Pharmacy

[thevoiceofreasonanddissent]

Did anyone read the disparaging review of Pharmacy by Adrian Gill last Sunday? Has anyone been lately and were his comments on the food and restaurant fair?

[fresh_a]

I like Gill, and in general trust his judgement. He's highly intelligent, even though many don't like him personally..

[peterpumkino]

Problem is that it seems at least 80% of this board hate him. I have no idea why as he always seems on the money as far as his reviews are concerned.

Is it some kind of jealousy?

As an added bonus he is always very funny as well. Plus he does believe in RealItalian® which means he can't be all bad.

And, yes, he did give Pharmacy a really bad review - feedback?

And, yes Simon, he did give an excellent mini-review of St. John a couple of weeks back. But I'm sure he was mistaken!

[circeplum]

i ate at pharmacy just after hywel jones went into the kitchen and loved it. the guy can really cook and i found the unusual combinations stimulating rather than offputting.

i find it quite funny that a chef can reap 100% rave reviews in other kitchens (lola's, foliage) and then be damned due to a change in location. especially when several dishes are virtually identical.

[rjs1]

Interesting as Circeplum says that reviews can differ so radically for basically the same food cooked by the same chef when he moves from restaurant. Why did Fay Maschler give Hywel Jones 3 stars at Foliage, 3 stars at Lola's and only 1 star at Pharmacy, all for what in my experience of several meals at each was pretty much the same standard of food?

I may be biased as Hywel Jones is a friend and so is Bruno Asselin, the new Maitre d' at Pharmacy (ex Pied a Terre), but I think the food at Pharmacy is better than it was when Hywel was at Lola's and almost as good as when he was at Foliage.

A A Gill's review seemed to me to miss the point of what Hywel does, which is unexctected combinations of ingredients put togehter so that the whole is more than the sum of the parts. Anyway, why should we pay any attention to a restaurant reviewer who doesn't know what sauce vierge is and can't be bothered to look it up? He's right about the grammer on the menu, though.

[thevoiceofreasonanddissent]

I have eaten Hywel Jones's food at both Foliage and Lola's and on each occasion had a delicious meal. I think with regards to the Fay Maschler reviews, she awards high marks not just on account of the food - she clearly has to like the whole operation and feel that it has integrity.

Presumably she awarded 3 stars to Foliage and Lola's because she not only thought the food was worth 3 stars, but she also thought the restaurants deserved three stars as well. As for Pharmacy, the overall score did not amount to very much either from Gill or from Maschler.

However, should I run the gauntlet and go anyway?

[rjs1]

I would give it a try.

Sorry, but I stand by my point. How can Fay Maschler give Pharmacy one star when she has given Foliage and Lola's three for essentially the same food. The rest of the package is important too, but not that important (and Pharmacy is surely not a step down from Lola's with its leaking roof and WCs accessed via the kitchen)?

[fresh_a]

I would say that they are professional food critics who judged what they experienced and saw. Voila. People disagree about personal preferences all the time. Some people like some restaurants, others don't..

[thevoiceofreasonanddissent]

..and I come back to my point....Maschler's rating (and presumably Gill's) is based upon their evaluation of the whole operation.

They are RESTAURANT critics,after all, not food only critics - they are evaluating, on their readers' behalf, the restaurants they visit in order to say "do go" or "dont bother"

We dont go to Claridges or Gavroche for the atmosphere, but we do go for the cuisine. Likewise, a visit to somewhere like Daphne's is more likely to be because you are in the area, the atmosphere is buzzy etc etc. not because it is known for its food.

Places like Chez Bruce get the whole thing right because they have a fantastic wine list, great food and service, and the atmosphere is good.

But I have always disliked Pharmacy because of the seeming arrogance of the people who own/run it.

(..and I love the loos at Lola's being beyond the kitchen -

it means I can have a peek at what is going on!)

However, I will give Pharmacy a try and let you know what I think...

[Matthew Grant]

I would give it a try.

Sorry, but I stand by my point.  How can Fay Maschler give Pharmacy one star when she has given Foliage and Lola's three for essentially the same food.

Surely this is akin to saying that once a chef has cooked one good meal, the rest of them must be good as well?

I have eaten at restaurants and had great meals only for the next one to be at best mediocre or poor with no change of chef or location. We all have off days/weeks, maybe Maschler and Gill were unlucky to eat at Pharmacy when Hywel Jones was having an off day, maybe they turned up when he had taken the service off? I certainly don't doubt Maschlers integrity.

[Andy Lynes]

Having eaten at Lola's I simply couldn't understand why Maschler felt it was worth 3 stars, an award she hardly ever bestows. 1 star would seem more appropriate, but I am yet to try Pharmacy.

[A Man for all Seasonings]

Mr.Lynes, did you eat at Foliage and think it was worth 3 stars?

