Del Posto

[Jason Perlow]

Del Posto, Batali & Co.’s new 18,000-square-foot cucina classica juggernaut, is an out-and-out bid for four-star recognition in a town where, as far as Italian restaurants go, three’s the max. Not that Batali or his partners, Joe Bastianich, Joe’s mother Lidia (of Felidia fame), and Lupa’s Mark Ladner, would ever admit it. There is no surer way for a star-seeking restaurateur to end up in the soup, after all, than to come right out and say of his latest masterpiece, “If this isn’t a four-star clam shack, I don’t know what is.”

Del Posto (NYMetro)

See also:

New restaurants from the Fall Preview issue of New York Magazine

[oakapple]

Del Posto, Batali & Co.’s new 18,000-square-foot cucina classica juggernaut, is an out-and-out bid for four-star recognition in a town where, as far as Italian restaurants go, three’s the max.

If it's really true that Del Posto is gunning for four stars, I wish them a lot of luck. In the last year or so, we've had two restaurants open that clearly had four-star pretensions, and didn't even make it to three (Modern, Alto). Two others in the category were demoted to three (Bouley, ADNY). Whether those ratings were accurate is a whole other question, but historically it's a tough category to break into, and for an Italian restaurant the odds are about as long as can be.

[rich]

Four stars??? - totally depends on the type of music and/or the bathroom fixtures. The food has nothing to do with it.

[bpearis]

My office is in the Meatpacking District so I walked over to see what could be seen -- which is not much. It's just a huge, ripped-up raw space right now; lots of contruction workers hammering, welding, etc, but you wouldn't know it was a restaurant apart from the giant DEL POSTO logo that's on the construction barricade around the building.

Interestingly, directly across 10th Ave (in back of Chelsea Markets) is what will be Morimoto, also enormous and in very, very early stages of construction. Batali's place should be open first, if the level of activity at both spaces means anything.

[docsconz]

This will be an interesting one to watch. If anyone can do it, Batali can.

[dan.]

It might help that the one who decides these things may be getting a little treatment over his Italian restaurant reviews. Or it might not.

Edited September 8, 2005 by dan. (log)

[NYC Mike]

"Juicy rumor of the week: much anticipated Upper Meatpacking newcomer Del Posto (which we've been tracking since its midsummer plywood stage) is said to be starting tastings this week ahead of its December 12 target opening."

http://eater.curbed.com/

From today, man I wish I could taste...anyone have any more detail?

[adamru]

I passed by over the weekend and there were definitely people eating inside, but does anyone have a phone number to make a reservation? I can't find a website with one and no luck with 411.

[dan.]

Tomorrow's news today!

[oakapple]

In today's Times, Frank Bruni surveys the Batali/Bastianich empire (list of restaurants here), with Del Posto's imminent opening the article's raison d'etre. On the website, there's an accompanying audio slideshow, which includes Bruni making a rather lame joke about trying to get a reservation at Babbo.

The article suggests that he expects Del Posto to be an important restaurant, although he plants the seed for a three-star review that will complain the menu needs editing:

Expect $240 rack of veal, $220 shoulder of pork and a $200 whole king salmon for four to eight people, to be carved within view of the table, in a flourish of high ceremony from the Old World.

The proposed menu lists nearly 20 antipasti. It has more than a dozen pasta dishes, one with a jalapeño pesto, another with a tripe ragù, another with partridge.

And there will be more than 15 other entrees, including duck wrapped in porchetta; guinea hen with pumpkin; squab with wild arugula.

In today's New York Post, Steve Cuozzo points wonders whether the city is ready for another high-end Italian joint:

Mario Batali, who launches his largest restaurant yet this month, is braving the Italian Jinx of 2005. In a town with an unlimited appetito, three new, ambitious biggies from other celebrated Italian kitchen stars have all strained to fill seats.

The slow starters were among 2005's most hyped debuts. Yet, both Alto and Maremma have dumped their original esoteric menus, and Piano Due is still waiting for the crowds.

Their owners say everything's going to be just dandy. But let's hope Molto Mario has a smoother start with Del Posto, his venue for "cucina classica" opening soon on 10th Avenue behind Chelsea Market.

Edited December 7, 2005 by oakapple (log)

[Lesley C]

Halfway through reading that story in the Times today, I wondered whether the restaurant critic should have been the one to write up that story, a first-person story no less. It's a major conflict of interest if you ask me. Why is he already showing such favouritism to the place? Is he willing to give other restaurants he reviews such exposure?

