Django, Philadelphia

[mrbigjas]

Yeah I was there in November; the place is just amazingly good. I hadn't been since around the time it opened, and since then had heard people bitching about how it had gotten more expensive, how it wasn't as good as it was at first, blah blah blah.

I suspect that all that complaining was based on resentment about not being able to get in whenever they wanted, because in three years I couldn't detect a drop in quality at all. And still the most expensive thing on the menu was like $25.

I think that Django symbolizes this city's unique BYOB culture in a way that makes me proud to live here.

[KatieLoeb]

I think it's time for me to swing by for a second time.

Django article

Herb:

There's an opening in October 2005. Better put it on your calendar.

If we all thought it was impossible to get a reservation before, we might as well fuhgeddaboudit now.

The food at Django is wonderful, and bolstered by Mr. LaBan's virtually pornographic prose describing it, anyone would feel foolish not falling to the ground and convulsing in joy after a meal there. I've been there about 3 or 4 times. I thought it was wonderful, incredibly charming and thanked my lucky stars that it was BYOB. The cheese plate blows the doors off anyone else, in terms of selection, value (it's a steal at $11) and the loving descriptions of the providence of each and every cheese ("this came from a cow named Elsie in Colorado who only eats sweet grass on the southern most facing slope of her pasture...") from the Hostess with the Mostest, Aimee. Does it deserve 4 stars? Only if Mr. LaBan were being consistent across the board. Tell me if it's just me, but I've always sensed a real reluctance on Craig LaBan's part to allow restaurants that weren't "FOUR STAR FINE DINING ESTABLISHMENTS" and all that is implied with that categorization like white linens, suited waitstaff, fine crystal and other tabletop accessories, into that exclusive club. If you're going to compare restaurants that are VASTLY different and NOT give the fourth star to anyone that doesn't meet the above stated criteria, simply because, well, they just aren't LaCroix or Le Bec Fin, then you have to remain consistent. If you are allowing everyone onto the same playing field, then I think that Tacconelli's deserves 4 stars as well. As does the Mayfair Diner. It ain't white tablecloth dining, but it's the best of it's kind in the city, and can compete with similar establishments in other cities as well. I just don't see the same standards being applied in this review. One obvious criteria that comes to mind in this particular instance, is the noise level. Mr. LaBan apparently carries a decibel meter with him and proudly lists those findings as well as taking points off for excessive noise in many of his previous reviews. Unless these reviews were conducted during a time that a convention of mutes or monks having taken vows of silence were in town, he was NOT in the same restaurant I visited. Django has to be one of the loudest restaurants in the city. The quaint charm of that "cozy" room is precisely what makes that the case. Is the decibel level even mentioned?? Don't get me wrong, I really like the place, but again, I see gross inconsistency with the standards being applied to this one small restaurant versus the dozens of other places that have reaped the rewards of a favorable LaBan review or the ones that have suffered irreparable damage to their businesses with a poor review. I wonder if Mr. LaBan is running low on time and rather than doing a roundup of the many BYO's available here, decided to simply sing the praises of the one that everyone seems to like the best.

[Andrew Fenton]

I ate at Django a week ago; actually, it was pretty easy to get reservations this time around, but that won't be the case again for a while. Everything was wonderful, as it always has been for us there. I walked away sublimely happy, which is something that doesn't happen to me all that often when I go out to eat. (Pizza Club excepted, natch.)

Katie, I agree with you that LaBan's metric is problematic. I have no problem with Django getting four stars. It's head and shoulders above any other BYOB in the city, and in my opinion outclasses many of the FOUR STAR FINE DINING ESTABLISHMENTS at which I've eaten: in creativity and execution of food, in the staff's knowledge of the food, and in general ambience. (In the seven or eight times I've eaten there, I've never noticed the noise being particularly bad, but I'm not especially sensitive to that.)

That said, the F.S.F.D.E's do provide an experience that Django- or any other such restaurant- can't match. I can understand why LaBan might judge that to be the standard to which all other places need to live up; it's an understandable metric, anyway. But I would like to see him make his rating system explicit: that'd be preferable to the sort of inference (like that of Kremlinologists during the cold war) involved in reading his reviews.

