Sugiyama

[Jinmyo]

I wanted to post a link to an online article on Sugiyama, did a search and couldn't find a Sugiyama thread. I was sure there was one. Anyway, here's the link: the link, she is jere.

Here's a sample line: "They affect a boisterous demeanor, and when a table pays up and leaves, they give a collective cheer, as if savoring the cash flow."

I know that many members think highly of Sugiyama...

[Miguel Gierbolini]

J, thanks for the post.  Pretty funny.  I don't think Sietsema minded the food terribly.  He just did not like the concept, the prices, some of the absurd diners and the staff.  Petty stuff.

[Liza]

Perhaps not the place to say, "I'll have what she's having".

[stefanyb]

I don't think Sietsema minded the food terribly.

Now wait a minute.  Are there two Sietsema's who are restaurant reviewers?  Thomas and Robert?

[Miguel Gierbolini]

Yes.  Tom writes for the Washington Post.  Robert is a restaurant reviewer for The Village Voice.  I think that Tom explained in his column that they are distant relatives.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Ah this is typical rich-baiting. Anytime I read a review that focuses on describing who else is dining there, that is code for not like us..  While I can understanding describing the crowd in general terms, focusing on specific people to the extent Sietsema has, is of no relevence to the food in any way, or to the experience of eating there. And while I am someone who certainly looks the crowd over whenever I eat anywhere, it hardly affects my meal. But when he says  "they give a collective cheer, as if savoring the cash flow," he isn't holding back any punches.

Regardless of whether one likes the food at Sugiyama or not(and I know people who go both ways about it,) one couldn't possibly describe Nao Sugiyama any other way but as being sincere. To eat there and to describe him or his staff any other way than being at your beck and call, one has to have gone there with an attitude to begin with. And if you wanted to understand why the prices are so high, all you have to do is have a conversation with Nao and he will tell you all about the special effort it takes, not to mention the cost of flying in many of the ingredients from Japan. That Sietsema, who would gladly delve into the most obscure details when reviewing an Egyptian meal that only costs $10 and would try and learn the source of the molokhiyya the chef used, would gloss over the big point of Suigayama tells me that he is more interested in appealing to his own sensibilities (and those who fit the Village Voice demographic) than getting to the bottom of the truth, or actually finding something delicious for his readers.

To me this is a perfect example of restaurant reviewing being about something other than the food and the service. And although there are many who spoke out in the other thread about the need for restaurant reviewers to be completetly anonymous and free from conflict, may I point out that in this instance, it was the restaurant who needed anonymity from the reviewer. That's  the only way they could have gotten a fair and unbiased shake.

[Bux]

That Sietsema, who would gladly delve into the most obscure details when reviewing an Egyptian meal that only costs $10 and would try and learn the source of the molokhiyya the chef used, would gloss over the big point of Suigayama tells me that he is more interested in appealing to his own sensibilities (and those who fit the Village Voice demographic) than getting to the bottom of the truth, or actually finding something delicious for his readers.

I've met any number of people who are so convinced an inexpensive or simple restaurant can't be worth raving about and thus not even worth trying, but I think there are more people unable or unwilling to pay a premium price for something that they prefer to mock those who are and do pay that price rather than learn to appreciate that expensive place or food.

Who knows, I may have done that myself. I suspect many of us may do it subconciously, but it's one thing to convince yourself that the place you cannot afford is a rip off. It's quite another thing to establish a professional reputation for it. It's also worth noting that what people who are comfortable in a certain situation see as a positive gesture, may be seen as a negative by someone who is uncomfrotable to begin with. While most of us want something other than a straight report of what was serrved at a restaurant, here it seems a pity that we got the reviewser's reaction rather than an impartial description. That's one more reason why I think it's hard to get too much out of any one review unless you know the reviewer or the restaurant from experience.

I don't want to knock Sietsema as I don't know his reviews well, but it's easy to find yourself in a niche where you are an  expert in a small area and through years of communicating with those in that area, you find yourself out of touch with, and unappreciative of, even bordering interests.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Bux-Over the years I have found Sietsema's work to be pretty reliable. But he has always been a sucker for authenticity over

deliciousness which has made me wonder about his palate. Here, as soon as he says;

"the meal affords a chance for bored sushi chefs to show off, and compete with their haute-cuisine colleagues to pluck the largest bills from your pocketbook."

Sietsema is just another writer (whether in print or on the Internet) who relies on the standard derogation that is code for, this is food for people who have more money than sense. Why do I feel that he would write the same thing about Bras, Adria or Robuchon?

