Blue Hill (NYC)

[Bux]

Those following this discussion know my appreciation for BH is similar to Steve P's in some ways but distinctly different in others. I feel that it's very subtle food and I would suggest that for some diners, the understanding and appreciation for the food grows with each visit. If the tasting menus follow the meals ordered from the carte, it may be that they're more appreciated precisely because there's a cumulative factor in play and not because the chefs have composed the meal. On the other hand, there may be some added value in having a meal composed by the chef. I also feel that because their food is so gentle and subtle, it's often best appreciated in small courses in an orchestrated meal.

A lot of this is subjective. Is Beethoven better than Bach? Why would anyone care to seek the answer to that. I prefer Bach, but it's a matter of taste. I might suggest that lovers of Bach are more likely to appreciate Blue Hill, but I'm not willing to bet heavily on that. Even that reminds me of Amazon's "those who bought this book also purchased such and such." Sure, but the first book is number one on my list and the other three weigh in at number 874, 962 and maybe seven digits for the last choice. Hell I might even be willing to burn one of their suggestions. Even after you know people's tastes, you can't predict what they will like.

How I rate the restaurant is how I'd rate the options of three courses from the carte and a tasting menu and letting the chef cook for me which is usually the tasting menu. Which option I might take would not affect my rating of the restaurant. Of course I could rate every single dish on the menu as well, but the rating for the restaurant in partially based on having choices. Everyone I know speaks highly of Babbo, but what I remember most of my one meal was a side order of fennel that verged on raw. We didn't eat it and asked the waitress to relay our complaint to the kitchen. She told us to note it on the comments card that comes with the check. There was an unbelievable compounding of the unacceptable from a restauant at half the price. The check arrived without the comment card, but with the full charge for the uneaten and inedible fennel. I have yet to have a dish at Blue Hill that wasn't perfectly prepared in well over a dozen meals, all three or more courses in length. I may have encountered a rough edge here and there in the service, but nothing like that in your face "I brought it all the way from the kitchen to your table, my job is done" 'tude.

What I find particularly interesting about BH is how the very subtle dishes grab my complete focus. What's fascinating is how a gentle dish I've had some time ago, will rivet me again as if it was the first time I've tasted this combination of flavors. If someone else doesn't get that, well they don't. Life might really be boring if we all reacted the same way. I think they are artists and I hope they depend on positive feedback from a few connoisseurs of their work rather than a mass audience. The way I look at it, the more people who don't like the food, the more special I will be when I go there and the better I will eat.

Now I see there are posts made while I was composing this message. I will have to read and answer them, but perhaps I should disagree that my love of BH is dependant on my dining in Parisian bistros. It might be, but I have been more conscious of how Parisian bistros have been disappointing when I compare them to Blue Hill which has pretty much become my paragon of the urbane and sophisticated, but not luxurious restaurant.

[Bux]

and i still want the chefs of blue hill to say to us here that people who ask for "chef's choice" receive markedly better meals than those who don't.  i'd even settle for a "have an 80% chance of receiving a better meal."  that admission wouldn't be good for business, and if that's the fact at every restaurant at that level, then it should just go unsaid, and ruth reichl and tommy and whomever should be able to say "i wasn't blown away" without people suggesting that they did something inherently wrong by ordering from the menu.  silliness. 

oy, i've typed too many words, and someone will no doubt pick out 7 and attempt to prove my opinion "wrong."

I've picked out a few more than seven and probably more than I need to prove you're wrong. Whoops, sorry, I think we're actually in agreement here if I understand the point behind the sarcasm. There's a certain advantage to putting yourself in the chef's hands at the right restaurant and I believe this is that sort of restaurant. Nevertheless, as I've said before we don't all look for the same experience when we dine. Some of us tend to gravitate to the tasting menu whereever we go, some of us tend to be drawn to the tasting menu when they respect the chef and others tend to shy away from tasting menus, finding the style inherent to tasting menus, not to their taste. At this point there's really no point in reiterating what it is that I like about letting the chef feed me either here or elswhere.

[Jinmyo]

Bux, I love raw fennel.

No hope for me. /sniff

[cabrales]

What I find particularly interesting about BH is how the very subtle dishes grab my complete focus. ...

but perhaps I should disagree that my love of BH is dependant on my dining in Parisian bistros. It might be, but I have been more conscious of how Parisian bistros have been disappointing when I compare them to Blue Hill which has pretty much become my paragon of the urbane and sophisticated, but not luxurious restaurant.

I agree with Bux. While not being clear on the meaning of a Parisian bistro moderne (which specific restaurants in Paris being referred to?), I would strongly disagree that BH resembles any form of Parisian bistro. It is, as Bux noted, much more evolved and reservedly robust than the reference to a Parisian bistro moderne connotes.

