Trattoria vs. Ristorante

[albiston]

A few days ago, on an Italian food discussion forum, someone started a discussion on how Italian food is seen from tourists visiting our country. One thing led to another and soon the discussion moved to why most tourist prefer trattorie to high-end Ristoranti.

This is, on one hand, a superficial view. One just needs to look at someone like my co-FH Robert Brown and his great reports on Italian restaurants on this forum to know that is not always the case.

On the other hand it is true that even on this forum many of us ask for good trattoria tips when travelling to Italy. Looking at the numbers it is easy to argue that Italy is also becoming less and less a gourmet destination, intended as having a restaurant scene which attracts foreigners, losing ground esepcially to Spain.

I have a few personal ideas of why this is so, but which place would be better than eGullet to ask visitors to Italy how they feel about this issue.

So here's my question: why do you prefer trattorie when visiting Italy (or the opposite, why do you prefer Ristoranti)? Tell us what your reasons are: curious minds want to know.

[hathor]

Good question.

I think part of the appeal of trattorie is the perception that the tourist can then mingle with 'locals', or perhaps its the perception that real Italian life is lived in a warm, welcoming trattoria rather than a possibly intimidating food palace.

We had a similar conversation last night with friends in Italy. We were dining at a local restaurant that has very non-tipici Umbrian food, and wondering why the restaurant was not doing a better business as the food was exceptional. Most restaurants around northern Umbria offer pretty much the same, standard fare, so you have to wonder why something a bit different would not be better received.

Italy, by and large is a less formal country, and not particularly adventurous in eating. They are all perfectly happy eating what they have been eating all along, and rightly so.

Your question also brings to mind that Italian cooking is ingredient driven, not preparation driven, so why spend so much money on indgredients_

[katiaANDronald]

I think Hathor is absolutely right.

I just got back from Barcelona and I can immediately relate to the comment about Spain possibly overtaking Italy as a restaurant destination. I think it is happening because the locals are actively seeking "trendy" places as a night out.... which perhaps is not happening as much in Italy with respect to eating. Even more telling than metropolitan Barcelona was Girona - a relatively small place but with very a disproportionate amount of restaurants trying to look trendy and sophisticated (with decidedly mixed results - since some were clearly trattorie trying to spice up presentation).

That aside, I think it is also the case that you go to Italy to get the "real thing" whatever that is - Italy may set trends for clothes fashion but when it comes to food it is really a very conservative country. As ever a happy balance would be the best...

[albiston]

hathor and katiaANDronald,

You both make very good points, but my question was more aimed at the reasons behind the eating choices of people visiting Italy. Or are you saying that if more Italians visited fancy places then the rest would follow?

It certainly is an interesting point. In a way if Italy wasn't so conservative when it comes to eating there would certainly be more possibilities for a bigger restaurant scene to develop. This could clearly bring to a livelier scene altogether, attracting more attention both at home and abroad. Still it's undeniable that there are already many classy places in Italy which could attract their share of foreign customers, but they don't. True trattorie give you, as hathor said

the perception that real Italian life is lived in a warm, welcoming trattoria rather than a possibly intimidating food palace.

That's what I often think too.

But then why does the same happen only to a lesser extent when foodie tourists visit France or Spain, both countries having their fair share of homey traditional places?

[Kevin72]

I visited Italy last fall and gravitated towards the "trattoria" experience as much as I could. One primary reason is that frankly we weren't dressed well enough for the full-bore ristorante experience. I couldn't resist checking out Diana in Bologna though and we "popped in" for lunch on our way to the train station. Sure enough everyone else was in their business suits and here were two scrubby tourists walking in off the street in their rain ponchos and hiking boots! Our reception was appropriately chilly.

Even with appropriate attire, though, I'd still lean more towards the trattoria experience for all the reasons hit on already. The food is more "honest" and indicative of the culture and ingredients of the region we are in, which is almost my entire reason for being in Italy in the first place.

