm no art expert,

I won't argue with that.

but I thought the key to criticism of abstract art is that it should still be judged by the same standards as representational art, such as color, form, composition, and perspective (to cite one formulation I've seen, with respect to paintings);

I suspect the non expert can best be advised to do that and learn what he can about art. The expert should be looking for those artists who break the conventions or commonly held taste in regard to those things. [Of course that's my opinion.]

It's the same with cuisine, which is always going to be about contrasts, extremes, and balances of flavor, texture, and temperature (my formulation). When you come to dishes where you have no reference points, just as with the art situation you have to work a little harder. But if you know food you can still use the same tools to perform the analysis. The first thing that, try as I might, I just couldn't get over about Passard was his decision to present several consecutive courses that could be eaten through a straw. That is downright bad culinary judgment by any well-grounded standard.

Analogies are always going to get me into trouble and one shouldn't be held to literal interpretations, but as far as you name what it's "about," you are probably on reasonable ground. It's when you accept existing value judgements in those areas, that I fear you (an editorial "you") can miss the rule breaking innovations. The truly revolutionary--that which will in time, cause us to reconsider our judgements--will frequently appear as bad judgement when it first appears. Picasso's initial cubist paintings would be a good example, breaking even perspective, the cardinal standard in western art since the early Renaissance, although Matisse, who used colors as if he were "a wild beast," would be another example in painting. Degas, who's often seen as a painter of lovely ballet dancers, broke conventions of composition by having people walk off the edge of the painting. I can't give an example in cuisine, because it has been tied to nourishment and that break, if it is happening, is seen as perverse and offensive to most eaters. I suspect a larger percentage of our society see recreational dining as a greater offense against nature than recreational sex.

And in the end I think that to "ignore what you don't like or understand and concentrate on what you like or find interesting" is not the path I'd recommend to someone who is serious about comprehending the whole of a discipline.

Hasty posting before an early bed time, can make me search for explanations the next morning even faster than the use of analogies. That's an embarrassing statement. I should never encourage anyone to ignore what they don't like or understand, but to learn more about those things. I really meant to suggest our best and most interesting information will come from those who expound on what they like or find interesting.

[Gavin Jones]

It's my own Acadamy. And quite deserving as well.

I will go and offer a cockerel to Asclepius.

[Bux]

There is no one who could better appraise the aesthetic value of the product be it in food, art or music than the professional, the equal to the creator.

This is the intentional fallacy.

But certainly there is no one who could better praise the aesthetic value of the product be it in food, art or music than the creator.

[Fat Guy]

May I add that Ducasse is self-aggrandizing and promotes himself, including through publicity received in the US in connection with opening up ADNY

To the contrary, Ducasse has been the recipient of the most negative food-media coverage in the history of both France (when he made his run for six stars) and the United States (when he opened in New York). He succeeds despite, not because of, the media. The media only broke on Ducasse -- in France and in New York -- after the opinion of educated gourmets overwhelmed the hateful and misguided press coverage.

In terms of the attempt both you and Plotnicki are making to define Ducasse as mass-market and chefs like Passard as artisanal and elite, I fear you're going farther and farther down a path that leads nowhere. The implication that Ducasse's customers are somehow less educated and have inferior taste to Passard's customers is ludicrous (and also insulting) and can't possibly be demonstrated. Frankly, it's nothing more than prejudice pulling the train of reason -- it doesn't compute. And as much as I appreciate both your opinion and Plotnicki's, when it comes to Steve Klc and Bux on the one hand versus Cabrales and Plotnicki on the other I know with whose taste and judgment I'm going to side most every time. And it's not because they have mass market tastes or are stupid. If anything it's because they know more about food than you guys do.

[marcus]

However, the inability of the general population to accept or make the right choice based on the true values of the product doesn’t undermine its aesthetic value.   If the general public were the only judge, we wouldn’t have Matisse and Prokofiev.

As I recall, the issue was whether the views of professionals in the trade are more determinitive as to true value than the views of consumers. I don't believe that the ultimate success of Matisse and Prokofiev or other artists and composers is determined by the views of their fellow professionals. I don't even know that their fellow professionals particularly supported them. Even if they did, it wouldn't matter. It was the consuming public, perhaps with the leadership of certain critics and art historians, who are part of the public and not the trade, that passed judgment. Of course, artists and composers have an advantage, in that their work has persistence and doesn't disappear down someones mouth to be gone forever. In the latter case, its aesthetic value is rather irrelevant if its not appreciated on the spot.

[cabrales]

If anything it's because they know more about food than you guys do.

