Craft

[Fat Guy]

Plotnicki, you ignorant slut . . .

Actually, my preferences run in a similar direction. My ideal chefs are Gagnaire, Kunz, and the like. But at the same time I'm not looking to have every restaurant be the same or to have the same goals. As a consumer and as a critic, my standard for judging a restaurant is, primarily, how well is this restaurant attaining the goal it sets out to attain? Of course some restaurants have ridiculous goals -- "Scandin-Asian" fusion might be a good example from one recent place -- so you can't take this approach all the time. But most of the time, I'm able to enjoy restaurants with very different sets of goals.

I wouldn't want every restaurant to be like Craft, and I dread the arrival of the copycats. But I enjoy having Craft available when I desire that particular style of dining. It's like that shampoo they used to advertise as an antidote to your regular shampoo: Use our shampoo once a week to wash out the residue from the shampoo you use every other day. Craft is very much a purifying experience. That is, assuming it delivers on its promise, which I think it does and some think it doesn't.

[Steve Plotnicki]

I have to add that Collichio's work with pork belly, or what he calls bacon at GT is innovative in the way I am describing. And the he paired it with mostardas is a classic "Amercanization" of a traditional European concept. Unless I am wrong, he is the one who championed the cut first and now you see it on  menus prepared in a few different styles. Unfortunately it is such a fatty cut that I don't think the dish will ever become as famous as Valenti's lamb shank when he was at Allison on Dominick.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Steven Shaw - But you can't say what you just said and not allow for the fact that looked at in a certain way, Craft IS dull. Regardless of how good a job they do there. And as it being "retro" as in Delmonico's, that is the last vibe I get from the place. Andy Lyne's comments are more in line with what it's about. Craft is conceptual. Delmonico's was just a fancy version of a roll your sleeves up and eat type of place. As I said earlier, nobody realizes it but Le Cirque is more likke Delmonico's than Craft is. All you have to do is ask them to do it for you.

Andy Lynes - If you had the chance, you should try both places. But to be honest, The Connaught Dining Room with it's ala cart menu listing every vegetable known to mankind is not dissimilar to Craft. But what makes Craft different is that the portions are sized in a way that encourages you to get many different dishes to split. To me it's more like tapas than ala carte. In fact I've never been but I bet Club Gascon serves similar sized portions.

Mao - Your bow to going back to Craft is more about having to put up with the travails of what others think is appropriate NYC dining than anything else. Not that I wouldn't like to go back myself after a decent interval. But for years I refused to go back to Union Square Cafe because I found it so ordinary. But so many people want to go, both out-of-towners and New Yorkers that I couldn't avoid it. I have sort of made my peace with the place and have found that if I order the lamb chops or steak I can have a satisfying meal.

But if you ask me, if Craft wasn't Collichio's place, it would have gotten mediocre reviews and gone out of business faster than you can say Virot, which by the way was probably a more interesting restaurant than Craft.

[Fat Guy]

"But you can't say what you just said and not allow for the fact that looked at in a certain way, Craft IS dull."

Yes, I agree that, looked at in a certain way -- the wrong way -- Craft is dull. :) I also think that you can look at most so-called "interesting" restaurants as dull, because really -- with the exception of a half dozen or so places at the top of the form -- they're all just trotting out the same few tricks. Again, to apply one standard to all restaurants only makes sense if all restaurants are trying to do the same thing (or if you believe they should be). I don't buy into that notion at all.

"But if you ask me, if Craft wasn't Collichio's place, it would have gotten mediocre reviews and gone out of business faster than you can say Virot, which by the way was probably a more interesting restaurant than Craft."

Both points are no doubt true. The food media are obsessed with celebrity and reputation, and rarely comment on food outside that context. And Virot was a very interesting restaurant, just not a good one. Interesting in and of istelf is neither good nor bad. There is good-interesting and bad-interesting.

"And as it being "retro" as in Delmonico's, that is the last vibe I get from the place."

I'm not talking about the vibe. I'm talking about the reality of the menu concept. I'm aware that the setting, the attitude, and everything else say conceptual and post-modern. But that's all smoke and mirrors as far as I'm concerned. I don't mean to imply that Craft = Delmonico's. But it owes as much to history as it does to most contemporary restaurants.

[Wilfrid]

Reading the above with interest, I think a fundamental issue is raised here.  But to get to that, can I first clarify something?

Steven S. suggested that Craft, ironically, looks back to those former times when just about everything in a restaurant was listed separately on a (usually very long) carte.  Delmonico's is an example, but any of us who have looked at historical menus from Diamond Jim Brady days will know what he means.  Steve P. proposes that Le Cirque will, on request, do what Craft claims to do - that is, prepare whatever they have in the kitchen in whatever fashion you might reasonably request.