[Marco_Polo]

my question was more aimed at the reasons behind the eating choices of people visiting Italy.

Ciao Alberto,

This is an interesting question. I'd by nature definitely consider myself more of a 'tratt' sort of guy, someone who likes nothing better than to sniff out places where the locals go, perhaps a little rough around the edges, wine poured from a big unlabelled bottiglione into simple tumblers (but good wine, vino genuino, you understand), and serving simple cucina casalinga or cucina della nonna, home cooked, genuine regional and local foods made from simple but ottimo ingredients. Yep, give me the choice and I'll opt for this most days of the week over a meal in most any 2- or 3-star joint, a ristorante with a hostess who looks you over and judges you by what you're wearing when you arrive, and those obsequious and sometimes obnoxious waiters in suits and ties, sort of place where if you need to scratch your backside it's anticipated in advance, where you can't even pour the wine yourself, and where you're served such un-Italian things as fegato grasso (which quite honestly even at Vissani can be disappointing).

We come to Italy, we stranieri, for an Italian experience, even if the experience we seek is based primarily on our own preconceptions and images of La Bella Italia. That is to say, we're not necessarily here in search of absolutely great food, but rather of that quintessential and unforgettable Italian experience and meal. And such experiences and meals are sometimes more often found in simple trattorie than in ristoranti that may be more international in style, service, ambiance, food.

We've all had such great experiences, great meals in the simplest, most unassuming and wholly simpatico places in Rome, Venice (yes, even Venice), Verona, Torino, and elsewhere. And for a week or so of eating, it may be all we ask for.

But, and but...hang around for a bit longer and the charms may begin to wane. In Tuscany, for example, the diet in such simple trattorie e osterie can be incredibly monotonous, in the provincia di Siena, a meal beginning most usually with a platter of cured salumi, perhaps a an antipasto of crostini di fegatini, then a primo piatto of pinci (or pici depending on where you are) al ragù, then carne alla griglia - simple plain grilled meats cooked over an open fire. Delicious the first time, pretty damn good the second, but, please, not for a whole week. And often there really is very little choice. So we begin to long for something more considered, more creative, more carefully prepared and presented: in short, we begin checking out the ristorante...

MP

Edited November 11, 2004 by Marco_Polo (log)

[slbunge]

Personally, when travelling (Italy or otherwise) we look for both. There are nights when we have gone full blast all day and we want to dress and have a relaxing meal at a ristorante. Other days we want a more bustling scene hoping to rub elbows with Italians rather than French or German tourists so we head for a trattoria.

As 'food people' I think that we feel that we would be missing something substantial about the cuisine of Italy if we go only to ristoranti. Right or wrong, my impression is that much of the real glory of Italian food is found in out of the way places that are small and staffed by a cook who is some sort of third generation pizza, pasta, or salumi maker. I think for many Americans this is bolstered by watching Mario Batali and Lydia (and the rest) who show us the beauty in what Italians know as ordinary (or at least available) food from trattorie.

One final note is that my impression of many US tourists is that food value is more important than the sort of nebulous thrill of a high-end dining experience. Certainly you will get more food for you Euro at trattorie and that is important to many travellers. I have not been to Spain but perhaps the difference in cost between their ristorante-equivalent and their trattoria-equivalent is not as substantial as it seems to be in Italy (realizing that I am painting with a very broad brush by even suggesting this to be the case).

[katiaANDronald]

This is an interesting point... largely i agree wtih most of the comments although I have yet to be bored with normal every day italian food. i think there are enough ingredients, seasons, variations to keep us happy!

Let me try to explain what I think. So in addition to the very good factors that others have there is perhaps one more element - in many European big cities you tend to find three broad classes of restaurants. Your basic, every day trattoria type thing, your trendy - trying to be trendy chabby chic, casual chic places (where anyone can walk in generally) and your elegant restaurants.

I think the middle category in Italy is very unrepresented and when Italians go for elegant they tend to overdo it - which means that they may be somewhat intimidating for tourists that stuble across restaurants.

