Bruni and Beyond: NYC Reviewing (2004)

[Pan]

Bux, tommy et al --

I'm not interested in hearing what Mr. Bruni's friends have to say about a restaurant.  I'm interested in hearing what Mr. Bruni has to say about a restaurant.  Mr. Bruni is the reviewer, not his dining companions, no matter how well-informed they might be.

←

Understood, but we can disagree without being disagreeable.

I don't agree with the Zagat analogy. One person is making the decision of which quotes to include, and they ate with him. This isn't like picking the "wittiest" or "catchiest" of 100 "reviews" sent in to a central office.

[Pan]

Robyn, as maddening as it can be to consider the possibility (and I really do find it maddening to go in with high expectations at a fine [and of course, expensive] restaurant and have them dashed), some of what you experienced could be luck of the draw. Have a look at this thread to get a feel for the great and very disappointing meals my family and I had within the same week at Michel Vignaud in Chablis, a Michelin 1-star restaurant (at the time we dined there, at any rate; I believe it still has one star, but I'm not sure).

[SobaAddict70]

(and i assume this is the standard to which you're holding Bruni)

←

Yes, actually.

Each Times critic had a particular style....

For instance, Reichl was known for her poetic/flowing/(overly (at least to some people)) descriptive prose. Probably a side effect of her creative writing background.

Grimes as I saw him, described his experience in an understated monotone. Flat, dry, spartan descriptions. "Precise without being gushy" is the best I can describe it....almost as if he were a lawyer drafting a memorandum to clients. Quite the opposite of his predecessor.

We know that Reichl had dining companions accompany her on most of her visits but the impression/recollection I have is that she rarely mentioned her companions' experiences in her reviews (i.e., Tabla). Her focus seemed to be on the food.

Ditto for Grimes, except that his focus seemed to be on the overall experience, with food, decor/interior design and service sharing equal billing.

With Mr. Bruni, whilst it's not every single review, a direct or indirect reference about his friends has appeared more frequently. I would guesstimate that at least a third of his published reviews contains such an item.

Soba

[SobaAddict70]

Bux, tommy et al --

I'm not interested in hearing what Mr. Bruni's friends have to say about a restaurant.  I'm interested in hearing what Mr. Bruni has to say about a restaurant.  Mr. Bruni is the reviewer, not his dining companions, no matter how well-informed they might be.

←

Don't read the NY Times. Seriously, the Times is paying for Bruni's judgment and if in his judgment his companion's comments are worth his attention, they're worth yours. If nothing else, Bruni earns his salary by carefully selecting his dining companions and by selecting and editing their comments. Those carefully selected comments are anything but filler. This is Bruni's style of communicating information and opinion about the restaurant and its food. If you don't like his style, why do you want to hear more about what he says? What makes you think he knows more than his companions?

←

Because he's the restaurant critic for the Times?

He also earns his salary by evaluating restaurants on a certain standard, whatever that might be. That standard assumes that he has a specific grounding in food knowledge that enables him to have opinions that matter, that are noteworthy of being a critic. If he needs to pad his reviews with commentary by his companions, then I would venture that this is a failing rather than a strength.

A better path might be for him to turn the commentary into criticism but without direct or indirect reference. In a perfect world, I suppose...

Soba

[Michael Ruhlman]

Michael, can you share with us how you came to be included in Bruni's dining party that evening?

←

He sent me an email to say he'd read and liked my soul of a chef. This, needless to say, endeared me to the guy. The ensuing brief correspondence resulted in Bruni's offer to let him know next time I was in town. Which I did. Also along for the meal were a noted food writer and Times regular contributor and an editor from the times dining section.

[tommy]

Each Times critic had a particular style....

←

it seems like you don't like this critic's particular style.

[oakapple]

A few thoughts on Bruni's "friends"......

He seems to use this term indiscriminately for his dining companions (aside from the occasion when he mentioned his brother). My guess is that sometimes they are friends, and other times they're just acquaintances or colleagues.

As far as I know, most NYT food critics regularly take companions with them to meals. Bruni is the only one, as far as I can recall, who mentions them in almost every review. Many of these references are filler, and contribute very little to our understanding of the restaurant.

