New York's finest restaurants

[Wilfrid]

It would be nice if the New York Times had a listing of four star restaurants to focus this discussion. Certainly the following have four stars:

Daniel

Le Bernardin

Lespinasse

Jean-Georges

Alain Ducasse at the Essex House

My first question, from recent experiences at Le Bernardin and Lespinasse, is: to what extent are any of those restaurants cruising on past reputations (although ADNY is a relative newcomer)?

I had a dinner at Le Bernardin not long ago which certainly had some high spots, but was not a start-to-finish one-of-the-best-restaurants-in-the-world experience by any means. And yet it has a wide reputation as being one of the two top places to eat in this city. The disappointment that was Lespinasse is being discussed right here.

My last dinner at Jean Georges was good, except for a let-down with the sweetbreads, and since I haven't been to Daniel this year I won't comment. So: is a serious re-evaluation of the city's top echelon urgently overdue?

And I do have a second question: at this level of dining in New York, has there been a significant drop in standards over the last six to eight years. When I started enjoying such restaurants, back in the '90s - with Gray Kuntz at Lespinasse, Boulud at the original Daniel, Lutece still basking in Solltner's glow, Les Celebrites (I never went), Chanterelle and Aureole all highly respected, Bouley and the original Le Cirque about to close - the scene at the top level just seemed more exciting. Am I right or wrong?

[Stone]

Woof.

[Wilfrid]

oops

[Liza]

Heck, I'm cruising on my reputation so who am I to judge?

[Wilfrid]

It has been pointed out to me in a PM from an expert that Bouley currently has four stars too. Again, while I dined at Bouley Bakery, I missed the original Bouley and haven't yet tried the new one. The consensus here and elsewhere seems to be that the new Bouley is not (or not yet) as good as it once was.

[g.johnson]

The New York Times ‘New York Today’ is listing Bouley as 4 star, but I don’t think it’s received a full review yet. Otherwise you’ve got them all.

Majumdar brought this up recently – that there’s a certain blahishness about restaurants now, but I think it’s more to do with jadedness than a drop in quality. Personally, ten years ago it was much more of a treat to eat at Jean-George because we had less money. Eating out more, we’ve become blasé. Furthermore, if it were a drop in quality, you’d find that there were new restaurants opening that overtook the older ones. But would anyone claim that there are better restaurants than the ones you listed in NYC? (OK, maybe Lespinasse is crap…) I suppose it could be a malaise that’s overtaken the entire restaurant business, but if so it’s not just in the US -- I thought my recent meals at Daniel and Jean-George (only the bar room, whatever that’s called) compared favorably with Gordon Ramsey. (Le Bernadin was, I agree, a little below that level.)

[Duplicate of post on duplicate thread. Never trust a philosopher with technology.]

[Steve Plotnicki]

There is a malaise at the high end because the style of cooking they offer has been institutionalized. That we are jaded is one aspect, but that they don't have many new tricks to show us is most likely a bigger problem.

If you look at trends in dining the way one looks at fashion, or music, the names you mentioned have all been stalwarts on the NYC dining scene for appx 15 years. To think that in that time nothing or nobody of importance has come along to do something so interesting that it changes the way we eat. Yes you have Ducasse but that is a variation of the same theme. And by the time Thomas Keller gets here, his restaurant might be the same.

High end dining sits at a crossroads now. Especially in NYC. What purports itself to be the dining capital of the world outside of Paris is without a local version of an El Bulli or Fat Duck. And I'm not sure that is going to change anythime soon.

[g.johnson]

There is a malaise at the high end because the style of cooking they offer has been institutionalized. That we are jaded is one aspect, but that they don't have many new tricks to show us is most likely a bigger problem.

But why should there be a malaise? Why are there no new chefs with new tricks to delight us?

[Steve Plotnicki]

Good question. How about we try and figure out how come there have been no rock bands as important as the Beatles since 1963?

Someone should look at a chronology of fine dining in the 20th century. I bet one can quickly gauge the length of cycles. My gut tells me we are in the midst of a cycle that started around the mid 80's and is on it's last legs. That's why everything seems so redundant. I think this point is further exacerbated by how chefs can become celebrities. They can expand their businesses vertically by creating more casual versions of their cuisine. What impetus does Jean-Georges have to reinvent his cuisine when he can open Vong's or a place like Market in Paris at a lower expense and with lower overhead. It's much easier to keep the J-G name going if you don't set the bar in a high place.

[Wilfrid]

Thanks for those comments, which are certainly persuasive.

I know my partial "solution" is generally unpopular round here, but I often wish the chef's would show us a few old tricks. That wild mallard would have made a fine civet or salmis - but maybe you just can't charge those prices for stewed meat, especially stewed on the bone: it has to be the same old lightly cooked square of breast.

[tommy]

wilfrid, you're using a lot more emoticons lately. correctly as well, which is refreshing.

