One Fish, Two Fish

[Fat Guy]

There are many sides to the debate over which is the world's greatest restaurant city, but it's hard to dispute that New York is the world's most diverse restaurant city. So when dining in New York, one learns to expect almost anything.

Still, once in awhile you wander into a place and you say, "This doesn't feel like New York at all." One Fish, Two Fish, on the corner of Madison and 97th, is such a place.

One Fish, Two Fish feels like a cross between a New England seaside fish house and a restaurant you might have found on Amsterdam Avenue in the 1970s. The clientele is primarily African-American with a smattering of Mount Sinai Hospital employees wearing scrubs (the restaurant even has an extension on the Mount Sinai phone system). Most white Upper East Siders, needless to say, simply won't cross 96th Street. To use the restaurant's own words to describe the decor: "The atmosphere for One Fish Two Fish is comfortable and nautical. Come see the life-sized, gigantic wooden steering wheel, ship pictures, dangling lights and the seashells & artificial seaweed ornaments hanging on the walls." (Much to my surprise, the place turns out to have a Web site: http://www.onefishtwofishrestaurant.com )

The menu is very basic seafood, and all offerings are of average quality. Nothing is bad; nothing is great. That's a very unusual state of affairs for a seafood restaurant, because almost all the world's seafood restaurants can be divided into great and terrible. One Fish, Two Fish somehow occupies that rarely seen middle ground.

And it's cheap. You can get a whole rainbow trout (farm-raised from Idaho) or a large piece of bluefish for $9.95, or a 1-1/4 pound lobster for $15.95. And those entree prices include unlimited iceberg-lettuce-based salad (served with a metal rack containing three kinds of goopy commercial dressing -- but if you ask for olive oil and balsamic vinegar you can get it), a basket of butter-saturated garlic bread, and a vegetable side such as baked potato or coleslaw. Most of the fish dishes are broiled, though they're also available steamed with ginger, soy, and sesame (cod prepared in this manner is surprisingly good -- probably the best dish at the restaurant).

Lunches are even cheaper than dinners, and this is one of the only places on the Upper East Side where you can get a table for weekend brunch without an absurd wait. One Fish, Two Fish is open until 3:00am every night, by which time it has attracted a high-energy bar crowd.

Not a ringing endorsement, I know, but I find this place exceptionally useful given that I live just four blocks away. When I'm looking for effortless, economical nourishment that eliminates the need for me to cook at home, this is my primary non-Chinese resource.

[vic]

Is the kitchen open after midnight?  There is a dearth of places (non diners/pizza/bagels) on the UES that serve this late.

[Christopher]

The menu reads like those in the south and has my favorite Southern phrase "Lightly Fried" Not sure what it means or how they accomplish it but it's ubiquitous in the south.

Along with "Cooked to perfection" I always want to give that as an answer to "How would you like that cooked?"

Steven, The raw oysters are cheap, are they any good?

[Fat Guy]

I'll definitely be using the "cooked to perfection" line soon!

The oysters at One Fish, Two Fish are fine. They keep them cheap by using smaller specimens, and not offering a choice so as to be able to purchase whatever is cheap and plentiful. Ditto for the other mollusks.

I'm primarily familiar with New England, but I suppose there are places along these lines all along the Atlantic coast. Perhaps the closest thing wouldn't be New England at all, but rather the fish places on the Jersey shore, or in Delaware and Maryland (minus the crabs). City Island, too. It's sort of a surprise to eat pre-Le-Bernardin seafood. It's so overcooked and retro tasting by contemporary epicurean standards. But it can be satisfying under the right circumstances.

I should add that the non-seafood items (burgers and such) are quite adequate.

[Ruby]

Quote: "Most white Upper East Siders, needless to say, simply won't cross 96th Street."            

Steven, I must take exception to your comment as I simply don't agree with it.  Upper East Siders are not afraid to walk past Carnegie Hill and frequent other neighborhoods beyond 96th Street like Harlem, East Harlem and the Bronx and they don't take tour buses to get there. I've had some fine meals and heard good jazz uptown in Hamilton Heights. 'White folks' are even buying hot property in Harlem and our former president, Bill Clinton, likes it just fine.