I never did, but I live in North London and discovered Hywel Jones's food while he was at Lola's. I thought his cooking was amongst the best to be had in London. When he left for Pharmacy, I dined there shortly thereafter. Delays, yes, but nonetheless the same quality of cooking. But the restaurant itself was nowhere in the

same league as Lolas, who I found to be charming and friendly. If I remember correctly, Jefford gave Lola's 5 out of 5 for their wine list, a rating I fully concur with as they

are very enthusiastic about their wines, and not greedy on pricing.

I think Maschler was correct in her rating of Lolas, as much because of their effort and sincerity as anything else.

I too would sooner go to places like Chez Bruce or Lola's as Pharmacy any day, because, even though they make mistakes, there seems to be a genuine desire to please.

Went there a week or so ago,with a new chef in residence. Still excellent.

[Andy Lynes]

Mr.Lynes, did you eat at Foliage and think it was worth 3 stars?

I am yet to make it to Foliage so I can't comment, but I heard nothing but good reports about it on these boards and from chefs I spoke to who ate there during Jones' residence.

[Simon Majumdar]

Isn't the new chef at Lola's Jones' old sous? There are some dishes on the menu now that are very much of his ilk ( i.e stuff "Three ways" the cuban choc that is similar to the one at Patria in NY etc) but there are one or two new touches.

When I last went there, it was post Reid, but before the new person ( whose name escapes me although I walk past there every day ) was allowed to take over. The whole experience was a bit underwhelming as I put in a post

I will have to try it again.

When Jones was there he was obviously working under constraints that he did not have at Foiliage ( definitely worth three stars on my two visits when he was cooking ) mainly in the quality of service ( Lola's is at best friendly and shambolic - they managed to set the menu on fire last time I was there and Tony Finch has a great story of one of the chefs burning his foot in the soup!!!!! ) and ingredients.

I have yet to try Pharmacy so can't comment, but looking at the menu, it seems to have all the usual Jones' Schtick. Perhaps he is a one trick pony, not a bad trick though

S

[thevoiceofreasonanddissent]

I think you are being rather ungenerous Simon, the service at Lola's is sometimes scatty but shambolic is a gross exaggeration, certainly from my experience.

I would agree with A man for all seasonings (great pseudonym -is that a play on the Thomas More film?) that Lola's is maintaining its standards on all fronts since this new chef arrived. (cant remember his name, ex Putney Bridge??)

[Scott]

I think we assign too much credit/assign too much responsibility to critics.

Inevitably readers see far too much science in what is often is an uncurated collection of sporadic thoughts.

Maybe Jay can confirm/deny.

In another field I was once worked as a professional critic, and you have deadlines, sub editors demanding copy, a new gig most nights etc etc you often end up writing whatever springs to mind 40 minutes before submission.

go,

I read a review of Sonny's in Barnes a couple of weeks ago from Terry Durack, who ranted like a madman because they served Caesar salad as a side dish. Somehow he thought this was more important, that anything else and dominated his story. Now this was a terrible quality critique because he invested too much of himself and not enough of the restaurant in his notice - bet he wrote at the last minute!

anyway, I wonder if Fay has not put as much science into her review as some may like to read into it. I doubt it's much more than that - though i could be wrong

[thevoiceofreasonanddissent]

Do agree with you. Sometimes you read these reviews and they all seem so personal. Went to Sonny's after they brought in the new chef (Helen...?) Mostly good food, service a bit erratic but I wanted to say "shame on you" to Durak for the stulifyingly boring focus on the Caesar...he does not rate as a reviewer in my opinion - not constructive or intelligent enough.

[Simon Majumdar]

I think you are being rather ungenerous Simon, the service at Lola's is sometimes scatty but shambolic is a gross exaggeration, certainly from my experience.

I would agree with A man for all seasonings (great pseudonym -is that a play on the Thomas More film?) that Lola's is maintaining its standards on all fronts since this new chef arrived. (cant remember his name, ex Putney Bridge??)

Does setting fire to a menu not count as shambolic?

S

[thevoiceofreasonanddissent]

Does this happen every time you go there?

Once, at Tour d'Argent, I saw a waiter spill an entire bowl of soup into the lap of a hapless customer. Would you call this a shambolic restaurant as well?

[Simon Majumdar]

Does this happen every time you go there?

Once, at Tour d'Argent, I saw a waiter spill an entire bowl of soup into the lap of a hapless customer. Would you call this a shambolic restaurant as well?

I wasn't aware I called it a shambolic restaurant..... I said the service was shambolic and yes it is like that every time I go there ( probably about once every two months for the last three years as it is very close to my office. Not for about four months now though as I have been going to The House )

They may not try and set fire to me everytime, but it I would describe the service as amiably happless. They ALWAYS get the drinks order wrong. ALWAY have to be reminded to bring the bill and USUALLY manage to put plates in front of the wrong people. I do think that this is offset by the fact that they are very friendly.

I am not too down on Lola's. It is one of those places that I would take clients if I didn't want to stray too far from the office but not somewhere I would go on a date or for dinner with friends. It had an upward blip when HJ was there, but now ( or certainly on my last visit ) it has returned to being what it always was, a dependable, realtively expensive, neighbourhood restaurant.

