Bistros in Paris: Merged topics

[cabrales]

God loves those who love Paris...

I couldn't agree more with magnolia's observation. This past weekend, it was raining to some extent in Paris, but that didn't bother me one bit. I looked around, and Paris was even more poetic than normal with the pitter-patter and grey bleakness associated with rain -- and the little puddles forming on some cobblestoned areas. After a short while, the grey didn't even seem bleak -- it seemed subtle and nuanced and expressive, and an appropriate backdrop to the barren limbs of the trees lining certain similarly pale-toned waterways and streets. When the raindrops touched my face, they felt vibrant and different. And that's even before we get to Paris' restaurants ....

[Simon Majumdar]

Calabres

This is the one post in the thread that ( almost ) makes me change my view of Paris.  Be impassioned in defence of a city your love, argue its case, don't hide behind poorly veiled digs at the critic.  Thanks for that.

like you, I thought the light in Paris was extra ordinary, unlike London where the grey and the grey used in the stone for much of the building soaks up the light.  I would have to say though that when it comes to a city being shown off to its greatest extent in this watery dappled sunlight of late winter, NYC is hard to beat.

BUX- They did have us marked down as swells from the UK.  I think it is because we were the only ones not depending on man made fabrics to cover our ample shame

Steve - I am pretty sure everyone is aware that you don't value my opinion and that the likewise is true.  If it is a debate you truly want to have, let's do it over the messenging service so we don't bore everyone.

I will repsond to two points though

1) You went to Regalade last May.  You had a good meal.  I don't doubt it.  Too many people whose opinion I really do rate recommended it for it to be worthless.  Magnolia in particular and she has give me the heads up on some great places in the past.  Unfortunately it did not live up to its billing on our visit.  There are two possible reasons for this

a) It is in decline.  Ten months is a long time in the restaurant trade even in a town which has been described as moving "stately as a galleon".  It is possible that it has become a victim of its own success.  Whatever your thoughts on Trouvaille.  It has provided excellent meals and got great reviews.  There are signs now that it is slipping.  It does happen.

b) You say it may have been an off night because of a holiday and that other restaurants were closed.  That is a possibility.  Would it not have been better forRegalade to close than offer a sub standard meal?

2) I will ace your main Paris wine dealer with the Editor in Chief of France's leading Cookery Book Publisher.  I asked her for her opinion of the place yesterday and she replied " go to Euro Disney, the food is better and at least the mice you see are only in costume"

[Steve Plotnicki]

Simon - The immediate issue isn't whether I value your opinion, it is whether what you write about a place is credible so the people who read the board know how to value your opinion. And it is in that light that I evaluate your review of a place like La Regalade. I try and look at it dispassionatelty from my own feelings about the place. Quite often somebody dislikes a place that I like. Cabrales for example doesn't like Pierre Gagniare, a place I like very much. But she puts forth a credible reason, she thinks the dishes feature too many principal ingredients. Now that is a reason I can accept even if I don't agree with it. Intelectually, that's quite a long way away from a place being "piss pauvre." And the next time I go to Gagniare I will take her opinion into consideration. And even if I had never eaten at Regalade myself, based on what I have read and people I have spoken to about the place, I would find your opinion of it to be highly suspect.

I think that it is difficult to be credible while being critical of something when the commonly held opinion is that it is good. And I think that when there are many valued opinions who are in agreement about the merits, it makes the burden of proving the flaws more difficult for a writer. It is simply a matter of pure inertia. But that's not to say that a soft voice fighting back the wind shouldn't be listened to. But one's antennae do go up when the type of negative review you wrote of a place like Regalade gets lumped under the heading of Paris being a bad place.

So while your invitation to take this discussion off the board is a kind one, I can't accept it because it won't allow me to point out something important to the others who are reading this thread. And that is, you are wrong when you say I do not value your opinion. Indeed I do. But the value to me is in being able to calibrate it to be almost the opposite of how you feel about a place that serves French food. I mean you think a quite ordinary place like Trouvaille is good, when you think a place like Regalade, a place where the chef has the ability to probably run a 2 or 3 star place is bad. It's all backwards. And I don't say that in an absolute sense, I say that as someone whose reality is that French food and French cooking are generally superior, a reality by the way that many people share. I mean all you have to do is read this thread for the evidence.