Unfortunately, comments like this reinforce an old stereotype. There are no more really bad neighborhoods in Manhattan. Of course, I wouldn't wander around in certain areas at 2 a.m. but I'd use that common sense anywhere.

[Fat Guy]

It was not my intention to reinforce a stereotype; I was just stating a fact that is plainly observable by anybody. I hope it was clear from my comments that I think the failure of most white people to venture north is a bad thing. I said most, and I'm sure if you took a poll you'd see that an overwhelming majority follow this pattern. President Clinton's foray into Harlem was newsworthy exactly because it was so unusual -- the proverbial exception that proves the rule. Manhattan's East 96th Street has been referred to by Spanish writer Victor de la Serna as one of the most dramatic urban divides on Earth. It is slightly eroded now, especially on Fifth Avenue, but as you go farther east it becomes very stark. Yes President Clinton and some other white people -- like me -- do visit Harlem and even buy real estate there. 110th and 125th Streets in particular seem to be doing pretty well in terms of attracting diverse clientele. But to say it is common, especially among Upper East Siders, is simply unrealistic.

[Ruby]

It was not my intention to reinforce a stereotype; I was just stating a fact that is plainly observable by anybody. I hope it was clear from my comments that I think the failure of most white people to venture north is a bad thing. I said most, and I'm sure if you took a poll you'd see that an overwhelming majority follow this pattern. President Clinton's foray into Harlem was newsworthy exactly because it was so unusual -- the proverbial exception that proves the rule. Manhattan's East 96th Street has been referred to by Spanish writer Victor de la Serna as one of the most dramatic urban divides on Earth. It is slightly eroded now, especially on Fifth Avenue, but as you go farther east it becomes very stark. Yes President Clinton and some other white people -- like me -- do visit Harlem and even buy real estate there. 110th and 125th Streets in particular seem to be doing pretty well in terms of attracting diverse clientele. But to say it is common, especially among Upper East Siders, is simply unrealistic.

Thanks for clarifying but I still don't see how blanket comments like this can be made. I don't want to sound smartass but did you take a poll or survey with every Upper East Sider? They don't all just dine at SaraBeth's. And the UES covers a large area from affluent Fifth Avenue way over to York Avenue.

I don't intend to start a new thread because your review of One Fish Two Fish was definitely positive but that one comment really bothered me. I'm uptown very often and see a wide variety of races and nationalities.  If anything I believe there are more whites and visiting tourists in the uptown area than ever before.  The Sunday gospel at the Convent Avenue Church is very popular and Harlem restaurants and museums are now frequented by many people of different colors.

This sort of reminds me of when people didn't go anywhere near Alphabet City. Roads stopped at First Avenue-St. Mark's Place. Avenue A was considered 'All Right'; Avenue B was 'Bad'; Avenue C was Cut-throat and D was 'Death.  Well, look how this area changed and gentrified (not to everyone's liking). It's now a destination and New Yorkers (including UES) going past 96th Street is definitely happening too.

[jhlurie]

Play nice kiddies and agree to disagree.  

BTW: does the estate of Dr. Suess get to sue this place over the name?

[Wilfrid]

I suspect we all agree that it is a good thing that Harlem and other areas are opening up.  I had been looking for an opportunity to make this announcement, and now I have it:

I am moving to Avenue D next week.  Now you'll see some gentrification.  I estimate our new abode is approximately ten to twelve minutes walk from Katz's.  I need to time it exactly.

I also have a holiday home in the South Bronx.

[Ruby]

Wilfrid, is the holiday home in the South Bronx your weekend getaway?

[Wilfrid]

Yes it is, thanks for asking.  It's main attraction is that it contains the overspill of my library from my main "seat".  I may have the finest collection of cricket books in the South Bronx.

[jhlurie]

My Dad was from the South Bronx.  Yous' better watch it buddy.  