Steven -- If you mean to say something, don't couch it in terms of "If anything" -- that type of lead-in is amusing because it gives you an "out" in case I call you on what follows (which I am). Please clarify what you intended to convey through the quoted sentence?

If you mean to say that Steve Klc and Bux know more about the preparation of food than Steve P and I do, that could very well be correct. With all respect to Steve Klc and Bux, if you mean to say they know more about sampling and appreciating food in restaurants than Steve P and I do, that is a wholly different proposition. I am not, to be clear, stating that Steve P and I know more about appreciating food than do Steve Klc and Bux. I am merely stating any statements in the reverse direction are presumptuous.

[Orik]

but it's patently absurd to dismiss his food because you haven't tasted it. I certainly wouldn't dismiss that kind of creativity that allows the diner to revisit food as it he's never tasted it before.

I associate a low probablility with having a dinner at PA that is as enjoyable as one at L'Arpege, or PG, say 20%

This means that at a cost of at least $750 for dinner, probably more, an enjoyable meal at PA is going to cost me around $3750 (not counting opportunity cost, partial travel costs, the emotional cost of a bad meal, etc.). The reason why I may eventually end up dining at ADNY is that the opportunity cost is much lower.

So while dismissing (or not dismissing) his food after tasting it makes better philosophical and culinary sense, economics have to be factored in.

[cabrales]

Fat Guy,Oct 4 2002, 09:48 AM]To the contrary, Ducasse has been the recipient of the most negative food-media coverage in the history of both France (when he made his run for six stars) and the United States (when he opened in New York).

Steven -- One thing to bear in mind is that, in my assessment, diners in NY unfortunately do not have as an alternative set of restaurants as Parisians or others in France. So, in NY, ADNY might be perceived as a better restaurant than it should be when the range of restaurants in France is included in the equation. by the way, I reiterate that I would rather have a meal at Blue Hill any day than go to ADNY, leaving aside cost differences between the two restaurants. There is a reason that media coverage is negative on Ducasse -- people aren't moved by Ducasse's cuisine.

Note my earlier statement: "May I add that Ducasse is self-aggrandizing and promotes himself, including through publicity received in the US in connection with opening up ADNY, the creation of his array of misguided establishments, etc." Note that publicity, even though initially negative, can increase the level of awareness of a chef. Obviously, Ducasse sought publicity coverage -- that it ended up being initially negative was not within his control.

I also am interested in the number of times people have sampled the cuisine of the chef they dislike. I have made various visits (including recent visits to ADNY and PA, although I have no recent visits to Monaco) to Ducasse's places. Can the same be said of those who profess a disliking for another place?

Orik -- The chance that a meal at any Ducasse establishment would be better in the manner you describe: 0%.

[Wilfrid]

I feel sorry for all those chefs who volunteered to sign Steve's statement that red wine is the right thing to drink with steak, only to be summarily dismissed when the subject turned to Ducasse's cooking.

[Fat Guy]

Cabrales you're the one who framed this in terms of connoisseurship and people's ability to appreciate cuisine: "Ducasse might be like a chain store that offers appropriate work clothes. However, other cuisiniers might be like Giorgio Armani black label or Cerrutti." And that's just a silly position to take against people who know more about cuisine than you do and have dined out more than you. But even were the ratio reversed, you would have to be quite mad to dismiss Ducasse's supporters as uneducated or lacking in taste and discernment, which is exactly and inescapably what you're saying. That position is about as cognitively dissonant as they come in the world of food discussion.

[Fat Guy]

Who do you think is eating in his restaurants? Other chefs?

People who don't really know about haute cuisine and people who have heard about his greatness from publications. It's the same crowd who goes to see Wynton Marsalis because they heard that "jazz is good."

Now you're just being absurd. I can't even tell if it's intentional or not.

Who is out there saying Passard is the world's greatest chef or that Arpege is the world's greatest restaurant? Nobody. But you hear it said all the time about Ducasse, by people at every level: Fellow chefs and culinary professionals, critics, gourmet consumers, and even the mass market to the extent there is any popular knowledge of top chefs (Ducasse's name having been bandied about in the New York Post, dropped into dialog on Gilmore Girls, and such).

[Fat Guy]

All the positive posts about Ducasse on this thread add up to one thing, luxury (and proficency is part of luxury.) I am sure you are all right when you say, as Marcus did, that the meal was "succulent." But so what? I keep talking about creativity and cooking that is interesting. So far nobody has offered anything about Ducasse that is interesting. In fact, even among the positive reports there is an admission that the goal of the food isn't to be creative.

And yet you liked Taillevent. Plotnicki, this is just another example of your situational absolutism.