Bruni and Beyond: NYC Reviewing (2005)

[jogoode]

Bruni reviewed BLT Fish (2nd Floor) and it's been open only two months--less even. It opened in very early March! I supposed he wouldn't have reviewed it if he didn't feel it was ready. What does everyone think about this?

[IML]

The cheekiness of his reviews blows me away, and most has no real bearing on any part of a restaurant's quality, be it ambience, decor, service or food, and is instead an extended expository riff, a campy backstory of his own invention: Laurent Tourondel as an auteur gone mainstream, now playing at BLT Fish!

[Todd36]

Bruni reviewed BLT Fish (2nd Floor) and it's been open only two months--less even. It opened in very early March! I supposed he wouldn't have reviewed it if he didn't feel it was ready. What does everyone think about this?

←

The BLT Fish thread has its first report on Jan 18, so I think it must have been open for longer than you think, at least 3 months it would appear.

[jogoode]

Bruni reviewed BLT Fish (2nd Floor) and it's been open only two months--less even. It opened in very early March! I supposed he wouldn't have reviewed it if he didn't feel it was ready. What does everyone think about this?

←

The BLT Fish thread has its first report on Jan 18, so I think it must have been open for longer than you think, at least 3 months it would appear.

←

No, I'm talking about the formal second floor, which is what Bruni reviewed, not the casual first floor. He gave three stars to the former.

[Nathan]

Bruni reviewed BLT Fish (2nd Floor) and it's been open only two months--less even. It opened in very early March! I supposed he wouldn't have reviewed it if he didn't feel it was ready. What does everyone think about this?

←

The BLT Fish thread has its first report on Jan 18, so I think it must have been open for longer than you think, at least 3 months it would appear.

←

No, I'm talking about the formal second floor, which is what Bruni reviewed, not the casual first floor. He gave three stars to the former.

←

Normally I would find it rather deficient for a critic to review a restaurant 2 months from opening (try telling that to the hothead idiots on Chowhound who will lambast a restaurant for slow service on opening night!) but in this instance that criticism is mitigated by the fact that it's a very positive review.

In other words, if it had been a negative review the obvious retort would have been that he reviewed it too soon. However, instead (since it's obviously not intended to be a 4-star restaurant) Bruni seems to be saying that this restaurant is already maximizing its capabilities. If a 3-star restaurant is already functioning at a 3-star level, why not review it? So, I can't find much fault in this particular instance.

[jogoode]

The cheekiness of his reviews blows me away, and most has no real bearing on any part of a restaurant's quality, be it ambience, decor, service or food, and is instead an extended expository riff, a campy backstory of his own invention:  Laurent Tourondel as an auteur gone mainstream, now playing at BLT Fish!

←

I didn't feel that way at all. This review had more food and ambience information than many of Bruni's past review. The from-fish-to-land-back-to-fish context, complete with sea metaphors, was inevitable, if a little tired.

And I'm especially surprised that you think that "most" of the review "has no real bearing on any part of a restaurant's quality". Have you read the review? Of the 1,076-word article, Bruni uses about 300 for general comments, context (most of it necessary), and aquatic word play. The rest of the article is food, ambience, food, food, food.

[oakapple]

I may be the last foodie in New York to have reached this conclusion, but I am on the bandwagon: Frank Must Go.

In the early days, I was more tolerant than most. Even in so prominent a job as NYT food critic, there is an adjustment period. The incumbent needs time to grow into the role, and we need time to get acclimated to his reviewing style. To a degree, this would be true even if Bruni had earned his stripes as a food critic elsewhere. It was especially true here, because Bruni was more of a fan than a trained food writer. He clearly loved to write and talk about food, but more as an enthusiast than as a seasoned professional.

Bruni's now been in the job for about a year. If he was going to be an excellent critic, or even a merely acceptable one, that should have been apparent by now. Frank Bruni is unacceptable. Even if he turns it around (which would be miraculous), it is too late. A year was more than enough time for Bruni to acclimate to the role—assuming he even had the chops to be doing it in the first place, which it now appears he didn't. A two or three-month apprenticeship might have been tolerable. A full year is not. And there is no sign of things getting better.

Early on, I was at least able to say that Bruni was getting the ratings right. From the very first review (Babbo), there were signs of the irritating tics that infect Bruni's writing every week, and are only getting worse. But at bottom, Bruni rated Babbo three stars, and there is no serious argument that he was wrong about that.

But nowadays the star ratings, and even the restaurants he chooses to review, seem to come out of a random number generator. Last week, he gave one star to a diner (Florent). This week, he gave two stars to a restaurant many thought would be a serious candidate for four (Modern). And even where the rating is arguably correct, the anecdotes he chooses to make his points are anywhere from irrelevant to tasteless, whether it be the music (Babbo), the cholesterol (Wolfgang's), the clientele (LCB Brasserie), the plumbing (Alain Ducasse), his Italian roots (Ama), or the coat-check girl (Modern).