[Wilfrid]

I am watching it, believe me.

[stefanyb]

I have to agree with Ruby here.  I personally know dozens of people who currently own their own places above 96th street and they are all "white".  Maybe the UES-ers don't go above 96th Street but many of them won't go below 57th Street either unless they're in a car and don't stop until they get to the door of the snotty restaurant, boutique or gallery they're headed to.

If its your opinion that white folks won't go above 96th Street, that's one thing (wrong though it is) but Steven stating this as a fact is just plain incorrect.

[Fat Guy]

I'll make one more attempt at clarification here before I throw in the towel. If, after I give the following explanation, Ruby and Stefanyb are still of the opinion that I've said something that is either 1) factually incorrect or 2) dangerously reinforcing of negative stereotypes, I will offer a heartfelt apology and retraction. Because it was never my intention to do anything of the sort, and I don't think I did.

What I said was, "Most white Upper East Siders, needless to say, simply won't cross 96th Street." I hope it was clear from the context of what I said that I think this is a bad thing, not a good thing.

Ruby suggested that my comment reinforces a negative stereotype. I just don't see it that way. The only group of people I think could in good faith take umbrage at my statement would be white Upper East Siders. And if there is one group of people on planet Earth that is not in need of protection from anything, it is white Upper East Siders.

Sure, some white Upper East Siders -- like me -- go into East Harlem to do various things. I go to One Fish, Two Fish (obviously), to Patsy's, to the Italian festival every year, to Morrone's bakery, to the 99-cent shops along Madison Avenue in the 110s, to Raskin Carpet, to wherever. My wife and I take long walks, and sometimes those walks take us north into East Harlem for hours and hours of exploration. I see very few non-Hispanic white faces on those walks.

Stefanyb, I want to make clear that I'm talking about the East Side here. I'm talking about El Barrio, as the neighborhood is commonly called. It's a Hispanic neighborhood, primarily, with some black population as well. According to the 2000 census, there are about 117,500 people in that area (Manhattan Community District 11) with only about 8,500 of those being so-called White Nonhispanic (that's 7.6 percent, and I bet more than a few of those are concentrated around Mount Sinai hospital and the 96th Street district boundary). The neighboring Upper East Side (District 8), by contrast, is more than 80% White Nonhispanic. District 8 is the wealthiest in New York City, and one of the wealthiest neighborhoods in the world (I think I read somewhere once that the 10028 Zip code is in fact the wealthiest Zip code in America; I'm sorry to say I live in 10128, which isn't quite so flush). Districts 11 & 10 (East and Central Harlem) are very close to last place, with five Bronx neighborhoods anchoring the bottom of the chart.

The revitalized portions of Harlem are mostly on the West Side. Neighborhoods like Hamilton Heights exist at a point in Manhattan where the East Side has already narrowed and disappeared. There is no East Side above the 130s. If you look at a list of the main attractions in Harlem -- Abyssinian Baptist, Salem United Methodist, Metropolitan Baptist, Hamilton Grange, Riverbank State Park, Sugar Hill, Striver's Row, the Apollo Theater, the Schomberg Center, Sylvia's and other soul food restaurants -- they are not on the East Side. With the exception of a few things right on the East-West Fifth Avenue border (like the National Black Theater near 125th and Fifth), East Harlem doesn't appear to me to have many destination-type places that attract people who don't already live in the neighborhood.

Now, if you go to the West Side, which isn't what I was talking about originally, you have both a different neighborhood boundary and a different situation. There are a lot of interesting issues we could discuss regarding this part of Harlem. For example, my understanding based on conversations with merchants in that neighborhood is that there is a lot of resentment towards the newly arrived masses of tourists, not only from other New York neighborhoods but also from Japan and elsewhere. The complaint I've heard is that these people too often come to look, but not to buy. And I also think that too many of the people who visit Harlem do so with an unhealthy attitude, as though they are on an adventure rather than just visiting another neighborhod of New York. Too few are up there setting up offices and businesses, as President Clinton has. I just did a quick Google search and found a pretty interesting article that seems to confirm some of my impressions. But none of those are subjects I introduced when I posted about One Fish, Two Fish and made a comment about most Upper East Siders not venturing north.