But, but, but...   First of all, those old, endless cartes, which list everything from herrings to gulls' eggs, to asparagus, to omelettes, usually list many (most?) of those items as being cooked in a particular manner - usually a traditional, French or French-derived manner.  So, what you in fact see, are herrings a la moutarde (I'll figure out how to do the accents one day, I promise), asparagus au beurre blanc, omelettes aux fines herbes, and so on.

Similarly, although Le Cirque would doubtless prepare you plain boiled sole and mashed potatoes, they would also surely (and their menu pretty much invites it) make you dishes from the classic repertoire.  I am sure you could ask for your sole a la meuniere  or Bercy and stand a chance of getting what you asked for.

My understanding of Craft - like Andy Lynes, I haven't been, but I have peered hard through the windows - is that what's on offer is something pretty basically different from any of the above.  How would I fare in Craft if I asked for the ingredients not simply to be grilled or fried, or whatever, but actually to be made into a dish from the recognised culinary repertoire?  

Which brings me back to the fundamental issue, which is that one, long-established view of what cooking is about is that it is the art of transforming ingredients.  Another, I think more recent view, is that it's about leaving them alone.  Happily, no rule says that we have to adhere to one school exclusively.  I have to say, however - and I think I am agreeing here with what Steve P. says about "soul" - not a term I would use - that it is the ability to dramatically and satisfyingly transform ingredients which makes serious cooking such a great cultural and historical achievement.

[Fat Guy]

I agree with and appreciate that distinction. Still, I think most every restaurant, from Craft to Pierre Gagnaire, offers a combination of ingredients left alone and ingredients transformed, albeit in different ratios. The mere act of slicing a piece of fluke very thin, or applying heat to a peice of meat, is transformative. (Americans often callously suggest that sushi chefs don't "cook" but, rather, just take raw fish and slice it up. You'd be laughed out of Japan for a statement like that, because it's common knowledge there that you can handle the same piece of fish a number of different ways to achieve dramatically different results without ever introducing heat into the equation. And I think it's safe to say the Japanese have given this as much or more thought than the French have given to La Technique.) I think it's just that at a place like Craft the focus is on the subtle transformations that bring out the most focused possible flavor from an ingredient, as opposed to combining and recombining ingredients to create new flavors. Craft is not a French restaurant, and therefore you won't find many of the classic French preparations -- though you will find some. But every dish on the menu is decidedly prepared in a certain way. It's not like you choose beef and then ask to have it broiled, boiled, steamed, or whatever. The kitchen seasons and roasts it in a predetermined manner and serves it with Bordelaise. There's more going on than meets the eye; it's just that the goals are different. I guess when I was talking about the Delmonico's comparison, I was focusing more on the phenomenon of critics and customers complaining that ordering at Craft is such hard work. I did not mean to imply that dining at Craft is like dining at Delmonico's. Again, your point is an excellent one. By writing this, I don't mean to say I disagree with it. It's an important distinction. I'm just trying to talk a bit more about how it does and does not apply to the Craft discussion.

[Wilfrid]

Understood.  What I really need to do is go and eat there!

[wingding]

I finally made it over to Craft for dinner,and didn't find it dull,or too much work to figure out the menu.Maybe I'm not as jaded as some of you,but preparing foods in ways that really bring out their essence, when it is done well, is a craft,and a test of a truly good cook.We had a lot of food,and I won't go into exhaustive detail,but some of the standouts were roasted foie gras,marinated arctic char,roasted skate,a wonderful plate of lightly dressed arugula,pain perdu with roasted bananas,and warm cups of hot chocolate...I often leave restaurants disgusted with oversalted,badly cooked food,and this was a welcome change.

[mogsob]

If by "yumminess" you mean a dish that can instantly silence conversation (and, indeed, all thought independent of and irrelevant to the act of tasting), then GT has the highest score in my book.  It is easy to dress up a dish with exotic spices and sauces and make it taste great.  The genius of Colicchio lies in his ability to extract the most pure and deep flavors from his subject with a minimum of fuss.  The secrets are revealed in his book: slow cooking and the best ingredients.  That is why the best dishes on the menu invariably include the word "roasted."

Not only is going to GT a joy for the pure dining experience (i.e. great food, great service, great ambiance, if the Zagat definition holds), but tasting Colicchio's food has made me a more educated diner (about what things should taste like) and a better cook at home.  Few restaurants in the world can make that claim (Le Bernardin, the old Lutece, Guy Savoy, Michel Rostang, to name a few).

[Wilfrid]

While trying not to repeat any of the excellent discussion on the thread, I just wanted to add my perspective, having finally dined there.