Bruni does everything he can to avoid writing about the one thing readers want most: the food. One can only infer that this part of the job is especially difficult for him, so he defers it until as late in the review as possible. When he finally does get around to critiquing the food, the prose is so awful it makes one cringe: "The grilled octopus is as fine as any in New York, and if its ablution of bergamot oil sounds like an eccentric marriage of gastronomy and homeopathy, it's really just a route to a subtle citrus zing, which is an effect Mr. Tourondel relishes."

Frank must go. His recent article on the late Pope John Paul II suggests the section of the paper where his contributions belong: obituaries.

[iheartoffal]

Pardon me if this has already been covered, but has anyone tried making a serious appeal to the NYT in regards to getting rid of this guy? Perhaps a petition signed by restauranteurs and real food critics might give them a hint.

[Bux]

I may be the last foodie in New York to have reached this conclusion, but I am on the bandwagon: Frank Must Go.

. . . .

. . . or the coat-check girl (Modern).

. . . .

Frank must go. His recent article on the late Pope John Paul II suggests the section of the paper where his contributions belong: obituaries.

←

I've come to terms with Bruni. As far as I'm concerned he can stay. Both the text and numbers of the Times restaurant reviews have tumbled so far in relevance since it was the review of record in NY, that it almost doesn't matter who writes them anymore.

However, I thought the quote from the coat check girl was some sort of indictment of a lack of professionalism he felt about the restaurant overall. That I've come not to care about what he feels is another story, but I lost a great deal of interest in what was printed in the Times back when Grimes wrote the reviews. The reviews haven't gotten better for me.

Sadly, it's almost been made to appear as if he writes obituaries for restaurants, if Florence Fabricant's interviews with Ducasse and Delouvrier can be trusted. Maybe you have to be French to take his reviews seriously. I say that as a francophile and with all due respect. I like the French, but the French like Jerry Lewis.

Historians on the site may remind me that I was also more supportive and less bewildered by his reviews in the beginning.

[oakapple]

I thought the quote from the coat check girl was some sort of indictment of a lack of professionalism he felt about the restaurant overall.

It was certainly made to appear that way, though he exercised poor judgment in choosing that particular example. I mean, it's certainly legitimate to withhold stars if there's an overall lack of professionalism in the restaurant. But if the service issues rise to that level, is there not a better illustration than an isolated remark by the coat-check girl?

Sadly, it's almost been made to appear as if he writes obituaries for restaurants, if Florence Fabricant's interviews with Ducasse and Delouvrier can be trusted.

←

This part is really not new. At the high end of the dining spectrum, there have always been careers riding on New York Times reviews. William Grimes was once asked about this. He said that a reviewer has to call the balls & strikes as he sees 'em. You can't withhold what you consider to be legitimate criticism because someone might lose his job.

In the last eighteen months:

Marion Burros demoted Union Pacific from three stars to two, and it has since closed.

Amanda Hesser demoted Compass from two stars to one, and Katie Sparks left shortly thereafter.

Frank Bruni gave V Steakhouse one star. JGV said in the press, "I don't do one-star restaurants." According to later stories, V is getting retooled.

Both Bruni and the Post's Steve Cuozzo slammed Cru's original pastry chef, Will Goldfarb. Coincidentally, the reviews appeared on the same day. Goldfarb is no longer at Cru.

On the other hand, I am not aware of any repercussions at Montrachet, Bouley, Asiate, or Café Gray, all of which have either been demoted or received poor reviews in the last eighteen months.

[Bux]

I thought the quote from the coat check girl was some sort of indictment of a lack of professionalism he felt about the restaurant overall.

It was certainly made to appear that way, though he exercised poor judgment in choosing that particular example. I mean, it's certainly legitimate to withhold stars if there's an overall lack of professionalism in the restaurant. But if the service issues rise to that level, is there not a better illustration than an isolated remark by the coat-check girl?

←

Call it artisitic license for someone who's writing to an audience that's not made up of those obsessed with food. I don't know which is more frightening, that there are those who are more obsessed with food than I am, or that the majority of those eating out, even in fine restaurants don't care all that much about food. Seriously though, somehow that remark struck a chord with me. It's so out of character with the service I've had at any of the Union Square Hospitality Group restaurants that I have trouble believing it's representive of the restaurant's level of service. It did remind me of the time a waiter stopped to interject a comment in the conversation we were having at the table. The three of us at the table were dumbstruck. It was a relatively upscale hotel dining room in Manhattan, not a diner somewhere.

Back to your point. That the isolated remark by the coat check girl doesn't stick out to me, actually reinforces the brunt of your argument.

[SobaAddict70]

Although to be fair to Mr. Bruni, he does say

But during my visits from February through April, its pleasures were inconsistent, its menu a patchwork of bold hits and noble misses.

so perhaps a two star rating for MoMA in that context is not quite off the mark after all.

...albeit a high-end two star. I have a feeling a re-review is in the works.

[rich]

Does it really matter what the person who reviews for the NY times says, writes, thinks anymore? Hasn't his significance become overwhelmed by his vast, relentless ego?