I might beg to differ with Bux's indication that BH is not luxurious. It is not a palace with respect to decor, so if "luxury" means the decor of Versailles, BH is not luxurious. BH is not luxurious in the sense it doles out oscetra caviar in a lot of dishes, but that should not be the yardstick for luxuriousness. Additionally, food does not need to appear (key word: appear) complex or elaborate for a restaurant to be luxurious. For me, cuisine should be prepared just right, with thought and balance and some subtlety and be intellectually stimulating. Luxury can be for the mind, as well as on the nose and in the mouth. I think, by that definition, BH would be, for me, a luxurious restaurant for many meals.

Edited December 3, 2002 by cabrales (log)

[tommy]

maybe i'm nuts, but this discussion, for me, subjectively, goes well beyond BH. but BH bears the brunt of the bad press.

[Jinmyo]

tommy, I truly hope that the good opinion that Dan and Mike's work is held in by many won't be overwhelmed.

Uh. Dan? Mike? When you read this, thanks again for the excedllent Q&A you had here.

[tommy]

and i still want the chefs of blue hill to say to us here that people who ask for "chef's choice" receive markedly better meals than those who don't.  i'd even settle for a "have an 80% chance of receiving a better meal."  that admission wouldn't be good for business, and if that's the fact at every restaurant at that level, then it should just go unsaid, and ruth reichl and tommy and whomever should be able to say "i wasn't blown away" without people suggesting that they did something inherently wrong by ordering from the menu.  silliness.  

oy, i've typed too many words, and someone will no doubt pick out 7 and attempt to prove my opinion "wrong."

I've picked out a few more than seven and probably more than I need to prove you're wrong. Whoops, sorry, I think we're actually in agreement here if I understand the point behind the sarcasm. There's a certain advantage to putting yourself in the chef's hands at the right restaurant and I believe this is that sort of restaurant.

yeah, i guess we agree. it took you all of those words to say as much? put down you weapon young man. as for sarcasm, i do apologize. where was my head, satirizing the absurdity of it all.

but i'm *still* waiting for a chef to post that his menu is geared towards the lowest common denominator, and that any guest who asks, can have a "chef's choice" meal prepared for him/her. can't wait. sitting here.

[tommy]

tommy, I truly hope that the good opinion that Dan and Mike's work is held in by many won't be overwhelmed.

we can only hope. these are clearly, from my perspective, good guys who care about customers and about making their restaurant a success. i guess i should have walked in and said "please let dan and mike cook for me tonite...my name is joe, and i want the best."

[Bux]

Bux, I love raw fennel.

And the Italians do raw fennel very well when they're not trying to cook it.

Shaved finely with a bit of olive oil, maybe some lemon juice and shave parmesan.

[Bux]

Lets face it food is a big part of our life, people like Cabrales,Bux and Steve have forgot more about food then alot of chefs know.

In my case, I trust you're not referring to what my daughter calls a "senior moment."

I think Steve P is on to something when he makes the case that one will appreciate the cuisine at BH better if one is able to situate it in context.  

I am a big fan of "context" which I regard as kin to "relative." It's my distinct impression that Mr. P. is more a fan of "absolute," than he is of "relative," but no doubt he will explain how I've taken "context" out of context here.

Perhaps it's interesting to examine the context in which I found BH. I've been a big fan of Daniel Boulud's cooking since he opened the first Daniel. I find the food of Blue Hill and that of Daniel excellent foils for each other. I find much of the food at Blue Hill offers not so much a simplification of what I like about Daniel's food, but a distillation. Understand that together with my innate preference for Bach over Beethoven and factor in the references to what's fascinating to me about some contemporary food in Europe, particularly Spain, among other things.

maybe i'm nuts, but this discussion, for me, subjectively, goes well beyond BH.  but BH bears the brunt of the bad press.

I know better than to argue with your first premise. As for the brunt of bad press, there's no such thing. Either members have already visited Blue Hill and formed their own opinion or they've discovered they are out of the loop and need to get to Blue Hill or be considered terminally clueless.

[Jinmyo]

Oh no. I prefer pecorino in this context. Perhaps even Sicilian pecorino with pepper corns.

/waw

[Bux]

Oh no. I prefer pecorino in this context. Perhaps even Sicilian pecorino with pepper corns.

/waw

Perhaps.

Correction, undoubtedly you do prefer pecorino. Perhaps I might as well. I should try it. Pecorino with baked onions is nice as well.

[Nick]

The country boy just has to butt in here.

Can any of you go out to eat, have a good time, and enjoy the experience without turning it into an intellectual exercise?

[Jinmyo]

Bux, we agree. I'm not a bad person after all.

I roast the onions in the skins with some garlic cloves and some 10 year balsamico. Then peel and spread on crostini with some shavings of pecorino and a dot of tradionalize balsamico.

[jaybee]

Can any of you go out to eat, have a good time, and enjoy the experience without turning it into an intellectual exercise?