First, the notion that the menu is difficult is totally absurd.  It's one piece of paper, with dishes clearly shown as appetizers, main courses and sides.  Unfortunately, such has been the media fuss over the menu, that the staff now baby-talk you through it.  I had a little lecture on "proteins" from the waiter, which I will cut short next time.  The stacks of tasting menus, wine pairings, cartes and specials which you get at many other restaurants are much harder work.

Second, I thought the food was fantastically good.  The thick slices of rabbit ballotine - a moist, oregano-flavoured, boned saddle, stuffed with the liver, and served with a tiny but intense jelly of the stock - was some of the best charcuterie I've had in New York.  The only disappointment were some alleged pommes boulangere which turned out to be whole finglering potatoes, heavily larded and greasy.

Third, I found the mode of service to be tedious, problematic and gimmicky.  Every item is individually dished, and comes with its own serving fork/spoon.  The table is quickly cluttered beyond belief, but the real problem is that you are expected to serve yourself onto a stone cold plate, meaning that the food (not too hot when it arrived) is chilled before you can eat it.  By the time I had worked my way through a dessert with sauce, ice cream and pain perdu all on separate plates, I was exhausted.  It was like eating at a buffet.

Which brings me to the historical element in the thread above.  I did indeed find something very old-fashioned about Craft.  Buffet service started to go out of fashion in restaurants back in the 1880s, precisely because the hot food never got eaten hot, and diners ended up with a chaotic mixture on their plates.  Craft are creating miscrocosm buffets on each table.  I guess it promotes sharing, but I never have too much problem sharing pre-plated food, especially desserts.

The food was so good that I will definitely go back.  I plan, next time, to order charcuterie/shellfish, meat and one vegetable, then cheese.  This will minimise the problems of the service, and will create a dinner which would not have looked particularly strange to Escoffier, Curnonsky or AJ Liebling!

I will start a separate thread on cold food, which is really starting to get me down.

[mogsob]

I've made my reservation and am going in February.  I'll report back with my notes and comments.

[Bux]

It is easy to dress up a dish with exotic spices and sauces and make it taste great.

I'd tend to disagree. I've had more food ruined by the injudicious use of exotic flavors that never came near fusing on the plate. I suppose many find that exciting and it covers some other faults in cooking for them. There's nothing one can do for over cooked shrimp. Even distraction is no use. Chefs such as Veyrat and Gagniare succeed only because their basic technique and raw ingredients are top flight.

[mogsob]

Bux, I really do think it is easier to hide under sauces and spices.  Classic french bistros in NYC and London are a good example, as are many Parisian brasseries.

I quite agree that at the top end you are quite right.  But when you look down the ladder a notch or two, there are many restaurant that have yet to master the basic techniques of roasting, braising and broiling.  Yet they cover it up with a tasty sauce and seemingly get a 20 in Zagat-NYC every year.

[Bux]

Ah, but you said make it taste great. ;)

I won't disagree that a lot of mediocre food not only gets served in NY, but lapped up by adoring fans who over rate it. I don't know if I'm lucky or unlucky, but I haven't found so many cases of poorly cooked food with a tasty sauce. Nor have I found an example in NY of excellently cooked food ruined by an "exotic" sauce as I had in SF some years back.

[robert brown]

Last night our friends pulled a fast one and drove us down to Craft instead of to the restaurant they originally told us. We had no reservation, but as we needed to eat early, we thought we would eat at the bar. When we mistakenly walked into the main dining room, the hostess said she had just received a cancellation and sat us at a table. I became instantly favorably disposed to Craft when I heard on the restaurant’s sound system “I Don’t Want to be Kissed (By Anyone Else But You”) from the Miles Davis/Gil Evans album Miles Ahead.

When I returned home, I looked again at the Craft thread on this site wondering what the posts, perceptive and erudite in their own way, had to do with going, or choosing to go, to Craft in relation to other restaurants, or why what Tom Colicchio’s approach has anything to do with anything else. If there is any fundamental issue involved, it is why are not there more restaurants like Craft in a city of eight million people, with a million people passing through every day. I wonder if it is by design or accident that Craft was launched as a living indictment of the New York dining scene. For me it is one of literally a handful of restaurants I would be anxious to return to, recommend, or bring my friends to. Even though not every dish was winning, there were enough at a very high level of freshness, preparation, and honest conception that I would return there much sooner than to, for example, Le Bernadin where I have not had a memorable meal since Gibert Le Coz died; Tabla, where the “Indian” food is neither from here or from there; or even Café Boulod, which I liked, but felt that the food was deliberately made overly-rich.