[mrbigjas]

"Virtually pornographic." nice.

[KatieLoeb]

Andrew:

Whether I'm hypersensitive to noise or you don't notice isn't really the issue. A decibel meter is an appropriate measure of a concert venue or the sound inside a railroad tunnel. If you're going to apply it to restaurants at all, appropriately or not, then you have to apply it to ALL of them. This whole review just smacks of sucking up and gratuitous overpraise, and even the tone of it is completely different than any other review I've ever seen from Mr. LaBan. If I didn't know better, I'd think someone else wrote it! (Pod person restaurant critic phoning it in perhaps?) But they couldn't use his name, could they?

Mr. LaBan introduced the decibel meter to the restaurant review. If he's ditching it, then he owes a repeat visit and a new review to every establishment that suffered the slings and arrows of his professional opinion as a result.

[mrbigjas]

He did use the decibel meter--it's in the side note that it was about 82 decibels, with his ideal being 70 or less. But you're right, he didn't mention it in the review. And overall the tone was different than many of his reviews.

Like movie reviewers, I've figured out where I stand with regard to Laban's restaurant reviews, in general--what to take seriously and what just makes me roll my eyes.

Kinda like knowing the difference between when Brian Dawkins tackles someone, and when Bobby Taylor does his standard wussy arm-tackling.

(Sorry, obligatory Eagles reference there, since they just lost in the championship AGAIN.)

[KatieLoeb]

He did use the decibel meter--it's in the side note that it was about 82 decibels, with his ideal being 70 or less.  But you're right, he didn't mention it in the review.  And overall the tone was different than many of his reviews.

Like movie reviewers, I've figured out where I stand with regard to Laban's restaurant reviews, in general--what to take seriously and what just makes me roll my eyes. 

Kinda like knowing the difference between when Brian Dawkins tackles someone, and when Bobby Taylor does his standard wussy arm-tackling.

(Sorry, obligatory Eagles reference there, since they just lost in the championship AGAIN.)

Jas.

Thanks! I was starting to think it was just me. Why give one BYO restaurant FOUR freakin' stars, when you've barely given any of the others in town the time of day? Although he's never stated it out loud (and that's most of the problem), it certainly seems that there used to be a "glass ceiling" of three stars for Mr. LaBan above which no humble non-"fine dining" establishment could hope to rise. I think an explanation of the yardstick being used (and being used consistently), would be in order. The explanation of the stars/bells (hey - what happened to the BELLS???) system as it presently stands is entirely inadequate. And entirely unfair.

[stephenc]

Just when the crowds were dying down....

[Andrew Fenton]

Thanks! I was starting to think it was just me. Why give one BYO restaurant FOUR freakin' stars, when you've barely given any of the others in town the time of day? Although he's never stated it out loud (and that's most of the problem), it certainly seems that there used to be a "glass ceiling" of three stars for Mr. LaBan above which no humble non-"fine dining" establishment could hope to rise. I think an explanation of the yardstick being used (and being used consistently), would be in order.

I agree with this. I've no problem with LB building a ceiling into his reviewing system; that's one way to define his job, and you can take it or leave it. But that ceiling shouldn't be glass; rather it should be... um, whatever non-transparent ceilings are made out of: plaster, I guess. And it should have signs clearly marking how high it is, and maybe some Mötley Crüe posters attached.

[mrbigjas]

It should be a popcorn ceiling, with sparkles. With a vaguely morrocan looking arch attached to it, with a statue of the BVM on a pedestal over to one side of the arch.

[herbacidal]

Thanks!  I was starting to think it was just me.  Why give one BYO restaurant FOUR freakin' stars, when you've barely given any of the others in town the time of day?  Although he's never stated it out loud (and that's most of the problem), it certainly seems that there used to be a "glass ceiling" of three stars for Mr. LaBan above which no humble non-"fine dining" establishment could hope to rise.  I think an explanation of the yardstick being used (and being used consistently), would be in order.