So don't be offended if I point out to those who are inclined to like a place like Regalade that they should weigh your words carefully. I mean the worst thing I can think of is some unsuspecting lurker reads what you and I write and then goes off and has a bad meal because they can't sort out who stands for what principal of fine dining. So I am quite happy to point out which side of the fence your feet are firmly on before a fork is ever lifted. And I'm perfectly happy having the quid pro quo be that they weigh my words in a similar fashion. I mean, isn't that what this board is for?

[Bux]

That Yves Camdeborde is capable of running a kitchen serving food worthy of mulitple stars is no guarantee that every kitchen under him will serve good food. I've seen great chefs run mediocre kitchens or let others do that in their name. I agree however, that one should question why one thought he was poorly fed by a great chef. Certainly the possibility exists that any restaurant could drastically fade in a matter of months.

I'm curious about la Trouvaille and how long it's been around. I had the impression it was rather new, yet Simon says "It has provided excellent meals and got great reviews.  There are signs now that it is slipping." I ate at La Regalade four years ago. Prior to that my daughter had it recommended to her while dining with a Breton who has excellent contacts and credentials in the restaurant world. It first came to my attention, years before when Pierre Franey mentioned it in the NY Times. He's been dead for quite some time. Assuming for the sake of argument that La Regalade went down hill in the last few months, how would you use that to justify an attack on food in Paris coming from a city where a restaurant gets good reviews and proceeds to slip rather quickly and that news is easily dismissed as "that happens." The whole tone of your original report is of the "I don't know Paris, but I know what I like" variety. I suspect you can do better if you really cared to discuss the matter

Alluding to stereotypes you may, or may not, see is not the sort of comment that invites serious discussion. Having attended several weddings and town dinners in provincial France, I know polyester well and I know who wears it these days.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Bux - That Camdeborde can run or not run a kitchen outside his own that doesn't live up to standards isn't the point. The point is that he has the ability to run a kitchen whose aspirations are far beyond what they try to accomplish at La Regalade. And that is the reason why the restaurant is so good. The technique they apply is a few notches beyond the food they serve. For years Alain Dutournier did the same thing at Au Trou Gascon. Maybe he still does but I haven't been there for a good 4 years.

What is abrasive about the original post in this thread is the tone. And while I'm not one who shys away from being strident when voicing their opinion, there is tone and there is tone. What I can't assess about the post is how much is real, and how much is calculated to push buttons. But I agree that any post of the "I don't know about it but know what I like variety" is a dead giveaway for some other issue that isn't really related to the merits.

[Andy Lynes]

For what it's worth - I really enjoyed my one and only visit to Paris a couple of years ago and would like to go back. I found the city a little "chocolate box" compared to London. It looks like it was all built at exactly the same time, it doesn't have the wild variations that London does. It's beautiful,but somehow a little dull because of that. I never saw the ugly bit (well, actually as I was working in La Defence, maybe I did, but it's removed in the same way thay Canary Wharf is from London).

We ate well, but not spectacularly better than London.  We were horribly patronised at Relais Du Parc, and had a fantastic meal at Chez Jean, the highlight of the trip without a doubt.

One very very important aspect of these boards is that you get a wide range of opinions about restaurants. Not only do you get the final judgement, but you get to quiz people on why they made that judgement, something that Harden's of The Good Food Guide can never do. It seems ridiculous to me to say that someone could not have had a bad meal because the generaly accepted view is that the restaurant is a good one.

What we have now is a fairly detailed first hand account of a bad meal in a "good" restaurant. I now know that along with all the good experiences people have had in this place, Simon and Robin have had a not so good one. If and when I have the opportunity to decide where I would like to eat in Paris, I will bear this information in mind. There is a chance, if I go, I will enjoy it as much as Magnolia has. Equally, I may be in and out in 60 minutes, nearly a hundred pounds the poorer and very pissed off.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/20/dining/20PARI.html  An article on Paris restaurants from the NY Times.

[Bux]

No disrespect to Simon and Robin who, I've acknowledged may have had a bad meal, but I never know that someone has had a bad meal from their description of dinner. I only know they didn't enjoy it. I've read reviews in the NY Times of "bad" meals or dishes, that have only convinced me that the writer didn't understand the food or had an agenda of his own in writing. At best and in the most honest of appraisals, there is a great element of subjectivity in all food criticism. The last thing I would ever recommend is averaging disparate reviews when in fact, you're more likely to agree with one of the two extremes than the middle.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Andy - I have to take exception to one thing you have said. You said that we now have a detailed first hand account of a bad meal in a "good" restaurant. But if that is all this thread was about, that would be fine and the thrust of the responses would be to say too bad. Better luck next time. And nobody here would ever suggest that even the best place in the world couldn't have an off night or be going downhill. But the conversation has been about something else. It has been about the motivation of the writer(s). And the reason a number of people have drawn a certain  inference is because the accusation against the place seems disproportionate to any possible ineptitude they might have shown. I mean my pork at La Trouvaille was overcooked to the point that made it inedible for me. Yet I would never describe that place as piss poor or horrible. On the night we were there, the pork was merely a good idea gone bad.