So this means that tourists are actually left with less options. I don't think they would not go for restaurants I just think that there aren't any as tourists tend to know them there...

[francesco]

....and where you're served such un-Italian things as fegato grasso (which quite honestly even at Vissani can be disappointing).

MP

←

I hope to be able to come back to the more general issue soon but for now, just let me take some issue with this particular statement. I understand that fois gras is associated in just about everyone's mind with France, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it isn't part of the culinary tradition of some part of Italy. The link below is the best I could find in English to explain what I mean:

fegato grasso in Italy

Given that, I don't find the use of fois gras in Italian high-end restaurants more out of place than the frequent use of pasta or risotti in equivalent French restaurants, restaurants which no-one accuses of not being French enough.

Francesco

[Marco_Polo]

fegato grasso in Italy

Thank you for this, Francesco. I stand corrected and it's fascinating to read about the production of fattened goose liver in Friuli-Venezia Giulia. The historic links with the Austro-Hungarian Empire have certainly influenced the foods in that particular corner of the country.

However, it still seems to me (and I may be entirely wrong) that the use of something like fegato grasso in top restaurants in Italy is more closely linked to the simple fact that foie gras is nationally and internationally perceived as a luxury food product that any top end place with aspirations must utilise than because it is necessarily part of a regional, local or even national canon of Italian dishes or culinary tradition. Of course creative cooks don't need to be straitjacketed to regional, local or national culinary traditions, which is after all one of the main points of this thread. I don't mind if fegato grasso is or is not part of such tradition when I'm in a restaurant; I do mind if it is not done very well and is just a sop to so-called top-end dining.

But then, I freely admit that I'm coming at this, as we all do, with my own preconceptions and prejudices, based on dining experiences not just in Italy but France, Britain, Spain, elsewhere, carrying my own limited expectations of what I want and expect an Italian meal to be, whether in a simple trattoria or in a top-class ristorante.

And that returns us to Alberto's point: we approach dining in Italy, at whatever level, with our own expectations of what the experience should be.

Perhaps it also comes down to whether or not we go out to eat because we are hungry and wish to be satisfied, or whether, in this post-modern age, we go out to eat for new experiences, to be excited, titillated, amused. A simple working man's trattoria can most enjoyably accomplish the former; but for the latter, we need to go to a ristorante.

MP

PS Francesco, I just realised this thread is appearing at the same time as your review of Vissani and the wonderful description of the fegato grasso served there. It sounds like an amazing dish, and an interpretation that is wholly and brilliantly Italian in conception. So forget about everything I wrote above! I think Vissani's a truly original genius. Unfortunately when we were there (and it was some years ago) the course I referred to formed part of a tasting menu and was disappointing, greasy and not unctuous at all, hence my comment.

(Edited to add PS)

Edited November 11, 2004 by Marco_Polo (log)

[albiston]

And that returns us to Alberto's point: we approach dining in Italy, at whatever level, with our own expectations of what the experience should be.

Perhaps it also comes down to whether or not we go out to eat because we are hungry and wish to be satisfied, or whether, in this post-modern age, we go out to eat for new experiences, to be excited, titillated, amused. A simple working man's trattoria can most enjoyably accomplish the former; but for the latter, we need to go to a ristorante.

MP

←

Marc,

good point, and I for one certainly agree. But the question remains. How do your (or that of others readers clearly) eating habits in Italy compare to your choices when in other European countries? Do you still prefer to look for equivalents of cucina genuina or do you find this is something peculiar of Italy?

P.S. A note on fegato grasso: it would be time to finally tell the truth. Italians, French, Americans.... we all copied the idea from those pyramid-fixated Egyptians

[katiaANDronald]

But the question remains. How do your (or that of others readers clearly) eating habits in Italy compare to your choices when in other European countries? Do you still prefer to look for equivalents of cucina genuina or do you find this is something peculiar of Italy?

Ours for one are pretty much the same wherever we are and are divded into two broad categories.