I agree with this. I've no problem with LB building a ceiling into his reviewing system; that's one way to define his job, and you can take it or leave it. But that ceiling shouldn't be glass; rather it should be... um, whatever non-transparent ceilings are made out of: plaster, I guess. And it should have signs clearly marking how high it is, and maybe some Mötley Crüe posters attached.

Methinks this is way too metaphorical for a simple campesino like me to comprehend.

[herbacidal]

Thanks! I was starting to think it was just me. Why give one BYO restaurant FOUR freakin' stars, when you've barely given any of the others in town the time of day?

Although he's never stated it out loud (and that's most of the problem), it certainly seems that there used to be a "glass ceiling" of three stars for Mr. LaBan above which no humble non-"fine dining" establishment could hope to rise. I think an explanation of the yardstick being used (and being used consistently), would be in order. The explanation of the stars/bells (hey - what happened to the BELLS???) system as it presently stands is entirely inadequate. And entirely unfair.

Okay, he's never given any other BYOB anything above 3 stars.

Django is his first.

Isn't it somewhat well explained what he liked and what he was looking for that made him determine Django was of the highest caliber?

He used more space for this review than I've ever seen, although it could be said that in parts, he doesn't give the same depths that he has in past reviews.

Please elaborate further on what you mean by the current system being inadequate and unfair.

[KatieLoeb]

Please elaborate further on what you mean by the current system being inadequate and unfair.

Herb:

1) Lack of a consistent rating system. First Bells, now stars. Are they the same? Where is this explained. A reader would have to be clairvoyant to understand whether/where this restaurant fits into the ever shifting hierarchy, with ever shifting scoring criteria.

2) There's been a quite noticeable dearth of BYOB restaurants reviewed by LaBan at all. Why isn't he comparing this one to the others, or is it simply that there are no other previously BYOB's to compare this to? If so, then isn't there a burden to explain that this restaurant is or isn't being compared to "full service" establishments? That's an important distinction in terms of service required by the customer,

3) The noise level being a main criteria of the review. LaBan introduced the decibel meter to his reviewing system. It's the equivalent of the defense attorney "opening the door" on previously unintroduced or excluded evidence. Jas. says there's a mention of the noise level - it doesn't appear on the web version of the article. It's a criteria that's certainly been used in the past to lower a restaurant's overall score with Mr. LaBan, yet there's no mention of this in the body of the article even though Django is way above his acceptable noise limit. Any other restaurant that was reviewed previously and hammered about their noise level deserves at minimum, an apology and rightfully, a return visit where the noise isn't calculted into the final score. You can't just change the "rules" in the middle of the game.

Please don't misunderstand me. I LIKE Django and wish them the best of success. It's LaBan's inconsistency that I find disturbing. I think Robert Parker's wine scores are nonsense, but at least he's consistently full of shit in the same way...

[Rich Pawlak]

Please elaborate further on what you mean by the current system being inadequate and unfair.

Herb:

1) Lack of a consistent rating system. First Bells, now stars. Are they the same? Where is this explained. A reader would have to be clairvoyant to understand whether/where this restaurant fits into the ever shifting hierarchy, with ever shifting scoring criteria.

2) There's been a quite noticeable dearth of BYOB restaurants reviewed by LaBan at all. Why isn't he comparing this one to the others, or is it simply that there are no other previously BYOB's to compare this to? If so, then isn't there a burden to explain that this restaurant is or isn't being compared to "full service" establishments? That's an important distinction in terms of service required by the customer,

3) The noise level being a main criteria of the review. LaBan introduced the decibel meter to his reviewing system. It's the equivalent of the defense attorney "opening the door" on previously unintroduced or excluded evidence. Jas. says there's a mention of the noise level - it doesn't appear on the web version of the article. It's a criteria that's certainly been used in the past to lower a restaurant's overall score with Mr. LaBan, yet there's no mention of this in the body of the article even though Django is way above his acceptable noise limit. Any other restaurant that was reviewed previously and hammered about their noise level deserves at minimum, an apology and rightfully, a return visit where the noise isn't calculted into the final score. You can't just change the "rules" in the middle of the game.