OK, I understand there's a great story here. But IMO, Bruni is the last person on the staff who should be writing about this. Write a blurb in a news piece about several openings this month, fine, two hundreds words, OK. But a huge article with pictures and a ton of quotes? Weird.

Those Times reporters sure have their favourites. For Hesser it's Vongerichten. And for Bruni it's obviously Batali. That wasn't an article about Batali's new restaurant, it was an ode to his empire. By another staffer, hey, great. Who doesn’t admire Mr. Orange Clogs? But the critic? He should have kept his opinions for the review.

[Bux]

I think Lesley makes a very good point. It's not the kind of assignment I would have expected the NY Times to give to its regular restaurant reviewer. It could preface Bruni's moving on to culinary journalist and it doesn't necessarily imply he'll be unfair when reviewing Del Posto, but it seems untimely in the first case and unnecessarily questionable in the second.

As I read the article, I found the parts devoted to refinement to be curious. "They're after refinement over raw energy." Refinement is later defined as including reservations even for the lounge, "live piano music and, believe it or not, valet parking." It sounds more like Mulberry Street than Daniel or ADNY. "Marble, brass and bronze, all meant to evoke a centuries-old palazzo" doesn't do anything but reinforce that for me.

[Lesley C]

This hit me because I was once asked to write a profile of a new restaurant opening, and as a critic, I refused. It just seemed wrong for me to give so much space to one outfit over another when I was supposed to be looking at all the restaurants on a level playing ground.

I have, however, written shorter newsy pieces about restaurant openings. But when you get into the big blowout features, it looks like you're rooting for them, instead of being the neutral force I think readers expect of a critic.

[Sneakeater]

I never thought to notice this, but in the Arts Section of the Times, do they ever let the same writer write the preview and the review of the same event? To be sure, sometimes events that have gotten favorable before-the-fact build-up pieces get unfavorable after-the-fact reviews, but it would still look strange if they came from the same pen. If the Times doesn't let the same writer write both pieces in the Arts Section -- and I strongly suspect they don't -- it makes this practice in the Food Section seem doubly questionable.

Edited December 7, 2005 by Sneakeater (log)

[JohnL]

My understanding is--the Time's editor responsible for the food section is from New York Magazine. It is the paper's management--editors etc-that are responsible for the assignments.

IMOP-The Times has shifted from a "paper of record" to a more "lifestyle" oriented journal.

It seems to me that they are more interested in becoming "relevent" to their audience than in performing a journalistic service.

Thus, they see no possible blurring of entertainment and journalism here.

It is also IMOP-why their restaurant reviews are focusing more and more on identifying what the current "hip" restaurants are and why, many reviews spend a lot of time on "setting the scene" rather than balancing the traditional--food, service, decor reporting.

That is, they "see" their audience as having a set of priorities and they are, in turn, re- setting their priorities.

A bit of journalistic "pandering" if you will.

[ckkgourmet]

I don't know if I can entirely agree that Bruni is caught in a conflict of interest here. While I underestand that this gesture towards Batali's DP might be viewed as favoritism, one might also conclude that Bruni is doing an admirable service to the public by informing us about Babbo's progress. As I diner, I appreciate it. And besides, Bruni has anticipated the openings of many other restaurants, even if not quite in this lavish way. Not many months ago, I recall reading an article by Bruni that anticipated the openings of dozens of NYC restaurants, including DP. Like everyone else I was intrigued by the idea of Batali's bid for a four star place, which for anyone who is interested in food in NYC must stand as a notable happening of potential consequence. I have frequently wondered ever since Bruni's survey about DP and whether it would open soon. The update, therefore, was most welcome.

We can disagree about whether Alto should have received similar "hype" from a reviewer's pen. The fact remains that Batali is one of the country's celebrity chefs and thousands and thousands are devoted to his cooking. Bruni makes a good argument in his article that Batali changed New York City Italian dining by his enterprises, and for this reason alone we continue to be interested in his work. If Batali has decided that he would like to bring his cooking--and Italian cuisine in the US--to the next level, then I want to hear about it, and so do many other people. I do not think that Bruni was overly partial in tone either. Whatever publicity was garnered would have been garnered anyway because we are speaking, after all, of Molto Mario Batali. Resistence, in sum, is futile. Why not the NYTimes?--it's going to come from somewhere--and most diners want to know.

Let's just hope that Batali succeeds in making better and better food. I, for one, am a bit skeptical that he can manage, i.e. whether his talent and style is equal to the ambition.

[Sneakeater]

I don't think the issue is whether the article should have been written, but rather whether it should have been written by the paper's principal reviewer.