Now, if a dining companion has made a particularly witty or insightful comment that brilliantly captures the experience, I have no objection if Bruni credits the comment to a friend rather than taking credit for himself. In fact, he should give credit where it is due. The trouble is, most of these comments just aren't all that that interesting.

On the other hand, I wouldn't say Bruni is writing a review by committee. The opinions are all his own. Even a highly opinionated writer can quote others, where the quotes help to make the desired point. These quotes generally don't do that, or they don't do it very well.

[SobaAddict70]

Each Times critic had a particular style....

←

it seems like you don't like this critic's particular style.

←

That's a partial assessment.

I'd say that when Mr. Bruni writes well, he writes exceedingly well. The problem is that there aren't many reviews that meet that threshold, in my opinion.

Soba

[madziast]

soba, so how do you feel about betsy, johnny apple's wife, who is mentioned in every article? he's not a reviewer, of course, but since you feel so strongly about bruni's friends (don't they all seem male? attention restaurateurs, table of 4-5 guys, watch out!) it made me think about betsy and how she's always there and yet doesn't really bring anything into the story

[Bux]

At the same time, I'm not convinced Bruni has any friends. I've never met anyone who's claimed to be his friend.

←

i just don't know how to react to something like this, even given the rest of this poster's comments.

moderators should note that my proclamation that i don't know how to react to this statement should, by any reasonable barometer, constitute a reasonable response. and i think that comment makes for a springboard into an interesting dicussion.

←

I would assume Bruni has friends. My point was more to do with an assumption made by others that somehow these were people unqualified to say anything that was worthy of being repeated in the Times.

[Bux]

What makes you think he knows more than his companions?

←

Because he's the restaurant critic for the Times?

←

The Times hasn't always seemed to require a specific grounding in food knowledge for the job before.

He also earns his salary by evaluating restaurants on a certain standard, whatever that might be.  That standard assumes that he has a specific grounding in food knowledge that enables him to have opinions that matter, that are noteworthy of being a critic.  If he needs to pad his reviews with commentary by his companions, then I would venture that this is a failing rather than a strength.

A better path might be for him to turn the commentary into criticism but without direct or indirect reference.  In a perfect world, I suppose...

Soba

←

We're not going to agree and probably beating a dead horse, but I think you paint too narrow a picture of who a reviewer must be, what he must do and how he must do it. Oakapple has said it well. He doesn't find the quotes useful, but doesn't object to the idea of quoting one's companions.

[SobaAddict70]

soba, so how do you feel about betsy, johnny apple's wife, who is mentioned in every article?  he's not a reviewer, of course, but since you feel so strongly about bruni's friends (don't they all seem male?  attention restaurateurs, table of 4-5 guys, watch out!) it made me think about betsy and how she's always there and yet doesn't really bring anything into the story

←

He's not a reviewer, so her presence is a non-issue to me.

Soba

[rich]

He's totally out of control - how does Sripraphai qualify for this type of review? If any place was meant for $25 column, this is it.

It's time to retire, enjoy life, get your head together and come back as a rabbit.

As an aside - did anyone notice the Times advertised watching the election results with him on the front page of their web site yesterday?

[tommy]

i generally don't get too bent out of shape about a star system, but if Sripraphai gets 2 stars, then i will admit that i have no idea what stars mean, other than "very good". yes, Sripraphai is very good.

[bpearis]

He's totally out of control - how does Sripraphai qualify for this type of review? If any place was meant for $25 column, this is it.

This week's $25 & Under is more expensive than the main review.

[robert40]

I'm not a fan of Bruni's writing and the star system is another matter.

But on a positive note if I admire anything it's that he is giving the little guy's some press.

[robyn]

i generally don't get too bent out of shape about a star system, but if Sripraphai gets 2 stars, then i will admit that i have no idea what stars mean, other than "very good".  yes, Sripraphai is very good.