Please don't misunderstand me. I LIKE Django and wish them the best of success. It's LaBan's inconsistency that I find disturbing. I think Robert Parker's wine scores are nonsense, but at least he's consistently full of shit in the same way...

The paper I read showed bells.

And Laban often doesn't refer to the noise level within the body of the review, but always in the sidebar column that accompanies the review.

[platedoctor]

after seeing that article i felt kind of ill because i have been there and when my friend and i left we were sad. maybe because we have high hopes for all the good restaurants we go to. most of the times we are let down by the lack of passion in the food or the lack of just seasoning. when we went we felt cramped and it was hard to have a conversation w/ out the next table knowing your business. for starters when we entered we were given an amuse. it was a bad rendition of a crepe with a very bitter balsamic reduction, thats not the way i like to start my meal. next we had a squab and foie gras terrine which was tasteless, then followed by a pork tenderloin which sounded good on the menu but a study in brown was the final view point. the proteins were all cooked perfect but the accompanients were lacking flavor and finese. my friend had the pot au feu which was again was cooked nice but the lack of presentation and vegetables were disturbing. to me what was the difference between that dish and any good chicken soup. the difference was that the breast was roasted seperately and sliced on the bias. if laban calles this a a masterpiece then i want what he is smoking. django was ok by my standards. when my friend left our comment was that whether we went there or got 2 slices of pizza we would of accomplished the same experience full!!!!

[Holly Moore]

While I maintain that the only credible rating system is Grease Stains, I am glad Craig LaBan rings up four Liberty Bells for Django. Restaurants can provide an incredible overall expereince without all the fancy trimmings or expansive wine list of a Le Bec-Fin or a Fountain Room.

Excellence can also be found sitting down at a table at Django or standing in line at Tony Luke's. Indeed, I'll buy into the Liberty Bell system when LaBan bongs four times for Tony Luke's.

[tim olivett]

I'm certainly having mixed feelings about this review.

What I find encouraging is related to something I said in some of my posts in the NYC section (sorry guys, I can't help it but I started posting on NYC when things slowed down over here on the Philly boards) about William Grimes retiring from the NY Times and that in an ideal situation a reviewer helps restauranteurs learn what they need look at about their establishment to improve it or how to focus on its strengths.

In that spirit, I appreciate Mr. LaBan's review in the sense that encourages chefs around the city to stay with the seasons, source local products and personalize their cuisine instead of cooking for the masses. In France, the great 3 star restaurants of the nouvelle cuisine era had what were referred to as "chef-patrons" in the sense that they represented their community & region, it's products, traditions and uniqueness. Also, when these chefs received 3 stars they took the news with caution since they now knew that an additional responsibility was placed on them. Whether it was local, national or personal pride, they knew that people would come expecting to have their expectations exceeded or find things, little surprises and what not, that they never anticipated, something unique, "worth a detour" - (the literal meaning of 3 stars-remember it was originally published as a guide for emcouraging people to drive using Michelin automotive products).

While I consider Django to certainly be one of the best byo's in the city and a special little restaurant, I wonder if this review will be all positive for them.

Having had some of the dishes in the review, I can't imagine how he had the same dish I had. Certainly every restaurant has good and bad nights, but there wasn't any fault in the execution of the dishes I had, it was more the concept of the dish. At times I felt as maybe the kitchen was feeling the strain of it's own ambition (the constantly changing menu, it's size and relative popularity).

I definitely wouldn't knock Django out of the niche that it was in, here in Philly but 4 bells, stars or whatever to me, implies a seamlessness to an experience that I don't even think they were aiming for. Basically, I think if people go expecting a 4 bell experience (which LaBan explains to mean setting a new standard in dining) I'm worried that it may backfire. People who may otherwise go to Le Bec Fin or the Fountain will find themselves in a completely different environment than what they're accustomed to. In one of their wonderful books (Becoming a Chef, Culinary Artistry, Dining Out) Andrew Dornenberg and Karen Page describe three levels of good food, the first is food that is good, satisfying, the second delicious, exceeding expectation and third an experience that transcends all that and makes you reflect on nature, life and feel that it is wonderful to be alive and experience such things. I can see how many people find Django delicious, I found the execution competent and consistent, which as we all know is a great achievement when dining out but again, conceptually and on that final follow through, I always found it short of that third, transcendent level.

