Bouley

[Fat Guy]

Overstated? Me?

Stop the presses!

[Pan]

Robyn, we could argue about the "warhorses," but wouldn't you have to agree that Per Se is such a high-profile new restaurant that the Times simply has to review it?

It probably has to - eventually. Why not give it some time and see how it develops? What's the urgency?

I definitely see your point, but I would think it has to be reviewed in the first year of Bruni's tenure at the Times, at least. Could he wait a few more months? Definitely.

[xyz123]

  I recently had my first dinner at Bouley a few months ago

Why is it that some of you love to hate Bouley.

Since most of you have said that you have eaten at Bouley only one time how is

it that all of the sudden you are experts on what Bouley is all about. You certainly have the right to complain about the restaurant but you are not qualified to state if it’s a 4 star restaurant or not. And some even make ridicules claims why its not a 4 star restaurant because he did not fax a menu/wine list or changed a fruit or vegetable on one dish. Hell I had a whole different fish served to me then the one written on the menu at Per Se and it did not bother me. There was even missteps in service yet overall I said that service was excellent and one of the best in the city. As a matter of fact my meal at Per Se was far far below the worst meal I have eaten at Bouley yet I have made no remarks that Per Se is not a 4 star restaurant. I will return to Per Se at least 2 more times before I claim if its a 4 star restaurant or not.

No restaurant or any establishment could perform 100% all the time.

Ask yourself do you or your company bat 1000 everyday at your profession.

I have eaten at the new Bouley around 25 times give or take a few.

Out of those 25 Times I have had maybe 3-4 meals that were not equal

to the rest of the meals.

I am comparing Bouley at its best to Bouley at its worst.

But even those 3-4 meals that were not great, they were just as good as the meals I have had at Jean Georges, Daniel, Le Bernarden, but they were not as good as the meals at ADNY. So even though I would say I am a big fan of David Bouley just as i am a fan of Alan Ducasse, Susur Lee, Joel Robuchon, Pierre Gagnaire, Michel Bras and others (and the reason is because they have all served me some mind blowing food) I admit that there is inconsistent problem with the food at Bouley . But there has been inconsistency at every restaurant I have eaten in North America with the exception of ADNY and Susur in Toronto.

Which leads me to the problem with the Frank Bruni’s review.

There is no mention of the inconsistency of Bouley, rather he chose to complain

about how a dish should be constructed or that some of the dishes were improperly balanced. Making ludicrous statements such as a citrus dressing should not be served with scallop carpaccio, because its old and tired.

Did he not find the concept of serving tomato sauce or brown butter sauce with pasta at his overly glorified review of Babbo tired and out dated.

Which leads me to believe that maybe Bouley has fixed the inconsistency problem therefore Bruni needed to find some problem with the restaurant to take a star away, which I believe was his intent all the while. Why I don’t know. The simple reason would be that all new reviewers like to act tough at the beginning of their career. Ruth Reichl did it, William Grimes did it and now we have Frank Bruni doing it.

To AGNO

Why would it be inappropriate to bring up Bouley’s past achievements?

this thread is about Bouley. Does it bother you what Bouley has achieved ??????

BTW my last meal at Bouley about 6 weeks a go was perfect, as was the last person who posted on these boards about eating at Bouley EJRothman

[GordonCooks]

BTW my last meal at Bouley about 6 weeks a go was perfect, as was the last person who posted on these boards about eating at Bouley EJRothman

In fairness, my meal there of about 8 weeks ago was far from perfect and I do consider myself a Bouley fan

[robyn]

Hell I had a whole different fish served to me then the one written on the menu at Per Se and it did not bother me.

OT - but I'm curious. What fish was on the menu - and what were you served? (I once got a good settlement in a case where my client got sick as a result of eating fish that was misrepresented on the menu - it was supposed to be snapper and it was grouper.) Robyn

[Pan]

  I recently had my first dinner at Bouley a few months ago

Why is it that some of you love to hate Bouley.

Hate is probably too strong a word, but if we use it, isn't a lot of hatred born from unrequited love, anticipation of delight dashed by the sting of bitter disappointment? I never hold myself up as an expert on Bouley and never would, but my two meals so far at 11 Madison Park and one meal so far at L'Impero were far superior to my meal at Bouley. Heck, I've probably had meals at a sizeable handful of restaurants that were superior to my meal at Bouley (a Restaurant Week lunch at the River Cafe about 3 years ago comes to mind), and loads that were more satisfying (because how high one's expectations are plays a role in one's degree of satisfaction - which is a different issue I don't want anyone to confuse with my my use of "superior" above). At the time, I rated it a 3-star meal, but in retrospect, it wasn't - it was a meal that had no-star and 3-star elements to it, but might not have had 4-star elements. 4-star to me should put a restaurant in a 2-to-3 Michelin star quality, and frankly, that's something I have yet to experience anywhere in New York.