←

That's the same rating given to David Burke & Donatella (albeit by another critic). Somehow I don't think I'd have been as happy traipsing out to Queens to eat there. Unless this is truly a "destination restaurant". I tend to doubt it - but what do those of you in New York think? Robyn

[Jason Perlow]

i generally don't get too bent out of shape about a star system, but if Sripraphai gets 2 stars, then i will admit that i have no idea what stars mean, other than "very good".  yes, Sripraphai is very good.

←

That's the same rating given to David Burke & Donatella (albeit by another critic). Somehow I don't think I'd have been as happy traipsing out to Queens to eat there. Unless this is truly a "destination restaurant". I tend to doubt it - but what do those of you in New York think? Robyn

←

Its largely considered to be the best and most authentic Thai restaurant in the entire NY metro area, so I would say yes, its a destination restaurant if that kind of food is what you are seeking and you want the best that cuisine can offer.

[jogoode]

The star system is more flexible when the critic can assume that his audience can tell the difference between a 2-star review for David Burke and a 2-star review for Sripraphai.

If the system isn't flexible in this way, there will be problems with reliability, even of reviews of restaurants on a similar price plane. A 3-star review of Cru is praising different criteria than a 3-star review of Sushi Yasuda.

[robyn]

The star system is more flexible when the critic can assume that his audience can tell the difference between a 2-star review for David Burke and a 2-star review for Sripraphai.

If the system isn't flexible in this way, there will be problems with reliability, even of reviews of restaurants on a similar price plane. A 3-star review of Cru is praising different criteria than a 3-star review of Sushi Yasuda.

←

Took me a while to find it - but the NYT circulation is about 50% outside the NY metro area (which includes parts of NY, CT, NJ and PA) - according to the 10K. So why would one assume that someone in Arizona or Oregon is supposed to know this? Reminds me of Eddie Murphy looking for his Queen in Queens in Coming to America.

I simply don't agree that a local ethnic joint that tries to be the best Thai ethnic restaurant in NY is comparable to a restaurant with higher aspirations (perhaps a Thai restaurant can have these aspirations - like some Indian restaurants do in London - they have Michelin stars - but I don't think that's what this restaurant is trying to do). Under the Michelin system - the former would - if perfect - get perhaps a knife and fork or two. Never a star. The latter might not get a star if it failed in terms of meeting its goals - but you wouldn't get confused about the difference between the 2 places.

I'm just concluding the NYT system is a silly way to rate places.

BTW - just as a point of curiosity - do you live in Manhattan - and - if so - how many times a year do you go to Queens to eat (excluding visits to family members who might live there)? I'm just a tourist when I go to NY - and unless I have business or want to see family members in other boroughs (I have relatives in both Queens and Staten Island - and my grandmother used to live in the Bronx a long time ago) - I pretty much stay in Manhattan. Robyn

[milla]

In the last of The Art of Eating" in the NY Restaurants issue, Edward Behr mentions

Sripraphai as possibly having the best Thai food in the United States. He was quoting several Thai friends who have been around the States and know Thailand quite well, of course.

If, in fact, that is even remotely true, would that not be reason enough to review it?

[jogoode]

Took me a while to find it - but the NYT circulation is about 50% outside the NY metro area (which includes parts of NY, CT, NJ and PA) - according to the 10K.  So why would one assume that someone in Arizona or Oregon is supposed to know this?

Because in each review, the reviewer provides some context for each restaurant. Bruni:

It is also about to expand and visually improve. Its Thai owner, Sripraphai Tipmanee, recognized that the original dining room, always spartan and charmless, had descended perhaps too far into outright frumpiness...

By the end of the review, and before you look at the star rating, you understand that Bruni loves this Thai place in Queens that has charmless decor. When you see the two stars, you shouldn't automatically say: "This bastard Bruni thinks that some Thai place in Queens is as good as DavidBurke or as good as Blue Hill!" They are clearly different restaurants. Bruni cares so little about aspects other than food at Sripraphai; he says explicitly that he doesn't care about the decor and he doesn't even mention service, as he usually does. Blue Hill would never get two if it looked like Sri. It has different ambitions and should be rated according to those ambitions, as people have argued many times before. Bruni is simply saying that it succeeded greatly in its goal to be a good, modest Thai restaurant.