A: If we are looking to be impressed by the ingenuity of the chef we probably already know the place we are going to - so wherever that is in the world its a place that is already in guides, discussed in egullet, etc because the chef is probably already famous or making a name for themselves. We would certainly not walk into any restaurant that claims to be fantastic (and has accordingly fantastic prices) without prior knowledge of the place (after all we are not paid-for food critics!)

B: If we just want to have a great lunch in a place we've never been before (and therefore don't know much about) we look for something authentic. We take that to mean "a restaurant that serves local dishes to local people, has been around for many years and is not necessarily on the usual tourist tracks...". These places are hard to find, but when we did find them we also tend to stick to them.

Now for case B the issue is that in Italy stumbling upon an "authentic" place is actually relatively easy. In Malta for example its not that easy at all (sorry Malta!)... in the UK its almost impossible (unless you are in the countryside...)

[DeirdreStraughan]

Somehow, in 14 years of living in Italy, I never thought about the distinction, and only notice it when one word or the other is in the restaurant's name. I've seen trattoria and osteria applied to restaurants I would consider far better than average in quality and not quite traditional, e.g. Lecco's Taverna (oops, not trattoria) ai Poggi and Osteria del Viaggiatore. Taverna ai Poggi servers traditional regional dishes, but also features a few dishes with a twist, and everything is good. Osteria del Viaggiatore doesn't use fancy table linens, but they serve a 30 euro fixed-price meal in five or so courses, each with some rather amazing choices and very amazing food. On the other hand, we've been to a lot of very humble "ristoranti" which were undoubtedly authentic in both menu and clientele, e.g. Ristorante il Capriolo.

So... what's in a name?

We have a few basic techniques for identifying good places to eat, whatever they're called: ask someone local who's not a concierge; see whether the place is crowded a peak times; follow your nose - I have backed hastily out of a few places whose smell I didn't like.

So far I've only once been violently disappointed in a meal, at a new restaurant called Chakra here in Lecco. They invested a lot in the decor, and forgot to hire a decent chef.

[albiston]

Somehow, in 14 years of living in Italy, I never thought about the distinction, and only notice it when one word or the other is in the restaurant's name. I've seen trattoria and osteria applied to restaurants I would consider far better than average in quality and not quite traditional, e.g. Lecco's Taverna (oops, not trattoria) ai Poggi and Osteria del Viaggiatore. Taverna ai Poggi servers traditional regional dishes, but also features a few dishes with a twist, and everything is good. Osteria del Viaggiatore doesn't use fancy table linens, but they serve a 30 euro fixed-price meal in five or so courses, each with some rather amazing choices and very amazing food. On the other hand, we've been to a lot of very humble "ristoranti" which were undoubtedly authentic in both menu and clientele, e.g. Ristorante il Capriolo.

So... what's in a name?

←

Deirdre,

you make a good point. Both names are used quite freely in Italy, perhaps managing to confuse the occasional traveller even more.

I could have called the topic traditional vs. creative coooking and maybe given a clearer idea of what I meant. Instead I chose to use those terms for a simple reason: in the Italian gastronomic media world there is a clear distinction beteween people who support either of these food ideologies. On one hand there´s the Slow Food followers, food "conservatives" and such, who look at the trattoria (or osteria) concept, seen as a simple often family run home-style place, as the essence of Italian food and hospitality. On the other are those who follow the ristoranti guides, may it be Gambero Rosso, Espresso or Michelin, who often see the trattorie people as those holding back the evolution of Italian gastronomy. Hence the choice of words and resulting generalization.

[Carlsbad]

Now that you put it that way, I'm definitely more trattoria.

[DeirdreStraughan]

I guess I don't pay enough attention to notice the dichotomy. We're Slow Food members and happily hunt down local traditional specialties etc., but we don't turn up our noses at anyone trying to do something new with them. Lanterna Verde, one of our favorites, does some interesting variations on regional specialties, as well as more Frenchified stuff like paté, but doesn't seem to give itself airs about it.