[Bux]

Add in a general air of retrenchment and conservatism in case you hadn't noticed. I think comfort food was making a cyclical come back anyway just as our sense of security was rocked. While we hope that good restaurants get the business they deserve, it's also apparent that the high end restaurants have been suffering a bit. Some don't serve lunch and it's probably easier to get reservations these days than five years ago.

Steve P. High end dining sits at a crossroads now. Especially in NYC. What purports itself to be the dining capital of the world outside of Paris is without a local version of an El Bulli or Fat Duck. And I'm not sure that is going to change anythime soon.

Interesting that you note Paris as the dining capital, but go on to mention two restaurants in other places (London and Catalonia) as examples of creativity. There may be more high end creativity in Paris today than in NY, but in that aspect it's not the capital. Could it also be that capitals in themselves tend to be conservative, protecting their reputation rather than risking it? Certainly as a contributing factor, it should be considered.

Please continue, this is so much more fascinating to me than the non food chatter we've become preoccupied with here.

[Wilfrid]

Quite right, Bux.

Tommy: I use the emoticons to register suitable nuances of expression.

I have been pondering during my disgusting lunch, and concluded that a number of restaurants which are not ranked in the first tier have served me food over the last year, the excellence of which equals and surpasses that of some on the four star list. I have in mind Cafe Boulud, March, Gramercy Tavern, Fleur de Sel and, on the strength of one meal, Atelier. Blue Hill, Eleven Madison Park and the lamented Bid were not far behind. Of course, in none of these places is the setting that of a four star restaurant; but I'm just focussed right now on what's on the plate.

If I carry on thinking like this, I'll be able to save some money.

[g.johnson]

Good question. How about we try and figure out how come there have been no rock bands as important as the Beatles since 1963? ... My gut tells me we are in the midst of a cycle that started around the mid 80's and is on it's last legs.

If it's a cyclical slump in the restaurant biz, it's a much longer slump than has occurred in popular music – although there may have been no bands bigger than the Beatles (there have been plenty of better bands, IMHO) there have certainly been new injections of energy every few years. Psychadelia, punk, new wave, grunge, rap, etc.

What impetus does Jean-Georges have to reinvent his cuisine when he can open Vong's or a place like Market in Paris at a lower expense and with lower overhead. It's much easier to keep the J-G name going if you don't set the bar in a high place.

Why would Jean-George need to reinvent his food unless we have, indeed, become jaded. If the frogs legs in garlic broth was good ten years ago, why is it no good now? Or if J-G has just lost his enthusiasm, why are there no young chefs who, though maybe not as innovative, can produce a high quality facsimile of J-G type food.

[Bux]

I know my partial "solution" is generally unpopular round here, but I often wish the chef's would show us a few old tricks.  That wild mallard would have made a fine civet or salmis - but maybe you just can't charge those prices for stewed meat, especially stewed on the bone: it has to be the same old lightly cooked square of breast. 

Whose fault is that? I mean is it the chef's call and if so, is he responding to what he knows of the diners by experience, or what he thinks they want from prejudice. In either case, I might fault him for pandering and for not offering what he thinks he does best or what he thinks we should have.

A few weeks ago in Romorantin, we had a really great meal at the Lion d'Or. Great in that we thoroughly enjoyed the food. It was a meal worth ananlyizing, but a meal that didn't make us stop and analyze it while we were eating. We split two game courses. The first was a pigeon roasted with spices under the skin and a no brainer for us. Our attention was on the hare and which preparation to order. There was the more elegant saddle and then there was the civet of leg. We'd had civets in several inexpensive restaurants already and the saddle invarious guises came up as a must have in almost every review or mention we read prior to arriving in France. The civet was on the seasonal pre fixe gastronomical menu, but the saddle was only on the a la carte listing a slightly higher price. The "connoisseur's" choice had to be the saddle, if only so we could nod our heads in agreement should we ever get to discuss the inn with the experts. An innate perverse sense has often led me to order poorly. We ordered the Cuisse de lievre en civet au cacao possibly because it was au cacao. It was memorable. Yeah, we're cool and the world would be better off if everyone was like us, but what are the odds that rabbit stew would sell as well as saddle of rabbit in NY. Would game stew sell as well as venison chops in Daniel or Ducasse? Can Daniel even put tripe on the menu except as a whim? Put twenty of your best picked eGullet members at the table and serve them a meal of game stews for two hundred bucks and I'll bet you'll find a few of them will complain to someone that the cuts were cheap and unexpected at the price.

[Wilfrid]

All true, Bux. Note that Le Cirque 2000 does serve such things as daily specials - mainly for Maccioni's own satisfaction, I suspect; and I believe they are the best things to order there.

Yes, there is a big market out there for tender filets, and I strongly feel it is leading to a dumbing down of upscale cuisine and a narrowing of menus. But your perspective is wider, and if I may, longer than mine.