Negativity for Sietsema and his ilk isn't only driven by price, it is often driven by who patronizes a restaurant and do they find the  people acceptable. A famous argument amongst that crowd was about the restaurant Elias Corner in Astoria, Queens. It was one of those unknown, cheap Greek fish houses that everyone dreams about finding. Well one day Eric Azimov found it and as a result of newly found patronage from Manhantanites who drove or trained out to Queens for dinner, it moved across the street to a larger home. Well it didn't take long for it to go onto all of the must avoid lists. Now while the quality might have varied some due to increased business, I assure you that they used the same fish supplier, same cooking implements, and from what I saw every dish was grilled to order the exact same way it used to be. But to read about it you would have thought the quality of the food became the same as what they served at Red Lobster.

I often wonder why there is such consternation about food, the price of food, and who gets to eat food. I'm quite happy that dinner tomorrow night might be a $5 souvlaki sandwich and a beer from a storefront on MacDougal Street and then the Taylor Bay Scallops with an expensive bottle of old riesling the next night at Union Pacific. Tis a shame that not everyone sees it that way.

[Jinmyo]

I agree. It is wonderful to be ominvirous and catholic in tastes. And yet to have the good taste and good sense to know that you often do get what you pay for and $100 or more is not too much to pay for excellence.

I think some people simply cannot understand that food could and can be worth spending money on. There's a miserliness about food that is often brought to household budgeting. Buy the cheap roast or the utility chicken from the grocery store. But buy a fistful of DVDs.

[Steve Plotnicki]

Jin-I am certain that if you served the type of people we are talking about a mass produced chicken, they would have convulsions of disgust. But serve them the same exact chicken but having been prepared by a newly arrived immigrant chef who prepares a cuisine that isn't often found in NYC, it becomes fantastic. And this reverse elitism operates at a higher level as well. Take the same person to France and the Poulet de Bresse they hate at a 3 star restaurant is the same one they love when it's served by some old fashioned Grandma type still running a bistro.

[Jinmyo]

Steve P, I'm sure you're right. I don't have much of a sense of the Voice readership and haven't read many of their reviews. But I think the title "Counter Culture" is telling.

[Mao]

I am not going to jump up and defend the current state of Sugiyama.  I am frankly a little worried about what used to be one of my favorite restaurants.  My last two trips over the last 4 months have not been on the same level as any of the meals I had last year; and I am worried that lack of business is forcing the place to cut back on the quality of ingredients.

That said, the Sietsema piece spends as much time socially dissecting a group of overly scripted caricature patrons (I have yet to encounter anyone remotely like this on multiple trips to the place) as it does describing his ONE meal at the restaurant.  Propaganda in the service of class warfare and the portrayal of a decadent and non discriminating moneyed class had its role in cold war propaganda films  about the decadent West, but strikes me as slightly heavy-handed and disingenuous in contemporary food criticism.  As Steven suggests, Sietsema seems motivated by a quest for a myth of authenticity in which "true" food is the product of the toil of noble and impoverished immigrant masses, a vision that simply banishes the possibility that food above a certain price level is anything but supreme artifice by and for the artificial.

[Steve Klc]

I sense Plotnicki and Mao are spot-on with their deconstruction of the reviewer in this case--Robert Sietsema.  Spend any amount of time exploring his canon--and all credit is due to the Village Voice for maintaining Sietsema's reviews online--and a few things become clear:

He can be a deft writer and is very comfortable waxing poetic about the inherent or implied intricacies, mystery and sophistication of rustic, cheap, ethnic foods. While he loves floating foreign culinary jargon around as often as Pierre Herme sprinkles fleur de sel on desserts, there's little in his online record to inspire or lend credibility outside of his mucking on and on about generous, cheap portions of ethnic yet noble cuisines. He seems the classic "Cheap Eats" guy--perhaps the model for all sorts of alternative, free City Papers around the country or a mantra for at least one other food discussion site I'm aware of--with a palpable relativist attitude, a barely disguised social disdain and that's about it.  I'd no sooner trust his Sugiyama recommendation as I would any restaurant he chose to review with entrees over about 10 bucks.

I'm sure he's a reliable go-to-guy for the low-end, from tacos to tapas, as long as neither are prepared by any known chef.  

I searched for one column which mentioned wine and couldn't recall one. Wine with food?  What a concept!

Bux, when you surmise "it's easy to find yourself in a niche where you are an expert in a small area and through years of communicating with those in that area, you find yourself out of touch with, and unappreciative of, even bordering interests" I think you are onto something, but being generous.  I'd go farther--based on the available website reviews: this Sietsema (unlike Tom) has a faux world-view: small-minded, anti-chef, anti-pastry chef, anti-West and anti-fine-dining. If he is not already a self-parody or caricature, he at least risks continued marginalization on the fringe in such a way as to ensure irrelevance when his readers grow up or wise up.