Now, it's definitely likely that if I returned to Bouley, I'd have a more satisfying meal. You know what? Someone else would have to take me and pay for it. 'Cause there are a lot of other restaurants I can visit for the first time or the fifth or twentieth, and I have no obligation to return to the site of a disappointment. I'll say this, though: If I ever do have occasion to return to Bouley, I'll definitely let Dave know, and I'll definitely post a report on my meal.

I do agree with you that the complaint about citrus on seafood as "tired" should raise eyebrows. I don't care whether an idea is old or new if it's good and well-executed.

[R Washburn]

xyz123,

Of the 6 meals I have had at the latest incarnation of Bouley, the only ones I would place in the four star category were the two when the restaurant was running at half speed, just after it reopened. The service was much better and there were no problems with the kitchen. If my later experiences were comparable to those first two, then Bouley might well be my favorite restaurant. It is my opinion that Bouley just can't operate at the 4-star level while serving that many diners a night.

If the ratings were broken down into separate categories for food, decor and service, then I might give Bouley 4-stars for food, but I can't see it rating 4-stars overall with out some changes.

[oakapple]

Why is it that some of you love to hate Bouley.

Since most of you have said that you have eaten at Bouley only one time how is

it that all of the sudden you are experts on what Bouley is all about.

xyz123, you seem to have the luxury of trying these places multiple times to get a feel for what they're capable of. Most people, if they have a sub-par meal, are not coming back anytime soon!

[Pan]

Thanks, Oakapple. You said in a few words much of what I meant.

[rich]

What seems to be lost in this thread is the journalistic content of the review. It doesn't matter much if Bouley has no stars or four stars - after all that's Bruni's opinion and he's more than entitled to it.

However, from a journalistic point of view he failed on two levels:

1. Most importantly, he brought up of the Red Cross incident without any explanation or substantiation, thereby misleading readers (purposely or not, only Bruni knows that answer). That's no just bad journalism - it's yellow journalism. While I realize the NY Times' journalistic standards have dropped significantly over the last several years, allowing that to go to press is an all-time low. The editors should be embarrassed and offer a public apology to Bouley.

2. His review was mostly negative and reading it was similar to reading a one or two star review. Instead of devoting paragraphs to Bouley's passion or lack thereof or the aforementioned Red Cross incident, he should have dwelled more on the food and the positive aspects of a three-star restaurant. That is a perfect of example of not knowing/understanding/or caring about the readership - take your pick.

Edited June 25, 2004 by rich (log)

[plattetude]

  I recently had my first dinner at Bouley a few months ago

Why is it that some of you love to hate Bouley.

Since most of you have said that you have eaten at Bouley only one time how is

it that all of the sudden you are experts on what Bouley is all about.

I for one (since you saw fit to lead off with a quote from me) never said I hated Bouley the man or Bouley the restaurant. I simply did not have anywhere NEAR a four-star experience, and I don't need to go there 25 times (assuming I could afford it) to know that *that particular* experience was lacking.

The simple point I was trying to make was that Bruni's review struck a very responsive chord for me. At the time of my meal there, I essentially *had* written it off as an off-night for the restaurant (even though the gaffes were borne more of inexperienced or just plain lousy staffing front-of-house -- not really a one-off kind of problem). Having my experience reflected pretty vividly in Bruni's review, and in the comments about Bouley I've been reading for the past few months here, really points out to me that there are concrete quality issues -- aside from the food -- to be dealt with. Seems to me there's been plenty of commentary to that effect long before Bruni's review came out.

Your own rebuttal, though, ignores the issues of poor service that I and many others have brought up. You seem to be focusing on how superb the food is, and how Bruni (and by implication, everyone who says anything negative about the place) missed the boat entirely. I find it hard to believe that there can be such a consensus among so many that there have been front-of-house issues (even Chop admitted as much) but you've only had a less than stellar experience 3-4 out of 25 times. I don't doubt your own opinion (much as you might seem to doubt those of others), but can it be that your standards may not include the same criteria as everyone else? Or that perhaps you overlook some problems because for you, it's all about the food? As I said in my original post, those problems became so distracting to me that the brilliance of the food was sadly overshadowed.

Finally, my comments were only meant to be another viewpoint, not almighty gospel. I never purported to be an expert on Bouley or anything else, so please don't put words in anyone's mouth.