How boring.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Tommy - No chef is going to come on the site and say that unless they are retired. But if you want to see the evidence for yourself, read the menu at any of the top restaurants and you will find a tremendous amount of sameness to what chefs are serving. Wilfrid is always saying this. Places do not serve strong tasting, hard to chew food. It's the same staple quasi-luxury items like salmon, tuna tartar, filet mignon, rack of lamb etc and not prepared with challenging spice regimens either. And it's not that the chefs don't want to serve interesting food, it's that the diners want the same repetitive blandness.

I think you are also underestimating that chefs might be willing to make more labor intensive food or offer top quality ingredients to the customers that are long term patrons or even those who aren't but express an interest in recieving that type of quality. For example, do you think that every fish delivered to a restaurant is of the same quality? And do you think that they choose fish for customers based on the chronology of the orders, or do you think that after they get their deliveries, restaurants might segregate the better specimens for regular and special customers? You know this just happened to me when I was in the South of France at Loulou. I ordered a Cote de Boeuf and the owner at first told me they didn't have any so I ordered the contra-filet. A few minutes later I see him walking to the grill with a cote de boeuf the size of Pittsburgh which was marbled like Kobe Beef. And I know exactly what happened. Eric the owner was aging the meat for himself which I know he does. But I've been a customer for 15 years going on a once or twice a year basis. That's even before he worked there let along owned the place. And he wanted to make a long term customer happy so he gave up the family jewels. Do you not think the same type of thing happens at every restaurant?

Now if you want to see me write a contradictory review of a place that everyone loves, wait until I eat at Babbo on Thursday night. That should give everyone a little agita.

[tommy]

Tommy - No chef is going to come on the site and say that unless they are retired. But if you want to see the evidence for yourself, read the menu at any of the top restaurants and you will find a tremendous amount of sameness to what chefs are serving. Wilfrid is always saying this. Places do not serve strong tasting, hard to chew food. It's the same staple quasi-luxury items like salmon, tuna tartar, filet mignon, rack of lamb etc and not prepared with challenging spice regimens either. And it's not that the chefs don't want to serve interesting food, it's that the diners want the same repetitive blandness.

I think you are also underestimating that chefs might be willing to make more labor intensive food or offer top quality ingredients to the customers that are long term patrons or even those who aren't but express an interest in recieving that type of quality. For example, do you think that every fish delivered to a restaurant is of the same quality? And do you think that they choose fish for customers based on the chronology of the orders, or do you think that after they get their deliveries, restaurants might segregate the better specimens for regular and special customers? You know this just happened to me when I was in the South of France at Loulou. I ordered a Cote de Boeuf and the owner at first told me they didn't have any so I ordered the contra-filet. A few minutes later I see him walking to the grill with a cote de boeuf the size of Pittsburgh which was marbled like Kobe Beef. And I know exactly what happened. Eric the owner was aging the meat for himself which I know he does. But I've been a customer for 15 years going on a once or twice a year basis. That's even before he worked there let along owned the place. And he wanted to make a long term customer happy so he gave up the family jewels. Do you not think the same type of thing happens at every restaurant?

Now if you want to see me write a contradictory review of a place that everyone loves, wait until I eat at Babbo on Thursday night. That should give everyone a little agita.

ah yes. you're right. where has my head been.

[La Niña]

Steverooni, does that mean you're already planning to be critical of Babbo? So it would seem. And if that's true, how can anyone take your review seriously? Are you open to loving it, or very much liking it?

[Steve Plotnicki]

Of course I'm open to liking it. But the two times I ate there I found the food to be slightly homogenized. Like a lite version of genuine Italian. That's sort of how I feel about the Union Square Cafe etc. And I had the same feeling about Esca. The edge was off. But of course I am always open-minded about being wowed by food. Actually I had the best success with Lupa. Hard to screw up home made ham and salamis.

[SobaAddict70]

Its already a given that he'll find something wrong with Babbo.

Its not a Michelin experience, but then again the restaurant isn't striving to be one.

*shrug*

I'm thinking of going again sometime in the next month, so if anyone would like to come along, PM me and I'll set it up.

SA

[ajay]

Steve P,

Do you think you could elaborate (either now or after your visit to Babo) what you mean when you say that the food there is slightly homogonized 'lite' Italian food?

I should note at the outset that my conception of actual, authentic italian is actually quite limited but I have always been laboring on the assumption that Batali was able to create one of the truest, best renditions of Italian food in the country let alone the city. It was my understanding that he is the only chef daring enough to feature dishes like testa, lamb's tongue etc prepared in a rather Italian way. It also seems to me that the menu has considerable breadth, with dishes across the spectrum. Furthermore, it was my understanding that he has achieved a real success with his pasta dishes, of which I personally found the mint love letters to be quite successful (i've been less persuaded by some of the others, but that's a different story.)