I found Craft to be in the style of, and on a par with, some of the very enjoyable bistro-type restaurants I have visited in France. My Terrine of Gamebirds, made with quail, partridge, pheasant, and gamecock, and heightened with fragments of chives and cilantro, was the best dish I have had in New York in years.  My roasted guinea hen, and that of the husband of the couple we were with, was tender and flavorful, while my wife’s sea bass braised in a “fumet”with carrots and fennel bass was perfectly cook and impeccably fresh. Our other friend’s braised monkfish was the only main course that fell short. The roasted “ratte” potatoes served with an aoli had just the right firmness and richness, and the Hen of the Fields mushrooms were chewy and fragrant. Agnolotti filled with black truffle and meat served in a cheese sauce was also delicious, though not as ethereal as I find agnolloti to be in Italy   All of the four sorbets and four ice creams in the sampler were of perfect texture and easily identifiable.

The punchy five-letter word “Craft” says a lot about the restaurant. It makes the point that cooking is nothing more or noting less than a craft while paying homage to the fundamental ways that food is prepared and to ingredients in their most perfect state.

The menu is now less confusing since the “mix and match” element that throw a lot of people off has been abandoned. Now it is a well laid out, simply designed piece of paper that can be changed daily along with the availability of the best ingredients.

For two months I have been waiting for an opportunity to acknowledge Yvonne Johnson’s post that said how food doesn’t taste as good here as it does in Europe. It is an observation I have heard from ex-pat and foreign friends and to which I also subscribe. For the first time, however, I am being made to realize that such may not be the situation for much longer. For the moment, it is my dinner at Craft six days ago that is making me consider the possibilities.

[Fat Guy]

Robert, I agree with so much of what you’ve said that it’s hard for me to respond other than by echoing your sentiments.

I think one thing your report underscores is that Craft is about much more than just applying heat to ingredients. There is serious cooking going on in that kitchen. It just happens to be an introspective style of cooking that emphasizes a very focused approach to flavor.

In response to your question why there are not more restaurants like Craft, I think there are several answers. For one thing, take a look at the reactions here and in the media. I mean, here we have assembled pretty much the exact audience Colicchio was trying to reach with this restaurant. And we have about half the members of that audience rejecting it for one reason or another. Given that the restaurant has no mass appeal whatsoever (the typical, inexperienced diner is just going to see it as paying an awful lot for a roast chicken), who is the audience for more such places? For another thing, it’s not so easy to pull off. In order to acquire his ingredients, Colicchio is relying on a degree of political capital and economic leverage -- not to mention a level of taste and discernment -- that few restaurateurs possess. How many other chefs, moreover, have a restaurant like Gramercy Tavern from which to draw a chef de cuisine and sous chefs who have already had years of training in the chef's philosophy and methods? And also, I think very few other chefs would be in a position to command those prices, which are of course an essential part of the equation. I’m sure someone will try to emulate Craft, but I’m equally sure that person will fail.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Brown - I'm glad you liked it. You were obviously there on a good night. I felt almost the same as you the first time I had lunch there. But I felt differently about it after a mediocre dinner a few weeks later. That was about 4 months ago so I should go back.

Shaw - The reason that Craft falters is because they are caught up in enmeshing diners in the concept of the restaurant instead of simply serving them food. When Robert says in his review that the food is on par with bistros in France, that is so far off from how they present themselves. Based on how the restaurant sells itself, one would think that something more profound is going on there. I think a good percentage of the people who have posted negative things about it would be less put off if the gimmick was removed. And maybe that has already happened when Robert says the mix and match part of the menu has been simplified.

[Wilfrid]

Quote: from Steve Plotnicki on 1:21 am on Jan. 25, 2002

The reason that Craft falters is because they are caught up in enmeshing diners in the concept of the restaurant instead of simply serving them food.

I wish I'd said that in my post above.  Enjoyed the food very much, but really didn't need to have a one-page menu explained to me or to have everything served on a separate dish.

But I am now slavering for the game bird terrine.  If it's as good as the rabbit ballotine...well, this is turning out to be a very serious charcuterie restaurant.  I will try to slide into the bar some time this weekend and check it out.

[Fat Guy]

When we talk about how Craft presents itself, what are we talking about? We probably don't mean that Tom Colicchio came out and explained it. We also probably aren't referring to any written explanation we've received from the restaurant. In terms of what the restaurant does to communicate with us (besides actually cooking the food), it's mostly a question of the menu design, the way the waiters explain things, and the plating of the food. And then there is what the media and other customers say about a place.

I'll be the first to admit that, by obsessing about the procedures, the the service staff makes dining at Craft more annoying than it has to be. I may actually have been the first person to write that; I don't know for sure.