Christopher

[Fat Guy]

I'm just about out of things to say on this subject, so I'll most likely be moving on to the next thing, but let me sum up by saying that the most disappointing aspect of the review to me had to be the statement that “Bouley as a whole does not create or sustain the kind of rapture that the very best restaurants do.” Because if you read the recent glowing reports about Bouley from lxt and others, what you will see very clearly is that Bouley can and does create rapture at least in the experience of many educated and experienced diners. Which doesn't mean it always does so or that it does so in a sustained manner over time. But what saddens me is that Frank Bruni clearly didn't get any sense of rapture at all on any of his visits. Thus his review recognizes Bouley's greatness only in a pro forma sense of acknowledging that there is talent in the kitchen, that some dishes are very good, and that David Bouley is an important chef. There is no actual recognition of the heights so many have experienced at Bouley, and therefore the form of the demotion feels empty, awkward, and unfair.

[GordonCooks]

We (the foodies that we are) can talk about food ad nauseum and for the most part, we seem to agree on the current status of Bouley. Anyone familiar with Bouley will have their own opinion of his Red Cross woes as with anyone taking the time to read a review of a 3 or 4 star restaurants in the Times. The quote

"There is serious talent in the kitchen, but Bouley as a whole does not create or sustain the kind of rapture that the very best restaurants do." Maybe be a broad stroke but it sums up the critic’s cumulative experiences. Bouley acknowledges the problems in some way in the changes he’s been making.

I've re-read the review and still have hold to the same opinion. Bruni may be an inexperienced food critic, but his words paint a fairly accurate picture - a means to an end (it's a tough job but someone's got to do it.) The haters will wallow in it and the lovers will deny it, maybe you have and maybe you haven’t….but Bruni had a 3 star meal. Call it empty and awkward if you wish but "unfair"?

[agno]

Where to begin without pissing more people off.

Chop: I don't mean to show disresepect, I only said that because you stated in a different thread that the restarant is having a difficult time hiring a sous chef, and that could be a reason why.

And where I work has nothing to do with it.

XYZ: Does t bother me what he has achieved? Absolutley not, what bothers me is what he has made money off of.

Robyn: I'd rather not post on this board what had happened with the chef and his employees.

[Pan]

Robyn: I'd rather not post on this board what had happened with the chef and his employees.

That's problematic because it would seem to put your remarks into the realm of rumor.

[chopjwu12]

Where to begin without pissing more people off. 

Chop: I don't mean to show disresepect,  I only said that  because you stated in a different thread that the restarant is having a difficult time hiring a sous chef, and that could be a reason why.

And where I work has nothing to do with it.

XYZ: Does t bother me what he has achieved?  Absolutley not, what bothers me is what he has made money off of.

Robyn: I'd rather not post on this board what had happened with the chef and his employees.

personaly i think if your going to post especially comments like those you made then you should come out in the open. ANyone can say anything behind a mask its harder when the eyes are upon you. Besides if you have experienced something as a employee at bouley then its different. But if its just what you have heard be very carefull. So come out and play with the rest of us will ya?

Modified for being being mean sorry about that.

Edited June 26, 2004 by chopjwu12 (log)

[sashimi]

That's problematic because it would seem to put your remarks into the realm of rumor.

Indeed. Or, complete and total bold-faced lie.

[robyn]

Robyn: I'd rather not post on this board what had happened with the chef and his employees.

No problem - I understand. Robyn

[robyn]

Robyn: I'd rather not post on this board what had happened with the chef and his employees.

That's problematic because it would seem to put your remarks into the realm of rumor.

Not necessarily. As a retired lawyer - I am very conscious of defamation laws. They're not really friendly to a private individual when he/she writes something bad about a business. On the other hand - the press has much greater latitude - which is why it pisses me off when members of the press seem to abuse their positions. In case you can't guess - I represented plaintiffs in defamation cases .

By the way - that's one reason why I think at least 3 times before writing negative things in public. And if you think the defamation laws in the US don't encourage private individuals to criticize things - you should look at the laws in the UK (where the burden of proof is basically on the speaker to prove that everything he/she said is true). Robyn

P.S. I've been threatened before with lawsuits for things I've written on line that I knew to be absolutely true. I'm sure I'm not the only person in that position. Who needs that kind of grief? That's why there's usually a tendency to see only good things on line - not bad things (unless the posters are so marginal they don't care what they say - or they have a financial interest in their statements - like short sellers).

Edited June 26, 2004 by robyn (log)

[Bux]

Why is it that some of you love to hate Bouley.

...

No restaurant or any establishment could perform 100% all the time.

...