I guess I'm without prejudices as regards food. I am willing to try most things once. Otherwise, who knows what wonderful experiences you might miss?

It can even be interesting to see what people do with a cuisine that is completely non-local. In Delhi recently, I meant to stop into a MacDonald's to look at the menu, but forgot. There's a good Indian restaurant here in Lecco (Masala) which makes cheese naan with gorgonzola. Weird concept - gorgonzola or anything like it is completely unknown in India - but it works.

[robert brown]

Some guy could get a PhD at MIT if he delved into the origins and meanings of the types of eateries in certain countries. Maybe one of the folks at Marco Polo’s Eat Words has looked into it. Speaking of Marc, I spent three weeks in Tuscany about eight years ago and experienced the same menu monotony. I guess things haven’t changed much. Perhaps someone can run this by Faith Willinger this week.

Deirdre raises the point of where do trattorias end and ristorantes begin. I am sure that the distinction gets more blurred as time goes by, and I’m willing to bet that the main instigator is new generations wanting to dump or dampen down tradition in order that their restaurant can make some culinary statement or another, or to offer more-upscale amenities. In some instances, some of the establishments continue to use the word “Trattoria” in their name. To take an example of a place some of us know, Trattoria della Posta in Monforte d’Alba, here is a restaurant that was an old-time trattoria in the center of town (I never went inside that one) and subsequently moved to the outskirts to become a new and upgraded hotel-restaurant. It is still named “Trattoria della Posta”, but to the naked eye it looks to be nothing less than a restaurant, and a comfortable one at that. However, the cuisine is remains traditional Piemontese, and there perhaps is why one could still view it as a trattorias. Go down the road to La Morra, however, and there you will find Ristorante Belvedere that, last I knew, served dishes that were also traditional, but with the small choice of dishes presented orally. Now why is that a “ristorante” when compared with Trattoria della Posta?

[Boris_A]

I am sure that the distinction gets more blurred as time goes by

←

25 years ago, "Trattoria Cantarelli" (sic) had one fork/spoon and two stars in the guide Michelin. It was clearly a trattoria. Once my neighbour table was composed by a delegation of the comunist party of Parma, obvioulsy not abhorrend to the pleasures of the upper class. But the food was two star, without any question.

OTOH, in the very same year, I visited the first time the two star rated "Da Guido", clearly an elegant ristorante. At our (huge) neighbour table, there was sitting a family with about 20 people - from bimbo to nonno, laughing and joking all the time. At the end of the 4 hour dinner, Guido (we didn't know him) came to our table with two bicchieri of grappa, sat down and asked for a translation of an article in a German newspaper.

Even back then, I couldn't make a distinction between trattoria and ristorante. And I never cared.

[MMerrill]

What we love about travelling in Italy is finding genuine, non-pretentious food at reasonable prices. And we always do, which is amazing and the main reason we keep coming back for more. To do this, we usually follow Gambero Rosso's recommendations for their "red" restaurants - whether ristoranti or trattorie. These places tend to feature local, seasonal food, but often prepared with a creative touch. We even stray into the "2 fork" category and have had exceptional meals (more in the ristoranti category) but sometimes get food that's trying too hard to be different. I guess I'm more of a conservative eater - and prefer cooked shrimp to raw, for instance. Maybe the distinction should be between modern and traditional cooking? Give me traditional, but with that creative twist!

[C_Ruark]

While it's true that the distinction betweem ristoranti and trattorie is becoming more blurred over time... I will choose to eat at trattorie 95% of the time (save the odd meals where I want to enjoy Italian fine dining at it's best), largely because I like the local dining experience. Nothing is better than finding a small local eatery where the pasta sauce - though it has only the smallest list of ingredients - comes across as fiercely complex. And I've never eaten a secondi that I didn't enjoy.