But there are a few things that need to be said about Craft's style of service:

First, there's the question of allocation of blame. I blame customers and writers for pushing the restaurant into a defensive posture. To me the menu always seemed like something that the average mind should have been able to comprehend. But it was not so. And there were also the people who didn't want to "work so hard," who helped create the present compromise situation.

Second, it's just like we were saying when we discussed William Grimes's complaints about talkative waiters. If you don't want to be burdened with the conceptual baggage, just cut the waiter off, say you understand the menu, and that's that. The restaurant has a default position of overexplaining itself, because that seems to be what most customers want and it is what the press has encouraged. But you don't have to be a silent victim. The only thing that's really unavoidable is having the food plated family style, which doesn't bother me.

Third, I'm always happy to discuss service, plating, and the organization of a menu -- these subjects fascinate me -- but they're not the same as the food. I try not to get too exorcised about conceptual elements if the food is good. Of course most people don't visit restaurants for the food, and it was silly to assume Craft would be an exception.

I'd actually rather see the menu go back to a more extreme presentation, but that's not what the people wanted. What the people wanted was for Craft to be Gramercy Tavern.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Fat Guy - I disagree with almost everything you said. Nobody wanted Craft to be another Gramercy Tavern, we would have been happy of it was just another place that served good food. It wasn't the customers who came up with the marketing gimmick of it being about a chef's craft, it was the owners. The fact is, that the restaurant doesn't really have a theme to it that is recognizable through its cooking. The "theme" they created is expressed through the presentation. I mean what type of theme is "the freshest food perfectly prepared?" Isn't that what every restaurant should be?

But isn't that all Craft is?

In reality, Craft is more like Union Square Cafe than Granercy Tavern in that it really serves New York style bistro cuisine, but with a French rather than Italian slant.  And if that is how they billed the place, it would be just as crowded, and there would have been less controversy. But Tom wanted the focus to be on how diners and chefs put a meal together. A great intelectual concept, but an unneccesary burden for many diners.

Craft needs to be viewed, as Robert Brown correctly viewed it, without the excesses of the presentation. And in my less than humble opinion, they would benefit from serving what they cook family style instead of in hundreds of little plates, each with serving forks and spoons. I mean if truffle filled agnoloti are good that day, for god sakes bring out a big bowl of the stuff and let everyone chow down on it. When I order a side of fimgerlings steamed and buttered, I want a bowl of them to pass, not a kidney shaped dish with 3 1/2 potatoes in it.

[Fat Guy]

Well, Plotnicki, I disagree with everything you said, so take that!

The objection to portion sizes aside (I agree, by the way, that some of the vegetable portions are stingy -- although I can't pretend to know the cost of every ingredient), here's what Tom Colicchio said before the restaurant opened. I think it's a bit more complex than just fresh ingredients freshly prepared. I also think he may have learned something, since he said all this, about what people want:

Craft came about in response to my own evolution as a chef, and my desire to cook in a fashion that I think reflects diners’ preferences today. What do I mean by that? To explain, a brief (and recent) culinary history of New York City might be helpful:

In the last two decades, fine dining in New York’s restaurants has evolved considerably. For many years fine food was synonymous with fancy food, and proof of a chef’s ability was correlated to his or her theatrics on the plate. High, architectural presentations and the juxtaposition of wildly different flavors and visual elements were the way chefs proved their showmanship and justified the high prices of haute cuisine in New York.

In my opinion, this eventually led to a sort of culinary ‘fatigue,’ which brought about the rustication of dining in New York. “Homey” elements like mashed potatoes, roasted chicken, soups, etc. became the rage. Restaurants started to feature couches and relaxed, easy-chair décor as a movement away from the rarified environment of fancy (read: French) establishments.

As this was taking place, I was finding myself excited by a greenmarket revolution happening right here in New York City. Small, family farmers were planting and rediscovering strains of herbs, tomatoes, greens and other ingredients that – although hard to come by – justified the additional expense their labor demanded. As a chef, I found the movement towards artisanal ingredients a boon to my craft; now I could experiment with paring down while losing nothing in the way of flavor. Sourcing and offering great ingredients became my mission, and I found I felt less inclined than ever to obscure the raw materials with over-the-top presentations.

At Craft I am taking this impulse to the next level. Whereas simplicity in the past has always been associated with less-elevated cuisine, I am seeking to marry the finest ingredients available to the highest level of culinary craftsmanship and letting that speak for itself. I will be presenting food I know to be exceptional in a way that lets the integrity of the raw materials shine through. Craft will be a very elegant restaurant, a destination for lovers of haute cuisine, but it will consciously seek to throw off the mantle of "fanciness."