Those who make personnel decisions based on said reviewer's writings and comments are suffering from "knee-jerkitis."

[Fat Guy]

There's so much room for misinterpretation when reporting on interactions with waitstaff. I can't even count how many times I've heard the two sides of a story and been amazed at the disparate accounts from two people who were in the same place at the same time, ostensibly speaking the same language. Maybe the coat check girl was from Honduras. Who knows? Who cares? I doubt she was called by a reporter and asked to explain her remarks. One thing is clear, though: Frank Bruni seems to be a magnet for bad interactions with waitstaff, and likes to write his one-sided accounts of them. And at some point, you've got to assume that somebody who has bad service experiences at so many of the very best restaurants -- Ducasse, The Modern -- is himself part of the problem. Maybe he's carrying around a chip on his shoulder. Maybe he has toilet training issues -- actually we know he did, since he just wrote his toilet training autobiography on Wednesday. Whatever the issue is, surely he'd be happier in a different line of work.

[Jinmyo]

To be fair, Frank is the Carrot Top of restaurant reviewers. You just can't take that away from him.

[oakapple]

Does it really matter what the person who reviews for the NY times says, writes, thinks anymore? Hasn't his significance become overwhelmed by his vast, relentless ego?

The reviews are clearly less significant than they once were.

Those who make personnel decisions based on said reviewer's writings and comments are suffering from "knee-jerkitis."

←

I don't think we have clear evidence that people are making personnel decisions solely based on Frank Bruni's say-so. As clumsy as his reviews are, he may at times stumble onto real issues that the management already suspected. Even a broken clock tells the correct time twice a day. In Ducasse's interview with Florence Fabricant, he mentioned the Bruni review as a factor. That does not mean it was the only factor.

[Pan]

To be fair, Frank is the Carrot Top of restaurant reviewers. You just can't take that away from him.

←

That's funny, Jinmyo, but what does it mean?

[mikeyrad]

You know, I hang out on this board and a New York Mets fan board. On the Mets board, if a player has a bad game someone will post a "Release [insert player name here]" thread. I don't even want to mention what fans will post about a player whose performances are consistently subpar. So, I was thinking that maybe iheartoffal is on to something. I think a "Fire Bruni" thread is in order.

[Jinmyo]

To be fair, Frank is the Carrot Top of restaurant reviewers. You just can't take that away from him.

←

That's funny, Jinmyo, but what does it mean?

←

Carrot Top is a prop comic. Frank pulls out observations about just about anything other than food.

Carrot Top is better known for being reviled than for being funny and that is actually part of his shtick. Frank is better known for being irrelevant and his role as NYT reviewer being questioned than for his reviews.

One could go on but I had perhaps best not tell jokes I need to explain.

[senorshuckerman]

Observer piece:

here

I am shocked no one has posted on this, which I found via the Romenesko site, and was in yesterday's posts.

aside from the egullet mention

"If there was any doubt, Frank Bruni?s review of Sripraphai makes clear that he is waging an all-out assault on the star system as we have come to know it," one reader posted on the foodie Web site eGullet.

there seems to be alot of meat to digest.

[Fat Guy]

The Observer occasionally runs an interesting, in-depth food piece. It especially excels at food-media analysis. There isn't enough interesting food content in the Observer, though, to justify bothering to read it for food content. So we tend to get Observer pieces mentioned here on a long lag. That being said, this particular piece is not interesting at all. It's crap. It's a clueless celebration of the worst restaurant critic in the history of the Times. It's like they searched far and wide for the one person who is more out of touch with the New York dining scene than Frank Bruni, and they asked him to write an article about Frank Bruni.

[oakapple]

We tend to get Observer pieces mentioned here on a long lag.

Actually, this appears to be a pretty new piece, as it is up-to-date with reviews Bruni published through last week. The website page is dated May 12th (today).

That being said, this particular piece is not interesting at all. It's crap. It's a clueless celebration of the worst restaurant critic in the history of the Times.

←

That's a bit harsh. The article acknowledges that Bruni is controversial, and it quotes a number of people who are less-than-enamored with his performance.

[senorshuckerman]

It's crap. It's a clueless celebration of the worst restaurant critic in the history of the Times.

Apart from the discussion of the crappy quality of the article, I did not read the piece as a celebration of Bruni. Rather, to me, it came across as reporting on the NY dinning scene's puzzlement with Bruni, and his ...eccentricities...

[VeryApe77]

It's crap. It's a clueless celebration of the worst restaurant critic in the history of the Times.

Apart from the discussion of the crappy quality of the article, I did not read the piece as a celebration of Bruni. Rather, to me, it came across as reporting on the NY dinning scene's puzzlement with Bruni, and his ...eccentricities...

←

I didn't think it sounded all that Pro-Bruni either

[Michael Ruhlman]

The Observer occasionally runs an interesting, in-depth food piece. It especially excels at food-media analysis. There isn't enough interesting food content in the Observer, though, to justify bothering to read it for food content.

←

Excuse me for asking, but whose fault is that...?

Your fan,

m