And I know that a meal at La Regalade, even if not a good one, is full of interesting twists on Southwest French cuisine. Regardless of the level of execution on the evening you dine there, what they are famous for doing, creating an affordable and modernized version of SW French cuisine is not a matter of opinion. And one doesn't even have to taste the food to know that. You can just read the menu. So to write a review of the place that doesn't begin from that vantage point, and then trash the place in a flurry of "it doesn't taste goods," doesn't pass the smell test. And one has to wonder because I know that if Simon was inclined to like a place, he is quite capable of writing a review from that vantage point.

Now is Chez Jean actually Chez l'Ami Jean on rue Malar, a little basque bistro with checked tablecloths? If so, an old favorite of my families though I haven't been in a few years.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Andy - I have to take exception to one thing you have said. You said that we now have a detailed first hand account of a bad meal in a "good" restaurant. But if that is all this thread was about, that would be fine and the thrust of the responses would be to say too bad. Better luck next time. And nobody here would ever suggest that even the best place in the world couldn't have an off night or be going downhill. But the conversation has been about something else. It has been about the motivation of the writer(s). And the reason a number of people have drawn a certain  inference is because the accusation against the place seems disproportionate to any possible ineptitude they might have shown. I mean my pork at La Trouvaille was overcooked to the point that made it inedible for me. Yet I would never describe that place as piss poor or horrible. On the night we were there, the pork was merely a good idea gone bad.

And I know that a meal at La Regalade, even if not a good one, is full of interesting twists on Southwest French cuisine. Regardless of the level of execution on the evening you dine there, what they are famous for doing, creating an affordable and modernized version of SW French cuisine is not a matter of opinion. And one doesn't even have to taste the food to know that. You can just read the menu. So to write a review of the place that doesn't begin from that vantage point, and then trash the place in a flurry of "it doesn't taste goods," doesn't pass the smell test. And one has to wonder because I know that if Simon was inclined to like a place, he is quite capable of writing a bad review from that vantage point.

Now is Chez Jean actually Chez l'Ami Jean on rue Malar, a little basque bistro with checked tablecloths? If so, an old favorite of my families though I haven't been in a few years.

[Margaret Pilgrim]

I swore that I wouldn't touch this thread with a 10-foot pole.  And I certainly am not trying to push any buttons.  

My husband and I eat an average of 40 dinners a year in Paris. We patronize small, neo-bistros run by young, adventurous chefs who cook with passion and construct amazing dishes from the best products of the market: La Villeret, Repaire du Cartouche, Clos du Gourmet, La Dinee, Les Amognes, Les Magnolias, twice last year at L'Astrance, most ranging 14 to 16 Gault Millau points. Except to a couple of places in the headlines, few Americans venture to the outer arrondisements that draw and support these new and ambitious chefs.  Regardless that we are Americans, the welcome and service in these houses is almost universally warm and professional.  The prices are within 50 to 100FF of Regalade.

We visited La Regalade for the first time around 5 years ago.  We were disappointed with our meals: other than good bread and classic terrine, we were served overcooked and over-salted food, perfunctory service, English the language of choice in the dining room.

We didn't return for several years, but allowing that something was wrong with either the kitchen, front room or us, went back for a second time to be served more of the same.  

This last spring, because the press and guide books kept loving this restaurant, I again booked.  Compared with all of the many dinners we enjoy on just about any night in Paris, this one was one of our worst.  We left much of several courses because of excess salt.  (I should note that I always carry Kosher salt in a tiny pillbox in my handbag since so many restaurants do not place salt on the table.  We do consciously avoid salt.) The service was abrupt. We were flanked by Americans. It was, for us, a miserable evening.

I really don't believe in the concept of a restaurant having a "bad night".  The odds are just too great against your being there when everything under the kitchen's and dining room's control falls apart. I am becoming a convert to the concept of the wrong customer. If a dining room is able to fill every table for several settings every night, they are doing something right, if only public relations with the press.  