I simply don't agree that a local ethnic joint that tries to be the best Thai ethnic restaurant in NY is comparable to a restaurant with higher aspirations (perhaps a Thai restaurant can have these aspirations - like some Indian restaurants do in London - they have Michelin stars - but I don't think that's what this restaurant is trying to do).  Under the Michelin system - the former would - if perfect - get perhaps a knife and fork or two.  Never a star.  The latter might not get a star if it failed in terms of meeting its goals - but you wouldn't get confused about the difference between the 2 places.

I agree, the Thai restaurant is not comparable to these restaurants with higher aspirations. It doesn't purport to be. Instead of the Thai restaurant getting a couple of pieces of silverware, it gets stars with context. As soon as you are informed by the reviewer that this is not an ambitious French or new-American or molecular-gastronomic place, you can in your mind transfer these stars to forks.

BTW - just as a point of curiosity - do you live in Manhattan - and - if so - how many times a year do you go to Queens to eat (excluding visits to family members who might live there)?  I'm just a tourist when I go to NY - and unless I have business or want to see family members in other boroughs (I have relatives in both Queens and Staten Island - and my grandmother used to live in the Bronx a long time ago) - I pretty much stay in Manhattan.  Robyn

←

I live in Manhattan, and I go to Queens to eat very often. I've been to this particular Thai place over 30 times, sometimes twice a week. But I'm not, of course, representative of most Manhattanites who read the Times Dining Section obsessively. I'm very young and don't mind the subway trip (which btw only takes 45 minutes on a good day, as much time as it takes me to get to the East Village from the Upper Upper West Side). This review is not for everyone, just as a review of ADNY is not for everyone. I couldn't give a damn whether ADNY gets three stars, four stars or zero stars. I'm never going to go there -- unless I give up on a job in editorial and become a money launderer. Now Bruni's working for me and for you!

[bpearis]

BTW - just as a point of curiosity - do you live in Manhattan - and - if so - how many times a year do you go to Queens to eat (excluding visits to family members who might live there)?  I'm just a tourist when I go to NY - and unless I have business or want to see family members in other boroughs (I have relatives in both Queens and Staten Island - and my grandmother used to live in the Bronx a long time ago) - I pretty much stay in Manhattan.  Robyn

←

There isn't a week that goes by where I don't think "I need to go eat at Sripraphai again." I live in Brooklyn where it's a bit more of a trek to get there than those who live in Manhattan, actually (I don't have a car). From midtown, it's a quick trip on the 7 train, much less time than it takes to go from the Upper East Side to Tribecca. It is a destination restaurant, but maybe not for people who need white table cloths.

[Bux]

Under the Michelin system - the former would - if perfect - get perhaps a knife and fork or two.  Never a star.

←

I think this is misleading, at least to those who haven't used a Michelin guide. The crossed forks and spoons (there are actually no knives) and the stars are two separate and parallel ratings. The forks and spoons denote a level of comfort or luxury. The stars are for the cooking or the quality of the meal. It's been argued that the decor and service figure into the qaulity of the meal as well when Michelin awards its stars, but it's still a separate rank. Not all restaurants have stars, but all restaurants are rated from one to five crossed forks and spoons. All of the three star restaurants in Paris have either four or five forks/spoons. When we get to the one star places in Paris, the range is from one fork and spoon all the way up to five and there are restaurants with five forks and spoons, but no stars at all.

[Jason Perlow]

There isn't a week that goes by where I don't think "I need to go eat at Sripraphai again." I live in Brooklyn where it's a bit more of a trek to get there than those who live in Manhattan, actually (I don't have a car). From midtown, it's a quick trip on the 7 train, much less time than it takes to go from the Upper East Side to Tribecca. It is a destination restaurant, but maybe not for people who need white table cloths.

←

BTW, I think we all can make a distinction between a "destination restaurant" and a fine dining establishment that merits 2 or more stars in the NYT. I think any restaurant that serves the definitive example of its cuisine or genre and by nature of its existence demands that you travel to it or go out of your way to get there, is a "destination restaurant".