Links up with the experience I have just had at the NYPL's historic menu exhibition. I don't know whether the cooking at Delmonico in 1902 was any good - but by heck, you could get all kinds of different meat, game and offal cooked all kinds of different ways. One has to conclude that upscale diners have become steadily more conservative in their tastes, right?

[ngatti]

One has to conclude that upscale diners have become steadily more conservative in their tastes, right?

Or grew up on malteds and MacDonalds, and now have to learn how to eat.

Nick

[Wilfrid]

Shrewd point, Nick.

By the way, this (from lecirque.com) is Wilfrid's tip on how to spend your money:

"WEEKLY CLASSICS

Monday: Braised Short Ribs

with Roasted Root Vegetables

Tuesday: Osso Buco

with Garlic Broccoli Rabe

Wednesday: L'Epaule d'Agneau Braisée

Thursday: Pot Au Feu "Traditionel" or Bollito Misto

Friday: Bouillabaisse

Saturday: Pied de Porc Farçi aux Truffes Noires

with Crushed Herb Potatoes

and Sautéed Spinach

Sunday: Tripe à l'Armagnac

with Pommes Vapeur"

[g.johnson]

I have been pondering during my disgusting lunch, and concluded that a number of restaurants which are not ranked in the first tier have served me food over the last year, the excellence of which equals and surpasses that of some on the four star list.  I have in mind Cafe Boulud, March, Gramercy Tavern, Fleur de Sel and, on the strength of one meal, Atelier.  Blue Hill, Eleven Madison Park and the lamented Bid were not far behind.

You cannot be serious. (Oo, mother, I've come over all Plotnickian.) GT is too muted and BH too muddled to seriously challenge the four star boys. And FdS, much as I love it, is too predictable (predictably reliable, too). Are any of those places capable of delivering the fuck me, jaw-droppers of which J-G, Daniel and the rest are still capable.

[Wilfrid]

I hear you. Maybe it's just that the restaurants named seem to drop fewer clangers. I would apply "muted" to Blue Hill, in fact; at Gramercy, the menu can be dull. Maybe March deserves further inspection; they overdo the novelty from time to time, but I do recall many suprising and impressive dishes there.

I am open to the argument that there just aren't any fuck-me jaw-droppers (I nearly typed drawer-droppers) left in Manhattan, other than ADNY (and I reserve judgment on Daniel, as I said earlier).

[g.johnson]

I would apply "muted" to Blue Hill, in fact

Yes, but they're trying and sometimes a big flavor does get through. Generally I think their ambition exceeds their ability but what do I know? (Sorry, bux, just not a big fan.)

I am open to the argument that there just aren't any fuck-me jaw-droppers (I nearly typed drawer-droppers) left in Manhattan, other than ADNY (and I reserve judgment on Daniel, as I said earlier).

Loved Daniel, loved J-G/Nougatine recently. (The latter so much we're going to the real J-G shortly.) Both delivered the FMJD.

[macrosan]

Surely the point about FMJD dishes is that they are not to be expected on every visit to these stellar-priced restaurants, but their alternatives should at least be excellent.

At these prices, given the quality control, service level, and general care that price commands, one should never ever have a poor dish, let alone a bad one.

[Wilfrid]

Not disagreeing, Macrosan, but I suppose my question is whether the ability of some of these restaurants to deliver the spectacular, occasionally, and the high quality, regularly, has significantly declined without their reputations yet suffering. As I said, I had a pretty good meal at Le Bernardin a little while back, but I find it hard to believe that it was the kind of meal on which Ripert built the restaurant's reputation. If that is the case, then it's not me becoming jaded, it's the kitchen losing some of its steam.

[Suzanne F]

...

High end dining sits at a crossroads now. Especially in NYC. What purports itself to be the dining capital of the world outside of Paris is without a local version of an El Bulli or Fat Duck. And I'm not sure that is going to change anythime soon.

Grammar and spelling aside , THIS is an interesting point. The closest NYC has come, I think, is Paul Liebrandt -- who failed to create a sufficient following at either Atlas or Papillon. What does this mean? That we are incapable of understanding the logic behind, or the pleasure inherent in, that sort of food? That we refuse to stand for such nonsense? Or something in between?

I've never eaten in any of those restaurants here or across the Atlantic, so I ask this purely for discussion, preferably by those who have.

[macrosan]

...my question is whether the ability of some of these restaurants to deliver the spectacular, occasionally, and the high quality, regularly, has significantly declined without their reputations yet suffering.

Maybe the problem is (and I say this entirely without sarcasm) that the "gastronomic elite" who give these restaurants their reputation are so small, and therefore eat so infrequently there, that the reputation lingers on for lack of proper re-appraisal.

Or perhaps (and now I rescind my previous parenthetical qualification) that elite feels that to reverse their past approval would be a form of self-criticism, therefore they simply decline to do so.