[Steve Plotnicki]

Shaw - I'll stick with my statement. I think Collichio's statement, while well intended, doesn't add up to much more than simple food, albeit it from artisinal producers and fresh that day, being well prepared. And again, I think the problem is that is has the burden of adding up to something more when it doesn't have to. I also think that you shouldn't have to order veggies there. They should all be included with your meal. Then the menu can look like Gagniere's. Just the name of your main course.

[Steve Plotnicki]

One of the great debates of the winter was about the restaurant Craft. While my opinion of Craft is well known to anyone who reads this board, I always considered myself open minded about it. In general, my inclination was and is to like it. Combine that with the chef/owner Tom Collichio being one of the nicest guys on the New York restaurant scene and I was always looking for an opportunity to see if I had missed the boat somehow. I mean I have friends who go gaga over the place. And while I have eaten a few good meals there, adjectives like boring or over-complicated came too easily to me. Yet I hadn’t rushed back for a reassessment. I waited for the right opportunity, figuring that space and time would be helpful and would allow me to calibrate my palate accordingly. Finally the other night some friends invited us to share a “Chefs Menu” dinner with them, which they had won in an auction to benefit the children and widows of victims of 9/11.

The place was buzzing as usual. I have yet to be at dinner at Craft, or even walking by it, when the place doesn’t seem full of activity. Not only were most tables full when we arrived, but almost every seat at the bar was taken. After a few minutes they sat us down and then the Executive Chef at Craft, Marco Canora came over to the table to chat with our hosts. They operate a rare wine business in the city and they do business with many of the top restaurants so they know most of the chefs and all of the sommeliers in town. After they chatted for a minute or two, our host turned to me and said,”Marco, I’d like to introduce you to my friend Steve Plotnicki” whereas Marco looked at me and said, “Steve Plotnicki, you’re the guy from eGullet.”  Feeling a combination of elation from being a cyberceleb, and awkwardness because of what I wrote about the place, I said to him, “have you read the thread about Craft and what I said about it?” Save to say he had read every word. From that moment on I was like a big fish swimming in his small pond and he was intent on catching me with a hook made out of delicious food.

A few minutes after Marco went back to the kitchen, Tom Collichio appeared at our table. He had been fully briefed by Marco. Like what Bush must have gotten before he met with Sharon the other day. Collichio was loaded for bear. He had all sorts of questions about the things I had written, as well as some of the things some other people had written. “How come you find the menu so hard to use? Do you know how long it takes us to make the charcuterie?” etc. I said to myself, this is how William Grimes must feel after he reviews and then visits a place.  The questions quickly dissolved into an explanation of how Craft came into being, and the statement by Tom that despite the hullabaloo, Craft wasn’t any different than the old fashioned steak house where they served everything ala carte. That brought a “that’s what I said” from my mouth. But he asked me why in spite of that certain people were still confused by the menu. I felt as though I was the poster boy for a certain strain of menu rejection that was a phenomenon unique to that restaurant. But our food was going to come soon so he bid us a temporary farewell. “I’m going to go upstairs and log on and read that thread and then come back between courses.” Before we get to the food here, I have to tell you that it was all good-natured. Both Tom and Marco are the sweetest guys, and they were inspired to have me see the light.

We started with a raw fish course. They bombarded the table with plates that Marco served himself. He explained what each dish was as he laid the plates on the table. It included;

Fresh Sardines from France marinated with carrots, onions and coriander

King Salmon belly (the Toro of the salmon as Marco said) with olive oil, lemon and ramps

Hamachi with coriander

Snapper with ramps

Grilled Calamari with garlic, parsley and olive oil

Tuna loin sashimi and tuna tartar

Chick Peas marinated in lemon and parsley

Arugula Salad

I felt a sigh of relief not having to navigate my way through that menu. I can honestly say that if I had to order, I never would have ended up with what they served us. I can’t put my finger on why but the menu doesn’t inspire me to order that way. But let’s not get bogged down in minutia. What’s important here is the food. The food was terrific. The salmon belly and the snapper being my favorites, with the calamari a close runner up. The only thing I didn’t care for were the sardines, a little fishy (or sardine-like if you will) for my palate. But chalk that up to personal taste because they appeared to be glorious specimens. And the chickpeas and arugula played perfect foils to the high acidity of the marinades. It was a perfect way to start a meal with your palate being called to attention by acidity while soothed by the smooth texture of raw fish. We drank the following,

1978 Ramonet Montrachet - This was the first vintage of Montrachet for Ramonet. The wine is extremely rare, with only 75 cases made. We were speculating on how many cases could be left in the market that had not yet been drunk and we couldn’t imagine that there is a combined total of more than four or five. It was my first time having it and it certainly didn’t disappoint. The nose was just glorious. It actually smelled thick. My first sip brought back a recent memory of having a 1999 Ramonet Montrachet in Beaune this past February. There was a distinct link between the two bottles that allowed me to get an instant perspective on the ’78. Here was a twenty four year old bottle of white Burgundy that was bright with acid, yet it wasn’t harsh. There was smoothness to it, a length to it that held it all together. There was sort of this nutty, roasted lemon flavor that was bathed in melted butter. It might be presumptuous of me to say this but if I get the chance to drink it again, I would decant it for three or four hours before drinking as the amount of change it showed just being in the glass was substantial. Lots more packed in there. This wine will last another 10-15 years. A perfect bottle of wine.