I do think that when we on egullet recommend a restaurant, we are obligated to describe it as fully as we can  rather than repeating that this address is a "must", so that the diner can make an intelligent decision about whether that restaurant provides both the level of cooking and kind of ambiance that he will enjoy.

I notice that Gault Millau 2002 has taken away the coups de coeurdesignation from La Regalade.  It retains its rating of 15 points.

[Simon Majumdar]

Andy - I agree on the choclate box take on Paris.  what it does have in its favour is NO BLOODY CRANES.  these big monstrocities blight the london and NY landscapes.  in paris they restore and protect.  In London and NY we rip down and replace.  What that does mean though is that the centre of Paris, to me at least took on a look of atrophy.  I know I barely scratch the surface when I am there, but it certainly lacks the energy of NYC and London

Steve - I push buttons I know.  Its just my way but it gets more of a reaction than just saying " a disappointing meal in Paris" and as on here, it does bring debate even if not everyone approves of my way of doing it.

Margaret - Most people wouldn't come near me with a ten foot pole, but it is interesting to see that regalade is capapble of being not great.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Simon - Not that I'm against button pushing because it is great fun. And I'm certainly one who practices it on occassion. But one has to pick their places for it. In this instance, whatever substance there might have been to your review was lost in the style of the post. A "troll" post, intended to galvanize opinion on a hot button topic works great when it is obvious it is a troll. But the net result of a troll when it is carefully hidden isn't to bring on debate, the net result is to turn the attention away from the topic and towards the writer. And as you see, most of this thread has not been about Regalade, but about you.

Margaret- Thank you for pointing this conversation to the merits.

I've been to Regalade 3 times. The first, also about 5 years ago was quite ordinary. The other two were pretty terrific with the last visit last May really being super. I know one of the problems there is that they have 3 seatings and things get a bit rushed. So last time I ate at the 10:30 seating and dinner was quite relaxing. In fact I dug up the notes from the meal to  post here.

"We were having dinner on the latish side, 10:30, a function of the popularity of La Regalade which is a miniscule bistro on the outer edges of the 14th arr. As instructed by Marc at Auge, I walked in and asked the woman behind the bar if she was Madame Camdeborde. After an affirmative response I said “I have been instructed to tell you Mazieres en carafe before I say hello” and then I handed her the card Marc wrote out for us. She laughed, got the Mazieres (we had no idea what it was at the time) and immediately had it decanted. La Regalade is the most nondescript place imaginable. It is so small, it barely can be called a bistro. But the food! The food is worthy of a one star+ restaurant.

I started with the Cochonailles which was assorted pork products. An entire terrine along with some fresh and dried sausages, a nice plate of Bayonne style ham, crocks of cornichons and pickled espilettes (a Basque pepper), along with some grainy mustard. Another appetizer of note was an entire large bowl of Petoncles, baby bay scallops that were superbe. With this we drank,

1999 Domaine Gramenon Viognier- Something they were selling at Auge. Never seen this in the states and according to Marc, they only made 1000 bottles of this unfined and unfiltered wine. Well all you needed to do was to pour it in your glass to see the evidence of non-filtering as it was full of little specks of junk. But despite the buildup, it was too herbal and extremely acidic, to the point where it was nipping at your tongue. Not to my taste but if one were to go hunting and drink viognier, this is the one to drink.

85 points.

My main dish of Haschis Parmentier avec Boudin Noir (Shepherd’s Pie made with blood sausage) was so rich and creamy that it was sinful. Each forkful of those creamy mashed potatoes found a lovely layer of juicy blood sausage that primed each bite. Oh it was so homey and warming. My dessert of Riz au Lait Ancienne (old fashioned rice pudding) was an entire bowl that could have fed at least 6 people and was served with home made confitures. But the most interesting dessert was two thin slices of perfectly aged Brebis cheese served with jam made from espilettes. Outstanding.

Mazieres Vin de Table-This was so odd. A non-vintage wine. The nose kept fooling us. At first we thought syrah but then cabernet. Ultimatly we thought it either syrah or Grenache but if anyone knows what its composed of please jump in. A minty, herbal wine but not to the extent that it was offputting. Awfully nice and ripe fruit. Hmm, this could be a good house wine and sure enough the Auge catalog offers it for 78FF or $11. 89 points"

And I can also say that the rest of the dishes were to a dish great. And the crew I was traveling with wasn't the easy to please type. You should see the review of L'Ambroisie from the night before where it was all thumbs down.