Come on, how often can you read some variation of "Though the (insert flowery adjective here) orbs of finely minced mystery meat are certainly of (insert obscure foreign country here) origin, the (foreign-sounding name) rolls ($1 or less) reminded me of (insert familiar, refined European country here) pasties. The rich, perfumed filling of (fill in seemingly weird combination of ingredients, revealing a great culinary mind at work.  Note to editor: weird is ok because the dish is cheap; if it were Sugiyama or, pardon me for stooping to toilet humor, "haute cuisine"--weird would be bad) is then dotted with (some exotic sounding spice or herb) and the (blah) wrapper is further dipped in (more blah blah) before frying for added crunch" and not grow tired or bored?

[Steve Plotnicki]

Steve Klc - An excellent follow-up to our criticism of Sietsema. If one were to analyze the various ingredients they serve at Sugiyama, the menu on any given night has gems flown in fresh from Tokyo that are truly worthy of oohs and ahs. Whether it be funny Japanese mushrooms or real Kobe beef, it is always at least one or two things per meal. And they don't keep it a secret either because the waiter usually describes each dish.

I have found that this rejectionism of quality goods and ingredients, which includes expert preparation, by the cheap eats crowds have left them with less than the necessary faculties needed to be expert in things culinary. But it is like my friend Sasha Katzman says, it was only after he got to drink all the great wines of Bordeaux and understand them that he was able to understand which $10 wines were the really good ones. I think it is no different here. How reliable is the opinion of someone who has rejected a top quality chicken, whether it be for price point or where it was being served, when they recommend a roast chicken at an Bolivian restaurant in Jackson Heights?

[Bux]

Bux, ... I think you are onto something, but being generous.  I'd go farther--based on the available website reviews: this Sietsema (unlike Tom) has a faux world-view: small-minded, anti-chef, anti-pastry chef, anti-West and anti-fine-dining. If he is not already a self-parody or caricature, he at least risks continued marginalization on the fringe in such a way as to ensure irrelevance when his readers grow up or wise up.

...

Note to editor: weird is ok because the dish is cheap; if it were Sugiyama or, pardon me for stooping to toilet humor, "haute cuisine"--weird would be bad)

I am generous to a fault.  

The operable word in the second quotation is "authentic." Weird is a test of your inner senses when it's ethnically authentic. Sietsema is not the only one, nor the worst of these gurus. Weird is also more than just okay when you are the first to spread the gospel of "discovery." These guys will fight over who discovered what whether they were the first to eat the best of the authentically weird.

No I'm not so generous, I just like to smoothly pass them by after bumping shoulders with this sort too often. They have, in fact, removed much of the joy from eating the foods they claim to love.

[gullet]

Has anyone been to Sugiyama on 251 West 55th Street?

I have always wanted to try a kaiseki dinner and I read that this was a good place to go.

Any suggestions or advice would be greatly appreciated.

[cabrales]

As of 2Q 2002 at least, Sugiyama was a good place to go. The non-sashimi and sashimi-related items were both good, including the US-bred Kobe-type beef which is served on a little piece of rock or a burner (I forget). I remember good abalone sashimi; note the most expensive kaiseki level was ordered, I believe.

It's necessary, for the experience, to be seated at the sushi bar.

You may wish to consider the below thread:

http://forums.egullet.org/ibf/index.php?s=...369&hl=sugiyama

[LaNiña]

Is it at all cozy feeling at the bar? What about Saka Gura?

[cabrales]

Nina -- Cozy as in cramped? Slightly (kaiseki is sometimes associated with more luxurious surroundings, I guess). Cozy as in a homestyle, friendly environment? Yes.

[Steve Plotnicki]

You don't have to be seated at the Kaiseki bar but it helps if you are the interested type. It gives you a chance to talk to the chef about what he has served you. But sitting at a table is fine. Gee I haven't been since before the summer. I have to go for the holidays.

[Michael Laiskonis]

While I can't offer much in the way of a comparison to anything else in NYC, I really enjoyed my meal there in July. I sat at the bar with my boss, a Japanese chef... which, perhaps inspired Nao to improvise a few things he might not have otherwise... there were a couple of dishes that were described to me as sort of Japanese comfort/soul food. We did the six course kaiseki with Kobe. We had a great time, though I always had it in my head that kaiseki was more of a solemn, contemplative experience, which Sugiyama is not. Would return, but perhaps I would like to try some other places first...

[vivin]

My meals at Sugiyama have been extremely good to not very good (last I went was this spring). In what I have heard from other people (and experienced myself). it has gone from one of the best kaiseki places to just good. Hopefully, it was an off night. Hope you have better luck. Please report back if you do go.

[gullet]

I opted to get the Nao Sugiyama's choice of 8 dishes along with Kobe Beef.