Either way, I look to another well thought out and excellent Plotnicki review, where I am sure you will address any residual concerns anyone, could possibly have

[lizziee]

I really didn't know where to post this - under Astrance, Blue Hill, Trio, Trotter etc.

Ajay said:

"(Much as I might prefer not to admit it), I think Steve P is on to something when he makes the case that one will appreciate the cuisine at BH better if one is able to situate it in context. Others have made a similar point about astrance in Paris, and I believe they are both correct--to a degree. I enjoyed astrance very much without having experiences with the breadth and depth of a bux cabrales or steve p. But, it is also probably true that I did not appreciate the uniqueness of taking in a soup flavored with rye bread, or enjoy the delicacy and intricate flavor of 'ravioli' made with avocado and stuffed with crab meat as they would have, but both dishes (the ravioli more than the soup to be sure) still spoke to me, and I was still able to enjoy my meal."

I am thinking out loud, at this point. I have eaten extensively in France and have had 3 meals at El Bulli. I consider myself a knowledgeable diner. I found the much praised "soup" silly and awful tasting. The rest of my review was also disparaging.

At some point, I have to eventually say to myself does this taste good? Obviously, a part of this is subjective. But given the current threads on Blue Hill, Trotter and Trio - it comes down to some simple principles - is the fish cooked correctly, do the flavors mask or enhance, are ingredients thrown together for effect not taste, is this a wow only for wow, are the key elements of fine cuisine adhered to?

By the way, Steve P's review of Trotter and Trio are extraordinary - it was as if all of egullet was at the table with him.

Maybe, one huge difference between France and New York and Chicago and Los Angeles, is what Robert 40 says "I don't believe the menu needs improvement it is shooting toward the norm. Which is the couple on a date looking for a nice meal before hitting the clubs, they are happy with the menu and they are the ones that made it a success.

Remember the needs of the many out way the needs of the few."

France and Spain seem not to have that same compulsion to aim to the norm. Maybe it is because the restaurants tend to be chef driven or less compulsive about the bottom line. One of the articles that always attracts me in Food Arts is their column Hits and Flops where chefs describe those dishes that made it with the public and those that they had a hard time giving away. Invariably, I am attracted by the flops which I guess says a lot about me.

Also, Ajay, I think you are underrating yourself.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Ajay - I didn't find the cooking to be at the highest level of intensity. The food conception was pretty good, but the follow through was on the conservative side I thought. And it's not that I don't like Batali's cooking because I enjoyed Po on a number of occassions. But what I'm complaining about is the same mediocrity I find at many of the upper middle level restaurants in NYC regardless of type of cuisine. I also hate the space which doesn't really help matters. But we'll see. Maybe they will wow me.

[SobaAddict70]

And I had the same feeling about Esca. The edge was off. But of course I am always open-minded about being wowed by food. Actually I had the best success with Lupa. Hard to screw up home made ham and salamis.

Interesting that you say that about Lupa. I've always thought of Lupa as the lightweight amongst Batali's restaurants. Haven't been to Esca yet, although I can say with total honesty that the concept there doesn't really grab me. Maybe its because I equate slices of raw fish with pristine sashimi, such that the idea of smearing a light to neutral oil over a piece of perfect fish is alien to me.

Anyway, as the saying goes, hope springs eternal.

SA

PS. Steve, you *MUST* get the panna cotta. Or at least someone in your party has to. (yes, he gussies it up with saffron, pears and cardamom, but even with all those distractions, its nothing short of amazing.)

[Wilfrid]

Well, I see it's only me catching up on this thread right now, and it's been genuinely interesting despite the random rudeness.

Although Steve is not going to be entered for any diplomacy prizes, I think his take is basically right. Blue Hill is an example of a restaurant where personal attention from the chef will enhance your dining experience; this is not to say - and I think Steve was misinterpreted here - that people ordering from the menu are going to get a poor meal. A restaurant like Blue Hill has to offer a wide choice on the menu, not just dishes the chef likes cooking or which will be especially good on that day. There's no reason to suppose that those dishes won't be prepared with care and attention, but it seems obvious that you are likely to raise the quality of your experience, assuming your tastes are catholic, if the chef puts together the best meal he can.

But, as I said, I think Blue Hill is an example of where that can happen. I am not sure that every kitchen, even in good restaurants, is geared to offer that kind of service, except perhaps to a few very special customers. I'd be interested in hearing opinions on that, but perhaps it needs its own thread.

On the style of cuisine at Blue Hill, I am in the camp that finds some of the cooking too restrained. But I should clarify - I am not saying that I don't like it when the Blue Hill chefs practice extreme restraint with an ingredient, as when they barely, delicately and gently poach a piece of fish. It can be great. What I contend is that I don't want to eat that way all the time.