Again, I hope the review is good for Philly restaurants and dining out in Philly. I hope that chefs can attract customers who are willing to go along for the ride and trust themselves in the chef's hands. I hope Django can rise to the challenge of such a rating. But, obviously, I feel that it shows an inherent flaw in the whole idea of rating restaurants with a single, final number of stars or bells. Something can definitely be the 4 bells of pizza or tacos but not ambience, service etc.

I hope for a time when restaurants like Django are in every neighborhood in the city and people understand how the food we eat is something so fundamental to the very idea of society, culture, nature and civilization itself, but I wish there was another way of appreciating that besides summing up someone's personal vision with a bell or two.

I promise not use the word hope again but here's hoping this represents a shift in the public's perspective that a restaurant has to take the middle road, be all things to all people, or be intensely focused on decor or wine or service or a particular cuisine. I look forward to eating at Django again and I love supporting restaurants whose heart is in the right place even if they fall short but I haven't had an experience there that warrants the kind of raves I saw in the article.

But, in the long run, I'm rooting for them and all of us because in the end, ask not for whom the bell tolls (ha, ha, ha - I've been dying to use that line since I moved to Philly!)

Edited January 20, 2004 by tim olivett (log)

[KatieLoeb]

But, in the long run, I'm rooting for them and all of us because in the end, ask not for whom the bell tolls (ha, ha, ha - I've been dying to use that line since I moved to Philly!)

<Groan>

But seriously Tim, you've definitely explained much of what I was trying to express as well. Django is VERY VERY GOOD. It's NOT Lacroix, Le Bec Fin or my dearly departed Striped Bass. Not by a longshot. And I think your point about the review backfiring is an excellent one. I think as that tiny restaurant tries to live up to the hype, they'll overbook just a bit more, get slammed just a bit more than they're accustomed to and the wheels are going to start getting shaky. They might even come off the cart and lead to a spectacular crash and burn. I certainly don't wish that on them, but it's going to be tough for them. And four whatevers definitely implies that seamless experience that they not only weren't necessarily aiming for, but that they fall far short of. If you give Django four whatevers, then you have to do the same for the best of the down and dirty cuisine as well. Tony Luke's, Taconelli's, La Lupe, Standard Tap, etc. by the same standard, deserve the honors just as much. Possibly more.

[herbacidal]

First Bells, now stars. Are they the same? Where is this explained.

2) There's been a quite noticeable dearth of BYOB restaurants reviewed by LaBan at all. then isn't there a burden to explain that this restaurant is or isn't being compared to "full service" establishments?

3) The noise level being a main criteria of the review. LaBan introduced the decibel meter to his reviewing system. It's the equivalent of the defense attorney "opening the door" on previously unintroduced or excluded evidenceIt's a criteria that's certainly been used in the past to lower a restaurant's overall score with Mr. LaBan, yet there's no mention of this in the body of the article even though Django is way above his acceptable noise limit.

Please don't misunderstand me. I LIKE Django and wish them the best of success. It's LaBan's inconsistency that I find disturbing. I think Robert Parker's wine scores are nonsense, but at least he's consistently full of shit in the same way...

To me, bells and stars would obviously be the same.

I interpret the use of bells as nothing more than an attempt to make the rating system a smidgen more Philly-centric.

4 stars-4 bells

Or I could just obviously be wrong.

With regards to dearth of BYOBs reviewed, I tend to lump all the reviews

( Inquirer, City Paper, Philadelphia Weekly, Philly Mag, etc.) that I read together in my mind. Once in a while, a few months after, I'll actually remember who reviewed what.

I do remember that he reviewed Melograno a few weeks ago.

Upon a search, I find he has reviewed:

Sabor Latino (Upper Darby), Kabob Palace, Tartine, among others.