As for outer arrondisement bistros, have you been to Les Allobroges? I ate an extremely good meal there a number of years back with the highlight being a Gateau de Pommes de Terre avec Lard et Foie Gras. It was an entire potato cake and the top was covered with slices of bacon and then there were slices of foie gras on top. Quite sinful. I also ate at Eric Frechon before he went to the Bristol, but didn't enjoy it as much as Allobroges.

In general, I find the neo-bistros to be price driven and I always seem to find it in the food. And at places like Frechon, or Violin D'Ingres, where the scope of the cooking is more ambitious, it always sticks out to me like a sore thumb. Aha, here is where they are saving money to be able to serve you a dish in the style of a 2 star restaurant at a $40 prix fixe. And that is one of the reasons I liked Regalade. Instead of the effort expended into applying fancy technique into smaller portions or not the greatest ingredients, they serve simple cuisine d'pays with a twist and use top notch ingredients. And I know that for a fact because last time I was there I spoke with Yves Camdeborde about it and he was telling us his sources for ingredients. Almost all of the things he uses come from small southwestern farmers that he hand picks and brings up to Paris every week.

As long as I'm giving him a plug, I can recall the best dish I ever ate there, which I have to admit is one of the best dishes I've ever eaten to this day. It was Foie Gras Confit avec Confiture de Prunes. They brought a large glass jar to the table and it was full of slices of preserved 1/4 rounds of foie gras that were preserved to the point where if you held it in your hand and tried to break one it would be firm enough to crumble. I don't know how they got it that way. When I buy a terrine of foie at home, after three days in the fridge it starts turning funky. But these were great. And the jar must have had 30 rounds! Eat as much as you want. Then a crock of home made prune jam and a little dish of coarse salt. It was really fantastic and for me summarized what the neo-bistro can do well. And it's funny because having eaten at Club Gascon last week, it's not at all that different than the foie Camdeborde served me. And just as an aside, my Pork with Prune Cream at La Trouvaille two weeks ago was modern in the same way. But unfortunately I didn't find the level of execution there to be as good as either Club Gascon or Regalade.

[Simon Majumdar]

Steve

Three sittings is quite a lot and I think contributed the feeling of being processed.  Perhaps if we had been at 10.30, we would have had a better experience and indeed I would admit that the rapid pace of the meal jaundiced our views ( well they certainly did mine ) I would argue however, that the other sittings should not be allowed to suffer.

I would love to know what you made of Club Gascon.  It is supposedly French in its take, but i suspect it would be almost unrecognisable to the Parisian.  for the record, I am a fan of the place and have had three excellent meals there in the past year.

S

[cabrales]

Three sittings

Are three sittings within the range of accepted practice at comparable establishments? I wonder how three sittings can be accommodated when some diners might order a greater number of dishes during a meal, arrive late, have digestifs or otherwise take more time.

[Scottf]

Cabrales

Sam and I had a 10.30 sitting in January.  We arrived at 10.20, took an aperitif and some sausage at the bar and got seated, once a table was available, around 10.45.  I wouldn't say from that brief experience that allotted times are strictly enforced.

BTW, we were the first to arrive for the 10.30 "slot" and by the time we were seated the queue was going out the door and down the street

[Steve Plotnicki]

Simon-I am in the process of writing up my notes for Club Gascon. But it's quite a complex place. I am trying to find the right balance between old/new France, old/new London and old/new cooking styles and presentations because oddly enough, the place operates on all of those levels. But if you want to know in advance I thought it great. It would be a perfect place for an eGullet dinner. I'm going to be back in May and we should try and organize one for that time. I also know they will alow BYO there if you sort it in advance.

Cabrales - Your questions about the 3 seatings at Regalade is in line with my comment that the neo-bistros try and find some way to cut corners. The entire neo-bistro trend was a result of the recession in France, and the fact that rising chefs couldn't afford to open "haute" places, as well as the French public wanting affordable meals. So someone like Christian Constant might make dinner affordable by limiting portion size, or cutting back on the type and/or quality of ingredients. Regalade has attacked that problem by offering 3 seatings. But my jar of preserved foie gras was stuffed to the gills, even though I might have had a shorter window to eat it. And as far as I know, Regalade is the only place to have 3 seatings.