Regards,

CSR

[francesco]

While it's true that the distinction betweem ristoranti and trattorie is becoming more blurred over time... I will choose to eat at trattorie 95% of the time (save the odd meals where I want to enjoy Italian fine dining at it's best), largely because I like the local dining experience. Nothing is better than finding a small local eatery where the pasta sauce - though it has only the smallest list of ingredients - comes across as fiercely complex.  And I've never eaten a secondi that I didn't enjoy.

Regards,

CSR

←

I am sure we all agree that what is written above pretty much describes in large part the gastronomic attitude that the vast majority of visitors to our country have towards our dining establishments.

The implicit (or not so implicit) implication seems to be: why go through stuffiness, high prices, long-term planning, when in many cases, you can get all the satisfaction you want from the trattoria just a few hunder yards away from your hotel?

I have to say that at some level, I completely agree with that. I am proud of the fact that in Italy this is indeed still possible, even not too difficult to find and places such as the ones described above are what makes Italy special because not even France (and perhaps only Spain) can compete with that. Also, and this is very important, this is also what the vast majority of Italians think.

But.

I think there something of the Bill Bryson effect going on here. I say that because to my mind, Brison is popular as a travel writer because he is good at focusing on the picturesque and, sometimes, on stereotype. The whole issue reminds me of that movie where George Segal finds out that he has a black son who is also very tall. They both go to a playground where they are challanged to a pick-up game of basketball by an obese white guy and his eqaully obese son. Against his own son's protestations that he can't play, he agrees to bet some money on the outcome of the game. Needless to say the game ends in a crushing defeat: just because his son was black and tall, Segal just assumed he had to be good at basketball.

I get the impression that something like this happens with our food industry: if there's anything that Italian restaurants in Italy can be relied upon is to provide a good meal with simple ingredients. Note that this view is shared by many Italians and visitors alike.

Well, I wish it was that simple. I hear many people talk about the ingredients. Living in the UK I can confirm that the average fruit or vegetable in an Italian market is much better than its UK equivalent, but that doesn't mean that it is as good as it can or should be. One example: pesto. Do you know where I go if I want to taste pesto made with the best basil from Pra, in a mortar, with high quality olive oil, the best quality cheese, etc.? I go to Ca' Peo, a restaurant that used to have a Michelin star until last year and has things like pigeon on the menu (most of the menu is quite traditional). Many "traditional restaurants" in my region work large numbers and couldn't do pesto with a mortar even if they wanted to. As for the others, most Genoese can't tell the difference, so why bother?

The owner of Ca' Peo used to joke with me that if it wasn't for the fact that the climate is different, we'd have to go to Japan to try our ingredients and cuisine because the respect for them he saw in the Japanese apprentices in his kitchen was far higher than that of the Italians.

Who makes pansoti with a prebuggiun filling nowadays? Prebuggiun is a catch-all name for a collection of wild herbs that grow abundant in the eastern part of Liguria. Borage is one of them and the translation for the others escapes me. Well, there are two places I know of for sure that use prebuggiun as they should and one of them is Balzi Rossi near Ventimiglia, which by the way, is not even close to being where the dish comes from. Again, the taste of prebuggiun is now so unfamiliar to the average Ligurian than spinach, which is easier to find and cheaper, often replaces it. This doesn't mean that pansoti made with spinach cannot good, but they certainly don't reflect tradition or the best ingredient available. Believe me, even limiting myself to my small patch of (home)land, I could go on: I still remember going out with school friends to trattorias in the hills behind the Tigullio where the only criterion was "who's going to give us more to eat"?

My point is this: high-level restaurants provide creative cuisine, more or less, but they are often also the last defense for the traditional recipe and the best ingredient. Many, many Italian restaurants settle for much less. This might be better than what most visitors are used to, but it isn't the best.

There may be exception to this: La Brinca in Ne, for example, is a trattoria ferociously careful about preserving tradition and getting the best local ingredients. But places like la Brinca are not common, believe me.