Some of those may not be BYOBs in people's traditional image, but I would say they are. I don't go to them for fine dining or inventive cuisine, very true.

The noise level issue was already addressed in sidebar, as noted.

While It may be better to have included it in the main body, perhaps it was

shifted because of space issues or whatever else. I'd be willing to give him the benefit of doubt.

I don't really know the difference between 82 and 70 decibels as far as the perceived ear.

I also haven't perceived Laban's indications that noise level was a dominant factor in many of his reviews, but I also read tons of stuff, and that may have just slipped though.

With regards to four stars to less haute food, yes I think he should consider evaluating things along those lines.

If he reviews Tony Luke's, Taconelli's, La Lupe, Standard Tap, etc,

I don't doubt he might.

He's already given 3 stars to Country Club Diner and John's Roast Pork.

But now you're going into his choice of restaurants to review rather than the scale on which places are judged. Which is another source of endless debate that I'm just not going into because I want to go to bed.

Now as far as the rating's affect on future Django business, that's another story.

I do hope they're ready for the changes.

But I don't take that into consideration when looking at the fairness and validity of a rating.

Perhaps if they do take care of business in the next year or two, they can even start planning an expansion/move for a year or 2 from now, if they want.

I too am rooting for Django, to continue to set the bar for BYOB food in the area. I think they are becoming a parallel to what makes NYC an awesome dining destination, the neighborhood restaurants. They are already very well along that path.

[gabe]

We've got reservations for early February at Django (made 'em well before the La Ban review)... any recommendations for must-eat items on the winter menu (aside from the cheese plate)? We've never eaten there before, but are looking forward to it very much.

[KatieLoeb]

We've got reservations for early February at Django (made 'em well before the La Ban review)... any recommendations for must-eat items on the winter menu (aside from the cheese plate)?  We've never eaten there before, but are looking forward to it very much.

Gabe:

I haven't seen the winter menu of late, but I'd definitely recommend bringing some port or dessert wine to compliment the cheese. Makes for the "full" wine-dinner pairing experience.

[Andrew Fenton]

We've got reservations for early February at Django (made 'em well before the La Ban review)... any recommendations for must-eat items on the winter menu (aside from the cheese plate)

The menu will have changed by then. The only recommendation I have is to definitely follow Katie's advice and bring a bottle of dessert wine if you're going to get the cheese plate. (If you really want to do the wine up right, call them and get them to fax you the menu, then take it over to Moore Brothers...)

When we were there last week I liked both the seafood soup (more like cioppino than bouillabaisse) and the braised lamb dish I had. Lamb shank, I think, but with the meat pulled off the bone and served in a sort of stew. It's a good way to serve shank, and one I'll copy: cuts down on the amount of fat, cartilage and so on that come with the meat.

Beth had a lobster/noodle appetizer; I can't remember what it was called, or even that much about it. The bite I had was pretty good, but she didn't feel like the combination held together all that well. The duck and polenta that she had as a main course was outstanding, though.

[KatieLoeb]

Just so you all know - I've had a very pleasant e-mail exchange with Mr. LaBan over the last several days, debating about his four star review of Django. I think we're at the point where we've decided to agree to disagree agreeably . Apparently Mr. LaBan was directed here by someone else (Michael Klein, where are you hiding?) and was quite favorably impressed with our humble forum and with eGullet as a whole. I asked Mr. LaBan if he'd like to participate in a Q & A with us, but he rightfully stated that he thought he shouldn't be "peering over people's shoulders" here and constraining anyone from the complete brutal honesty that an anonymous forum such as this allows. Also thought it would be innapropriate since the Inky has it's own website. All understandable, but it sure would have been fun to pick his brain a little bit.

But now that I know he knows about eGullet, I might have to constrain my mouth a bit!

[Andrew Fenton]

Constrain, shmomstrain (?) You keep on keepin' on, Katie!

Can you pass along any of CLB's comments? I'd be interested to hear his side.

[mrbigjas]

I don't know why a food critic would feel like he'd be keeping anyone from being honest about restaurants on a food site.

Besides, this is Philadelphia--everyone says whatever they want anyway.