Ruby, you mentioned the Bronx. I want to make clear that I wasn't talking about the Bronx, or Westchester, or Canada -- all of which are north of 96th Street too.

Stefanyb, correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm assuming the dozens of people you know who own homes in Harlem are living on the West Side, and not on the East Side. Probably the Morningside Heights and Manhattanville areas, not East Harlem and probably not Central Harlem either (which is only 2% white). If you do know a lot of non-Hispanic white people living in East Harlem, did any of them move there from the Upper East Side? And if so, would you call such people typical or atypical?

I've not taken any polls. But can we indulge ourselves in a guessing game for a moment? Let's say we asked 1000 Upper East Side white residents (or 1000 randomly chosen Upper East Siders, since more than 800 of those would be white anyway) the following question: "How many times per year do you visit the East Side of Manhattan above 96th Street, not including transit through that neighborhood on the FDR Drive or en route to the Madison Avenue Bridge?" How do you think the answers would break down? Am I crazy for speculating that the majority will answer zero, and that the majority of those who don't answer zero will be doing so because they've been to Mount Sinai Hospital recently? I live on East 93rd Street, and have for more than a decade. I spend an inordinate amount of time walking around, especially now that I have a dog. I talk to all sorts of people. My impressions may be unscientific, but they're based on a not insignificant body of experience.

To those who have never done so, I recommend a walk along 96th Street from Fifth Avenue to the River. Look left and look right at each intersection. It's pretty amazing.

Way back when, I said "most." I believe that to be true. But if I am still failing to make my point, it is because of my shortcomings as a writer and not because I'm trying to say anything negative about Harlem or the people who live there, East or West.

[ahr]

President Clinton's foray into Harlem was newsworthy exactly because it was so unusual...

Let's not give our ex too much credit.  Remember, his first choice was the tower overlooking Carnegie Hall (not Carnegie Hill), but the public quite literally refused to buy it.

[Ruby]

Quote: "Most white Upper East Siders, needless to say, simply won't cross 96th Street."            

Steven, thanks again for clarifying but your original comment was the above and that's what I responded to. As the saying goes, sometimes 'less is more' and to also say 'needless to say' made it appear that this was a well-known fact carved in stone. That's what I responded to. I'm glad I did because now you've cleared the air with your last post.

IMO New York City is changing/improving by the second and I really believe there are really no bad neighborhoods. Real estate developers just don't confine themselves to only certain boundaries. I remember when Lexington Avenue in the 20s was filled with prostitutes, pimps and drugs. When the first high-rise went up and they put up a sign that said 'The Joy of Lex" I thought they were nuts; who would want to live there. Well, try to get an apartment there now. It's happening all over and though some areas are still tougher and grittier than others, that's changing too.

[Fat Guy]

Back when West Side Story was unfolding on the Upper West Side, my father -- a grad student at Columbia at the time, I think -- found a two-bedroom apartment on 69th and Columbus for something like 142 dollars a month. My mother didn't want to move there -- she was afraid for her safety and that of her potential children. But my father said, "They're building this Lincoln Center thing, and it's going to make this into a fancy neighborhood."

38 years or so later, my widowed mother -- who still lives in that apartment, in which she and my father raised two children -- complains that the neighborhood is too fancy!

[foodboy]

I know this has nothing to do with the original point, Ruby, but Lex in the 20's is now filled with nice restaurants, expensive apartments and prostitutes.

[Ruby]

I know this has nothing to do with the original point, Ruby, but Lex in the 20's is now filled with nice restaurants, expensive apartments and prostitutes.

Foodboy, you're right and that was my point too. I know some prostitutes are still around but not like it was. In the 80s, I recall my exterminator, who made night calls, was looking for a place to park his van on Lexington Avenue but he was so fascinated staring at the pros that a police car pulled him over and asked what he was looking for!