From raw fish we were going to move onto charcuterie. One of the things that Craft is known for is making their own charcuterie. But before they served the course Collichio came back to visit us again. “Did you read the thread?” I asked. “No but I have four pages of notes that I took when it was first posted and I just read through them.”  I have to say that I was a bit taken aback at how much interest he had in eGullet and what we said about his restaurants. He proceeded to say that when the Craft thread was going on he was tempted to join in the thread. I asked him why he didn’t and he said he came close on a number of occasions but eventually decided not to.

Going off on a tangent, and this is probably worthy of its own thread, here is a perfect example of restaurant criticism where any notion of anonymity should be abandoned in favor of accurate information coming to the forefront for the benefit of diners. I mean if we were posting about a painting and there was a disagreement as to its interpretation, the artist coming onto the thread to explain what he intended would be welcomed. But here Collichio feels somewhat awkward. It just emphasizes the point that restaurants are looked at through a consumer lens where a certain standard of separation between consumers and those who cater to them is expected. While in other aesthetics our need to have the maximum understanding outweighs other variables. In fact I asked him if he had read the “Compromised Critics” thread and he said he hadn’t. When I told him what the issue was he laughed and said that there really wasn’t such a thing as an anonymous critic, we all know who they are and what they look like. He went on to say, “How much can we change something for a critic? What can we do, give them the center cut of a piece of meat? There isn’t really anything we can do to make the experience not a typical one.”

It was just about that time that Marco showed up with our charcuterie. He served us,

Porchetta stuffed with mortadella

Duck Ham

Duck Terrine with foie gras

Ballontine of Rabbit

Beet Salad

Fava Bean and Pecorino Salad

The porchetta was really excellent. Better than when I ate it at Craftbar a few months ago. Last time I found it sort of bland but this had more oomph to it. Somewhat saltier as well. I wouldn’t mind if they spiced this up even a little bit more. The duck ham is just terrific. It just melts in your mouth. And nice flavor to the duck terrine that seemed to be a combination of breast meat wrapped around delicious foie. Not being a rabbit eater, I took a bite of the ballontine to see if I could acquire the taste on the spot. It was fine, but a little dry I thought. I skipped the beets but as always I think the fava bean and pecorino salad is one of the best dishes there. Nice course but it could have used a pate/rilletes type of dish to introduce a different, coarser texture. We drank,

Jose Dohndt Blanc de Blancs Champagne (nv) – We bought this off their list. Very good champagne for a non-vintage bottling. Touch of residual sugar. Mousse of larger than average bubbles but nice and mild on the palate. No harshness to the wine at all, or sour taste that champagne has sometimes. Went well with the charcuterie as each sip refreshed the palate and the touch of sweetness perfectly played off the spicing.

More visits from Tom and Marco. Conversation about everything from the beautiful wine storage units that line a good deal of the room, to what type of olive oil they use in the kitchen (they bring it in from Italy palate at a time.) Finally they arrived with what must have been half of a baby lamb. They served chops, shanks, loin and shoulder either roasted or braised along with sweetbreads that were sautéed. The meat was extremely tasty, with the shoulder tasting a little salty, like the lamb had grazed on salt marshes. Forgot to ask them if that was the case or we are just talking about expert salting on behalf of the kitchen staff. Along with the lamb came a plate of steaming gnocchi with grated Parmesan cheese on top. I didn’t taste them (wheat sensitive) but Mrs. P said they were the best gnocchi ever. Light as small clouds that would melt in your mouth. They also brought a plate of mixed mushrooms and a small pot with morels in a cream sauce, sautéed wax beans and baby carrots that were roasted until soft on the inside and caramelized on the outside. The carrots were fantastic.  Good course with lots of delicious food although we were a bit stuffed before the course began. One complaint was that the lamb and the mushrooms weren’t served hot enough and were closer to room temperature. This has been happening to me a lot in restaurants these days. Is it that they want to serve things at room temperature (I abhor that) or they cook things and then they sit around cooling down until they are ready to serve them. Can’t figure it out here but I would have enjoyed the food much more if it was hotter. We drank,

1990 Frederic Mugnier Musigny – Nice and jammy. Good fresh cherry pinot flavor. With a little air I thought it showed some stemminess but it blew through that phase pretty quickly. Fairly light in body for a wine with so much stuffing. Couldn’t tell if it will pick up some weight with time. Just beginning to drink and as delicious as it was this night will be exponentially better when fully mature which should be in five to seven years.