Francesco

[C_Ruark]

I am sure we all agree that what is written above pretty much describes in large part the gastronomic attitude that the vast majority of visitors to our country have towards our dining establishments... I am proud of the fact that in Italy this is indeed still possible, even not too difficult to find and places such as the ones described above are what makes Italy special because not even France (and perhaps only Spain) can compete with that. Also, and this is very important, this is also what the vast majority of Italians think... [but] I think there something of the Bill Bryson effect going on here. I say that because to my mind, Bryson is popular as a travel writer because he is good at focusing on the picturesque and, sometimes, on stereotype. ... My point is this: high-level restaurants provide creative cuisine, more or less, but they are often also the last defense for the traditional recipe and the best ingredient. Many, many Italian restaurants settle for much less. This might be better than what most visitors are used to, but it isn't the best.

Francesco

←

Francesco...

I think that you've explained Italian dining fairly well. I took particular note of some what you've written as shown in my quote, and I'd like to reply with a few comments.

Respectfully, I would argue that when I am in Italy, I don't think about picturesque and stereotypical... at least in the visual sense. I follow my nose .

I spent some years working in the UK and France and I was privileged enough to visit Italy frequently during my time (great skiing!!!). It just so happened that I chose trattorie for one reason or another (time?, convenience?, wanting to find a place that didn't remind me of work?)... I'm not sure that indicates a preference, but as a rule I love dining in a local trattoria and being impressed by the elegant simplicity of the meal. It reminds me to never stop paying attention to the ingredients, and I am better in the kitchen for it. After all, that's why I'm travelling in the first place. To take some time to slip the clogs off, collect my thoughts, and come back to work ready to go.

Yet, one needs to be aware that rules always have exceptions and I know of at least two… Ristorante Ambrasciata (Quistello) is THE place for guinea hen... bar none. And most recently, a colleague arranged for me to visit La Locanda Ai Cavalieri (Petrignano di Assisi) and meet some of the kitchen staff. During dinner I enjoyed the chef's seared tuna. Beautiful.

It's very difficult to compare trattorie v ristoranti and find a true winner. For me it's all about the food. Sometime you find that the best is right next door. Sometimes, you make special arrangements months in advance. Either way, native Italian food rarely disappoints.

Best Regards!

CSR

PS -- This is the first time on eG where I've been quoted... Thanks for taking a few minutes to write a great reply! .

Edited November 17, 2004 by C_Ruark (log)

[hathor]

On one hand there´s the Slow Food followers, food "conservatives" and such, who look at the trattoria (or osteria) concept, seen as a simple often family run home-style place, as the essence of Italian food and hospitality. On the other are those who follow the ristoranti guides, may it be Gambero Rosso, Espresso or Michelin, who often see the trattorie people as those holding back the evolution of Italian gastronomy. Hence the choice of words and resulting generalization.

←

[albiston]

On one hand there´s the Slow Food followers, food "conservatives" and such, who look at the trattoria (or osteria) concept, seen as a simple often family run home-style place, as the essence of Italian food and hospitality. On the other are those who follow the ristoranti guides, may it be Gambero Rosso, Espresso or Michelin, who often see the trattorie people as those holding back the evolution of Italian gastronomy. Hence the choice of words and resulting generalization.

←

Albiston, would you mind explaining a bit more what you mean about the trattorie people holding back the evolution of Italian gastronomy?

Thanks.

←

hathor,

more than happy to. I would only like to make clear that this is not my opinion, so I'll try to do my best to sum up what I've been told by people who firmly believe in this point.

To put things into perspective it should be noted that gastronomy is a big theme on the Italian media today, as you probably know living in Italy. Many food lovers both pro Slow Food and against, agree that in general this attention verges on the superficial to say the least: TV-shy top chefs who get two minutes to explain, badly, their creations; newspaper food columns written by uninterested and at times incompetent journalists and so on. In this situation the Italian (mainly TV) public is pushed towards an interest to food and wine, but it receives insufficient and contrasting information. All this, at least according to what I read and am told, is actually having an unwanted and opposite effect. People are slowly getting tired of all the chit chat about food since that is exactly what it is most of the times, empty shallow chatter. In this situation the work of the more serious food and wine operators, Slow Food, Gambero Rosso, Veronelli, Espresso and Associazione Italiana Sommelier, is constantly under scrutiny of the Italian gourmets, even too much so. This whole situation creates IMO a rather tense discussion atmosphere.