[cabrales]

Your questions about the 3 seatings at Regalade is in line with my comment that the neo-bistros try and find some way to cut corners. The entire neo-bistro trend was a result of the recession in France, and the fact that rising chefs couldn't afford to open "haute" places, as well as the French public wanting affordable meals.

Steve -- I have not yet purchased the 2002 Gault-Millau, but the company's website notes the following (roughly translated):

"This year, we have also taken on another challenge: we propose a reasoned and reasonable selection of 'small tables' and bistros that one can enjoy without breaking the bank. Restaurants that respond to a specific need; to note them in a local context [uncertain about this part of the translation].  An ambitious project with a simple goal  -- to satisfy the reader's current mood, whether festive or practical, . . . classical or baroque, romantic or solitary."

The neo-bistro trend you mentioned no doubt contributed to G-M's inclusion of the new information in its 2002 guide.  I wonder what the reference to a reader's mood means, with respect to the manner in which bistros are listed in the guide.

[Bux]

With but one exception, I would say many of the best restaurants turn a few tables more than once in an evening. With many American tourists willing if not eager to dine well before seven and not a few Spanish tourists hoping to start after eleven, three sittings should be easy in a small Paris bistro. Esay on the clock that is, not easy on the staff.

[rmajumdar]

Simon - The immediate issue isn't whether I value your opinion, it is whether what you write about a place is credible so the people who read the board know how to value your opinion. And it is in that light that I evaluate your review of a place like La Regalade.

Steve,

It's not just Simon writing about this place.  Look at this thread (and another on a rival board) to see what the current opinion is of La Regalade.  There are plenty of places I loved in the past but don't cut the mustard now.  Be gracious enough to concede that all is not well in the house of Regalade we won't think any less of your taste - honest  

Any comparison with Club Gascon I find unfair as the service and food at CG is much better:  good regional wine list, honest, well prepared regional dishes.  Also, M. Aussignac has stated on many occasion his hatred of 'sittings'.  Once you are seated you are not rushed and can spend as long as you like at your table (in my case 3-4 hours).

The only problem is that after many years CG has it's first star so will inevitably appear on the tourist trail - let's hope it doesn't go the way of La Regalade - Krug anybody ???

[Steve Plotnicki]

Robin - Hey I either think your opinion is credible or I don't. And I'm not the only one who wasn't buying it in this instance. And the place might well might have slipped. But you and Simon are going to have a hard time convincing me. And that is mostly a function of how the post is written. If you notice, nobody jumped down Margaret's throat when she posted her bad review.

As for Club Gascon vs Regalade, I can see liking CG better even though the cooking there isn't at the same level of proficiency as Regalade. But they offer a cool and unique experience. But I'm not sure I would feel the same way about it if there were a hundred places like it. It could become trite then. I also think it's easier for CG to be good. I mean I had the sauteed foie gras with lemon ices and for the size of the dish, 3-4 bites, it's easy for it to stay interesting. I don't know how successful it would be if they served you a whole plate of the stuff.

[Bux]

Let's not forget it's rather rustic and old fashioned food for all the two staf chef technique and input. If you don't like that sort of food, no one is going to cook it to your taste. If you love it to begin with, that's another story. I'd not overlook the wrong person in the right restaurant. Of course that's from my perspective. I truly wish it was around the corner. I'd be willing to check it out.

[Margaret Pilgrim]

Two concepts emerge from this exchange: Bux's tenent of the wrong person/right restaurant, and the idea that a restaurant can be different things to different people over the course of its several seatings, ranging from frenetic and brisk service of menu-determined dishes to relaxed, conversational waiters sharing ideas and culinary treats.  This begins to make a lot of sense to me from all viewpoints.

(Our son seldom gets his ducks in a row in time to make a prime time dinner reservation.  He is frequently able to get in around 10, and has often told of the different atmosphere in the dining room and charm of service staff, particularly in places known for difficult attitude.  I never took this out of his context and applied it to other restaurants and towns.)

[lizziee]

There is a discussion on the Blue hill thread about the modern bistro in Paris.

In the March, 2001 edition of Gourmet Magazine there is a lengthy article by Alexander Lobrano entitled "The Outsiders."

He profiles the Young Turks of the Paris culinary scene; Stephane Mole (Les Ormes), Pascal Barbot (L'Astrance), Yves Camdeborde (La Regalade)", Christophe Beaufront (L'Avant-Gout), Olympe Versini (Casa Olympe), Pierre Jay (L'Ardoise), and Thierry Breton (Chez Michel).