... ludicrous statements such as a citrus dressing should not be served with scallop carpaccio, because its old and tired.

Did he not find the concept of serving tomato sauce or brown butter sauce with pasta at his overly glorified review of Babbo tired and out dated.

Quite a few years ago there was a major article in the NY Times Magazine, devoted to David Bouley. It gave a few reasons why Bouley has offended more than a few people, and this was well before 9/11. That article would be a excellent reread right now, but I don't know how far back it was published.

Indeed. The claim that a four star restaurant will deliver a four star experience to every diner every day of the year is more than a bit optimistic, for at least two reasons. The first is simply that no one is perfect. The other is that the diner is an individual and as such, each diner has his own idea of what the perfect four star experience is and some diners choose the wrong restaurant for them

I also feel so unhip not realizing that citrus with scallops is so passé. On the other hand, scallop carpaccio is not the classic that pasta with tomato sauce is and therefore subject to a different kind of criticism.

I do sense that even for people in the industry who harbor some kind of resentment about working for nothing to feed the 9/11 workers while Bouley profited, the mention in the review seemed unfair and unreasonable. It's probably worth noting that many construction companies also got good contracts as a result of 9/11 while many people worked in the most unhealthy conditions as volunteers. I can think of reasons why Bruni chose to mention 9/11 in his review, but maybe he was wrong to do so. It's all part of the same "nobody's perfect" syndrome. On balance, we'll get a better idea of his worth as a critic in due time. I don't know if there have been any NYC restaurant critics I've held in high esteem for some time. That may say more about me than them, but I suspect that when I find one I can count on, it's likely not to be someone who's popular.

[ErinB]

From about 2 pages back:

Bouley, even more so than the formerly four-star Chanterelle, has always been a different kind of four-star restaurant: less formal, more relaxed, less expensive, more approachable, less opulent.

Completely agreed. Actually, one of the reasons I chose to go to Bouley. I love the décor of the dining room, I find the colors warm and cozy. I thought it would be less expensive and less intimidating to my non-foodie relatives.

I had dinner at Bouley on Thursday night. I should preface this with the fact that chopjwu12 knew we were coming, so we did get some special treatment. (Thanks!)

Overall the dining experience was fabulous. I was in a party of 5, we didn’t get the tasting menu.

The highlights for me were an appetizer of "Homemade Silk Tofu with Ponzu Jelly, Malibu Sea Urchin, Wild Trout Caviar and Yuzu Granité" (i think this is what i had or something similiar) and an outstanding amuse-bouche of clam, celery sorbet, and something else that was amazing.

These dishes were very similar, but my favorites of the meal. The combinations of flavors and the different textures and temperatures just went perfectly together.

Of the entrees that were ordered, the best was a squab dish. I was slightly disappointed with a lamb dish I ordered, not because of the preparation, I felt the quality of the lamb could have been a bit better, a bit more tender, a bit more flavorful. I didn't try all of the other entrees or appetizers.

We didn’t order the tasting menu but we had about 4 amuse-bouches, one special appetizer (courtesy of chopjwu12). My grandmother didn’t order an appetizer, but they brought her out one, on the house, because everyone else ordered one. In terms of complimentary dishes, the service was outstanding (and a little over the top.) They brought out a lovely moscato d'asti after dinner that was lovely.

I paid special attention to the service, because that was one of the main things the Bruni review criticized. It did seem like some of his complaints were valid. Some of the servers were bumping into each other (the space is a little cramped) and it also seemed like tensions were a little high. I don’t know if it was because of the recent review, but I was watching carefully and could tell. Personally, I prefer friendly service over formality, and I definitely got that both times I've been to Bouley.

3 of us at the table had a wine pairing with our meals, and the meal came to be about $115 per person including tax and tip at the end of the night.

I'll be going to Per Se in a little over a month so it will be interesting to compare the two restaurants.

[chopjwu12]

so who else is coming in to test the waters? Fatguy you haven't come by in a while and you know ive never actually met you!!!!!!!!! Is anyone i know going to test our skill level?

[MonsieurSatran]

I'm coming for my birthday on the 31st... Very much looking forward to it after our fantastic meal at Danube.

[Dryden]

My folks will be there for their 30th wedding anniversary on the 10th of August. It will be their first time at Bouley since the original closed... I know they are looking forward to it very much.

[MonsieurSatran]

I was just wondering if anyone here had ever tried the chef's seasonal tasting menu at Bouley- 5 savory courses, infinite amuse bouche and dessert, and starting at $135. It sounds incredible, but can I hear anyones' first hand account?

ps: edited for clarity

Edited July 24, 2004 by MonsieurSatran (log)