We were then given dessert menus and I immediately had a severe attack of Craftmenudyslexia. All I can say is that my complaints are well documented in the other thread and they still hold. Maybe they should just give people a magnifying glass and an organizational chart with the menus. Since that dinner, my wife has decided to carry a small flashlight in her bag just so we can navigate through impossible to read menus. But I ordered the panna cotta, and they brought us a series of different ice creams and sorbets which were all pretty tasty.

So how was Craft? Very good, but really not much different than my prior assessments.  I much prefer the “serve us whatever you want” way of dining there to the choose one from column A, two from column B way the menu is laid out. And if I were to make any suggestion as to how things could be improved, I think they can really enhance the dining experience by including detailed descriptions of the ingredients.  I mean if the concept of Craft is serving the best market ingredients, tell us about them. Make our mouths water when we read the menu (but first design a menu we can read ). The other thing I decided that bothers me is the concept of ala carte vegetables and side dishes given the style of cooking they do there. While I understand that the menu is laid out like an old fashioned steak house, I find the food at Craft is prepared with much more finesse than the gruff style that steak house food is cooked in where a side order of hash browns or cottage fries (read not expertly prepared) are the perfect accompaniment to anything that comes with a char crust.  The cooking at Craft, which is intended to showcase top quality ingredients, depends on exposing subtleties. Forcing diners to choose which vegetable is the proper accompaniment to their main dish is a greater burden than being able to get the cream spinach right to go with your porterhouse. I think ultimately that means that too often, less than the perfect pairings end up on your table. For example, we didn’t eat the soft shell crabs (though we tried to order some and they ran out) but I have had them in the past and they would go smashingly with the carrots we had. Yet left to my own devices, that combination would not have been obvious to me before I tasted the carrots. To have a restaurant whose purpose is to bring out the best in the best ingredients pass up the opportunity to create pairings that showcase those ingredients at their best seems sort of a mixed message. Unless I am just being a dolt about it. But based on how many people have chimed up with small criticisms of the place, I will respectfully defer the title of dolt for another occasion.

Trying to quantify my feelings about Craft and reducing them to a rating is even more difficult. There are certain aspects to the restaurant that scream out for four stars, like the raw fish course and even simple things like the incredibly fresh arugula salad that accompanied that course. But then I have a hard time giving something like the lamb course more than 2 stars, even as good as it is. Maybe I find that the ala carte menu concept has deconstructed the main course from the side dishes in a way that has eliminated a clever use of saucing to bind them together? And maybe I demand that there be “more cooking” in a restaurant than the simple roasting or braising of top ingredients? I mean many of us complain about places like Union Square Café because of the cooking being too simplistic. But then we rave about Craft because the simplicity comes with a proffer of “best available ingredients.” There seems to be some conflict in there somewhere. I think it boils down to that there are occassions where I am the best person to make choices in a restaurant. And then there are other occassions when I think I’m better off with the chef making those choices for me. Whichever way, I'm going to have to go back at least a few more times to try and figure it all out.

[Wilfrid]

Eeek!  People actually read this stuff!

Never mind; an interesting report, Steve.  I am beyond recalling the detail of the last Craft thread, but there were some reminders here.  The coldness of the main courses was one thing which irritated me; and this isn't just old Wilf with his usual complaint - it was a specific outcome of the restaurant's insistence on serving every component of the dish separately, leaving the diner to plate it on a cold plate.  Same with your experience, I assume?

I haven't been able to get near the place recently when I've tried for a table, or even the bar, at short notice - I'll have to book ahead.  Given this obvious success, you'd think they could drop the dumb menu layout.  I totally agree with you about that.  I guess they really believe in it.  Understand, I don't actually think the menu is difficult to comprehend - it's just awkward, and I agree that it I would prefer to try the chef's combination of ingredients rather than invent my own.

Love that charcuterie, though (three star item or not).  

[Damian]

Great post Steve.  Amazing that you were recognized by name - although perhaps not so amazing given the amount of time and energy dedicated to discussions of Craft's concept and execution on these boards by yourself and others already.  I have yet to go, having only spent time looking at the menu posted outside once when we happened to be nearby.  However, after reading this post I am more resolved than ever to give it a go myself soon, intimidation factor of "crafting" my own meal aside.