Course 1

Monkfish and tofu compote with a small dish of chysanthemum leaves and matsutake mushroom. The compote was accompanied by a grated radish and scallions in a tart, ponzu sauce. The tartness was a nice balance to the creaminess of the compote and the greens were a nice palate cleanser.

Course 2

A basket of small bites including omelet, edamame, whitefish cake on a stick, tuna cake, small tiny crab, sweet potato, and a bay berry in gelatin. Simple and clean which was a nice prelude to some of the latter more complicated dishes.

Course 3

Sashimi which included 2 pieces of yellowtail, 2 pieces of tuna, and then 1 piece of squid, uni, marinated fluke, giant clam, and red snapper. As for the sashimi, the only relevant comment I can make is that it was exceedingly fresh. Even one person who normally does not like squid, enjoyed the piece here.

Course 4

Clear soup with whitefish, tofu skin, ginko nut, mushroom and green vegetebale stems which I believe was parsley served in a teapot. The lid was removed and formed a small bowl where we were instructed to pour some soup and then use the chopsticks to fish out the more solid items. The soup was subtle but very nice.

Course 5

Possibly one of the best lobster preparations I have ever had. A lobster was split in half and then heated on a hot platter over the stove flame. The tail meat was sweet and extremely tender. The head part had been scooped out and filled with an uni and lobster roe sauce which provided an unctuous counterpoint to the lobster meat. Along the side of the dish were shitake mushroom and asparagus. This dish was simply incredible.

Course 6

Another array of different tastes. In the upper left corner was a crab and caviar in a creamy sauce. In the upper right corner was 2 slices of seared tuna with a side of carrot and cabbage in a ginger/miso sauce. Along the front was unagi and japanese tai sushi prepared more along the lines of kyoto style which is rectangular style and has more rice and it also included baby abalone. Good but it was probably the least impressive course.

Course 7

Hot stone grilled food. The kobe beef was delicious, tender, juicy and beefy. Whether or not it justifies a $50 surcharge is another question but it was good. Other options included seafood (lobster claw and some fish) or prime beef. With a side by side comparison against the prime meat, the Kobe beef was superior and was nice treat.

Course 8

Sticky rice with crab and mountain vegetables steamed in a banana leaf served along with white miso soup and pickles (carrot, radish, and cucumber). As if we were not full already, along comes this course. Sublime.

Dessert was grapefruit in jelly along with scotch and heavy cream. A delicious way to end the meal.

My overall impression is that the first experience where every dish is a surprise will be the best. From what I have read, some dishes like the monkfish liver get repeated. If I had more money, I would like to have tried to order a complete omakase meal as I saw a Japanese couple relishing some crab that I had never seen before.

Overall the amount of food was huge, enough courses to make maybe 2 dinners. One of the best Japanese meals I have ever had.

[vivin]

Gullet,

thanx for the report. Good to know Nao Sugiyama is hitting the high standards that he himself has set. Would you care to compare the meal to some other great kaiseki meals you have had (specifically where).

vivin

btw, Gullet, you spoke of a surcharge for the Kobe course. When I have been there, at least twice the Kobe was included without a surcharge as part of the omakase (which is the only meals I have had there). Would you mind telling us (or emailing me directly) how much was the meal?

[gullet]

I guess surcharge is not really an appropriate term.

Of the menu choices, my wife chose the 8 course without Kobe which is $100 and I got the 8 course with Kobe which is $150.

The only difference between the 2 meals was the Kobe beef substituted in Course 7 so I viewed the 8 course with Kobe to be the same as my wife's 8 course dinner basically with a $50 surcharge for Kobe beef.

The only similar experience that I have had would be at Makoto in Washington, DC. I would love to go to Japan and try something there but I have a feeling it would be much, much more expensive.

As opposed to where Sugiyama would give you upwards of 8-9 tastes in a course, Makoto would offer 3-4.

Since I have been to Makoto many times, the usual offering is 8-9 dishes which normally consists of

2-3 seasonal dishes (for example tofu skin wrapped fish cake in a light bonito broth)

and includes

sushi course

sashimi course

soba course with a choice of toppings such as (mountain yam, mushroom, soy bean, wild vegetables, etc.)

a hot stone dish (usually a few pieces of seafood such as shrimp and/or scallop, mushroom, beef)

a "main dish" - a small 3"X5" piece beef tenderloin, orange roughy in miso, yellowtail or salmon

tempura course (have had softshell crab and shrimp before)

grape ice for dessert

As for the sushi and sashimi courses, Makoto consistently serves the freshest fish in the DC metro area but not on par in terms of breadth as compared to a place like Sushi Yasuda. I consider Makoto to be one of the best values for great food.

The price for the set menu at Makoto... $45.