S

[Scott]

Do agree with you. Sometimes you read these reviews and they all seem so personal. Went to Sonny's after they brought in the new chef (Helen...?) Mostly good food, service a bit erratic but I wanted to say "shame on you" to Durak for the stulifyingly boring focus on the Caesar...he does not rate as a reviewer in my opinion - not constructive or intelligent enough.

well said - i agree entirely

Durack was a dubious reviewer in Sydney previously, and no more reliable than now.

I do think that in most cases, the era of the critic who believes he/she is the show is pretty much over - but there are exceptions...

[rjs1]

On the subject of Hywel Jones, it's been pointed out to me that it wasn't adequate to have prefaced my comments by saying that he's a friend; I should also have disclosed that I did a consultancy for the Hartford Group that involved recruiting him to go there. Many apologies for not having stated this before making my point about 3 stars at Foliage, 3 stars at Lola's but only one at Pharmacy for what I think it pretty much the same standard of food.

Love the wine list at Lola's, by the way.

[Andy Lynes]

You must also disclose your bank account number, your inside leg measurement and the name of the last cd you purchased, otherwise we won't be able to trust a word you say.

Your honesty is much appreciated.

(I bet you are dead popular at Lola's now).

[magnolia]

Piping in late on this one, I know...but my two cents: I thought I had already posted on Pharmacy but my mind is a bit fried these days.

I had eaten at Lola's when Hywel Jones was there, and liked the food, thought it was decent value in general - though I recall someone's portion was a bit stingy. They also had well-priced wine flights which I thought was a nice touch. Service was fine as well.

I ate a Pharmacy about a month ago, and although the food was also good - when it finally arrived - the whole evening was basically a fiasco from the moment we arrived...to the moment I just received my credit card statement...on which I (and it turns out three other guests) had been charged three times...I had only been to Pharmacy a couple of times in the past few years (well prior to the new chef) and despite my revulsion at the decor (it was as if Boots had put in a lunch counter) I thought it had decent bar snacks and a good bartender, and didn't aspire to be anything but a trendy bar.

As for my recent experience...we were a party of eight, booked for 21h00 on a Saturday night. I had convinced everyone to go to Pharmacy solely based on Hywel Jones's move, thinking that perhaps they had gotten serious about the food and that HJ would have something to say about the service.

By the time all eight were there, it was 21h05. They had given our table away to a party booked for 21h15 and asked if we would mind sitting downstairs in the bar for a couple of minutes until they had a table ready...no problem.

However it seems the bar downstairs is separate from the restaurant, and the waitress was none too happy that eight people were now taking up one of her tables but didn't want to order a round of £10+ drinks , knowing (thinking?) we'd be seated within 10 minutes. .

Fair enough but the upstairs should have sorted that out.

Anyway we stayed put, and gave up trying to converse (music was earsplitting) someone ordered a drink...and waited for our sign to come upstairs. And waited. At 21h20 we sent an emissary upstairs to ask about our table; he was told that as we had been late, we'd have to wait for a table to be free. Emissary then pointed out as the 21h15 party had been seated at 21h00, perhaps *their* table was now ready...he also advised that we were being hassled downstairs by the bar staff, who wanted our table for their own customers...and suggested that perhaps the restaurant could see its way to offering a round of drinks, which would placate both us and the antagonists downstairs. Receptionist said she'd see what she could do about the drinks. But before she had an answer for us, our table miraculously materialised...

From what I recall, the food was fine...when it finally came. To be honest, I was so annoyed at that point - and felt kind of guilty for corralling everyone to try this place - that I don't even remember what I had. I do remember something about interesting flavour combinations, as others have pointed out.

But everything else was so disappointing - rotten treatment, mains arrived at different times and were gvein to the wrong people (though I have to say our waiter did try hard and was apologetic); also the tables are very close together that every time someone at another table got up, three people had to shift...and the noise level was...one louder.

Maybe I'm getting old and crotchety but it was total chaos, waiters running around madly, several hen parties...you get the picture...

So however good the food may have been (and it wasn't outrageously priced either, though the wine list was but what's new?), I will never go back. We really could not wait to leave. And to add insult, as mentioned, we just received our credit card statement and were charged three times. We called to point this out, and the person who took down our details in order to send a cheque...got our address wrong...

So whatever AA Gill wrote - I no longer read his reviews - this time it may have been true.

By the way, he is not universally hated on this board because of his reviews, but because of his lack of review...who wants to slog through 1500 words of minutiae about AA himself, bodily fluids (his and other peoples') or whatever he conjures five minutes before deadline...before getting to the punchline? He's a fine writer, probably even funny. But not all fine writers can write fine restaurant reviews...on a related note, I fear Giles Coren - whose reviews I *have* been reading with interest...is sliding down the Gill low road too...see his review of some place in Stanmore last weekend in which he found it necessary to mention "wee" twice...I mean, does he think his readers are five years old? But I digress...

Edited April 14, 2003 by magnolia (log)

[peterpumkino]

But you don't have to wade through his minutiae . Just go directly to the last few paragraphs and read his (usually excellent) review on the restaurant concerned (personally I like his ramblings but there you go).