Many of the comments by the chefs describe what Steve P was referring to as bistro moderne. "Originally, I'd planned a fancy place with tablecloths and flowers," Camdeborde explains. "But then the Gulf War started, and it devastated the restaurant business. Tourism plunged, and France went into recession. " (Remember this was written in 2001, before 9/11). Camdeborde responded to this situation by opening a bistro. "For an ambitious French chef on his way up, this was a revolutionary act..... 'I decided that in France we'd forgotten that to eat well is to eat simply.'"

"A small band of passionate young chefs, who couldn't care a whit about their Michelin ranking, has in many ways become the compass of modern French cooking."

"What we have in common", Camdeborde says, "is that we all have haute cuisine training, but we didn't want to open faux-chateau museum restaurants. We wanted lively places where people would relax and discover interesting new food. We use many of the same suppliers as 2 and 3 star restaurants, and we dare to invent new recipes, but we are also firmly committed to tradition and to defending our terroir."

Camdeborde feels certain that this new modern bistro has staying power. "It's innovative by definition, but it is also anchored to the best traditions of the French kitchen, which makes for perfect modern food..... The real luxury now is honestly cooked, high-quality food based on tradition but prepared with creative intelligence."

Olympe Versini feels that Parisians want rustic, authentic food. She describes her style as "cuisine rassurante (cooking that reassures).... I put my money into the best produce I can buy and then prepare it simply.... Now I cook the food that my friends and I want to eat" instead of the showy, extravagant dishes of the past.

Unlike Camdeborde and Versini, Barbot didn't want to open a bistro, but a restaurant. Still, he favors "homely products - I'd rather cook mackerel than salmon - without the cream and butter of classical French cooking, and to animate them with Asian seasonings.... (The French) have developed this idea that our culinary identity is all about transmitting unchanging recipes from one generation to the next, but now we're in a new century, and it's time to move on and to welcome the world in. Cooking is history, and I want my food to reflect the times in which we live."

The article is a fairly long one and I have tried to highlight the salient points. Other than L'Astrance, I have not eaten at the other restaurants.

Do you members think this accurately describes the current "Young Turk" culinary scene in Paris? Is this what you would consider "bistro moderne?"

[Jinmyo]

This is a very good topic, lizziee. Thanks for posting it. I was thinking about this article when reading the BH thread.

[Bux]

Lizzee, thanks for picking up on this and bringing it over here. I started to reply a few moments ago and I thought I was writing too much about Blue Hill--wrong emphasis for this thread. Your question--does this accurately describe the current "Young Turk" culinary scene? is double edged. I can't tell if it's accurately described the scene, or it it's put out a label for others to find the fit. I just don't know Paris that well. I can only say that two or three years ago, I began to sense an renewed interest in smaller and less expensive restaurants. Then again maybe that interest existed all along on the level I just discovered.

Does the "bistro moderne" include the offshoots of the starred chefs and if so, do we make a distinction between those that are simple offshoots and those that are run by a young chef supported by a stared chef. Do the restaurants of chefs with restaurants in Saulieu and Montpelier count as one of these bistros without a young Turk. Can Robuchon acquire Turkhood with his new concept at the Hotel Pont-Royale?

The chefs in the article run very different sorts of restaurants, although with the exception of Barbot, their menus are very inexpensive--at least the ones I know are. That certainly included Frechon, who Steve mentioned and who I believe was named in that article although he had already committed to heading up the restaurant at the Bristol. His was a real neighborhood restaurant, larger than a bistro and very fine, but not at all fancy. Chez Michel (mention on my web site of a dinner there last year) was far simpler and in an even less auspicious neighborhood. It may be the least self conscious of the lot and didn't strike me as ambitious as Frechon's or as resolutely determined to recreate rustic food in Paris. L'Astrance is far removed from the others and perhaps on the other side of Blue Hill in terms of "ambition" or kitchen philosophy, although it's pricing is probably higher than Blue Hill now and rising or so we hear. (Hard to compare accurately with service and tax included.)

I think this is all part of a larger picture that extends beyond Paris and New York. I recall a post of Robert Brown that spoke of midscale restaurants of some ambition and distinction in France, that aimed to provide better food than the decor might lead one to expect. In any event, I suspect Steve had this very article on his mind when he referred to the "bistro moderne" phenomenon. I trust he'll let us know soon.