Those who claim Slow Food is holding are not usually attacking trattorie as an eating out concept. They're are a fundamental part of the Italian eating out scene and, in the best cases, the depositary of Italian cooking traditions. What some find unsettling is the position SF sometimes shows towards creative restaurants, and how this influences those orbiting around SF's world. As a fitting example for this I would take the Osterie guide. Reading between the line of the guide's introduction it is very easy to get the idea that in SF's opinion trattorie are the only representative of real Italian culinary traditions. Since Italy is already a really conservative eating country when it comes to the average restaurant customer, opinions such as these can easily sound, to the ears of the above customer, like a direct attack at restaurants who walk even slightly step out of the tradition line. Therefore what those who accuse SF of holding the evolution of Italy's restaurants are saying is that SF, through it's research and support for tradition, is in a way stopping at a picturesque view of Italian eating that only in part represents the truth. The end result of all this is a strengthening the already conservative opinions many Italians have.

I think there is a grain of truth in this view. I'm not a fan of everything SF does and at times their beliefs come through as too dogmatic, for example the ones on GMO. On the other hand as Italian I believe SF's work at home with both traditional products and cuisine should be appreciated and prized. Otherwise why would I keep trying to convince friends to start a local convivium ?

I started the thread out of curiosity, because reading through the forum it seemed to me quite evident that many eGullet members have a certain kind of preference, but I don't really see a contrast between trattorie and restaurants myself. I do believe there is a distinction, if not at the nominal level, then at a conceptual one, between those places that are more anchored to family style cooking and those that offer a more creative take on cooking. That is not to say the distinction is sharp but rather we're looking at shades. It could be said that street food is one extreme and purely creative places the other. I do enjoy both the extremes, although admittedly more street food than avant-garde places, and the whole variety of eating out places one finds in Italy. Still I do understand, and pretty much share, Francesco's point on the Bill Brayson effect and I think he made a very good point saying that some of the best traditional dishes are found in top restaurants.

Something Faith Willinger said with her reply on Italian Chefs and Restaurants gave me quite a bit to think of. She has a point when, talking about people like Gennaro Esposito of Torre del Saracino, she says that:

The restaurants and chefs that thrill me the most express a sense of place and season.

I would still consider some of the chefs she mentions in the post as creative, but I guess it's a matter of definition. The important point she made mentioning those names, at least to my eyes, is that a chef can remain true to local ingredients and traditions without compromising creativity. Many of the best places in Italy are accused of being unable of doing so and being French. I don't share this view, but I understand the point behind that critique. The union of tradition and innovation is, to me, probably the only way for the development of a real and unique Italian haute-cuisine, which can subvert the common prejudice on Italian fancy restaurants. A way where the concept of restaurant and trattoria meet if you want, bringing out the best of both worlds. I think the Italian restaurant scene is showing quite a few sign that this is indeed happening, especially if you look at what some of the best young chefs are doing. There's plenty of creativity in their dishes, but also a great attention for the local traditional ingredients.

[Marco_Polo]

more than happy to. I would only like to make clear that this is not my opinion, so I'll try to do my best to sum up what I've been told by people who firmly believe in this point.

What a superb, well-argued and -written exposition and summing up of current trends and schools of thought in relation to dining in Italy today, Alberto.

My point is this: high-level restaurants provide creative cuisine, more or less, but they are often also the last defense for the traditional recipe and the best ingredient. Many, many Italian restaurants settle for much less. This might be better than what most visitors are used to, but it isn't the best.

Francesco, thanks for your well-argued defence of creative restaurants as places that elevate as well as celebrate traditional foods, produce, ingredients and recipes.

I've learned a lot from this thread.

Grazie!

Marc