[Lesley C]

ckk, as I said before I think the story is a good one -- I would even go so far as to say an important one -- and I'm for Mr.Batali. I just don't think the reviewer should be writing this kind of piece.

(oops, sneakeater posted at the same time I did)

Edited December 7, 2005 by Lesley C (log)

[FoodMan]

Halfway through reading that story in the Times today, I wondered whether the restaurant critic should have been the one to write up that story, a first-person story no less. It's a major conflict of interest if you ask me. Why is he already showing such favouritism to the place? Is he willing to give other restaurants he reviews such exposure?

OK, I understand there's a great story here. But IMO, Bruni is the last person on the staff who should be writing about this. Write a blurb in a news piece about several openings this month, fine, two hundreds words, OK. But a huge article with pictures and a ton of quotes? Weird.

Those Times reporters sure have their favourites. For Hesser it's Vongerichten. And for Bruni it's obviously Batali. That wasn't an article about Batali's new restaurant, it was an ode to his empire. By another staffer, hey, great. Who doesn’t admire Mr. Orange Clogs? But the critic? He should have kept his opinions for the review.

←

I wonder how that fits in with their annonymity for critics stand ?

[Lesley C]

Well, one would assume hid did that interview over the phone.

[JohnL]

ckk, as I said before I think the story is a good one -- I would even go so far as to say an important one -- and I'm for Mr.Batali. I just don't think the reviewer should be writing this kind of piece.

(oops, sneakeater posted at the same time I did)

←

There are two issues here.

First--the paper's restaurant reviewer should not be writing this kind of piece.

Second--after reading it --I thought it to be the type of semi news--event announcement--publicists dream that often appears in the pages of New York Magazine (hence my point about the editor--though I am not certain the editor of the Time's Food section is in fact from NY Mag).

The story struck me as a better "fit" for the Times Sunday magazine--but that's just me.

Clearly, the opening of Del Posto is news but the article in today's Times seemed somehow out of place for the front page of the food section.

[oakapple]

I saw no conflict with Bruni writing such a piece. It was an entry in his quarterly column called "Critic's Notebook." This column is often used to discuss broader trends in the dining industry. It clearly was an opinion piece (such as one would expect from a critic), going through the restaurants in Babali's empire one by one, and providing (briefly) his view of each.

I see no evidence that Bruni is shilling for Batali. His first review for the Times re-affirmed Babbo's three-star status, but he was no great fan of Bistro du Vent, a conclusion he re-iterates again today. His comments on the other Batali restaurants are a mixed bag.

By the way, the Bruni writes another food column for the Times—the weekly Diner's Journal—which is sometimes used to provide an "early preview" (without assigning a rating) for restaurants that will later receive a full review.

I've always had the impression that the critic has pretty broad latitude to choose his subjects. I don't think this was Bruni's "assignment." He has a quarterly column to identify restaurant trends, and this was the "trend" he thought worthy of coverage on this occasion.

[Nathan]

I'm going to disagree with most of you.

"Those Times reporters sure have their favourites. For Hesser it's Vongerichten. And for Bruni it's obviously Batali. "

I don't agree...he's given Batali good reviews but not out-of-line ones (like Amanda did for JG). The survey of the Batali empire clearly contains some negative notes (i.e. the comments on deficiencies at Otto and Bistro du Vent).

Furthermore, I think Bruni was given this piece for one simple reason -- he is the specialist on Italian cuisine at the Times (and his reviews of Italian restaurants have been uniformly better than his other reviews). He was, quite simply, the best person to write this article.

I simply don't see the conflict of interest.

[JohnL]

I'm going to disagree with most of you.

"Those Times reporters sure have their favourites. For Hesser it's Vongerichten. And for Bruni it's obviously Batali. "

I don't agree...he's given Batali good reviews but not out-of-line ones (like Amanda did for JG).  The survey of the Batali empire clearly contains some negative notes (i.e. the comments on deficiencies at Otto and Bistro du Vent).

Furthermore, I think Bruni was given this piece for one simple reason -- he is the specialist on Italian cuisine at the Times (and his reviews of Italian restaurants have been uniformly better than his other reviews).  He was, quite simply, the best person to write this article.

I simply don't see the conflict of interest.

←

I don't think this is a question of conflict of interest.--Bruni will review the place when it has been open and that will be that.

The article is not a critical look at anything. It is a "soft" profile piece. I see no evidence that the story required the 'expertise" of an Italian food specialist. Or the analytical eye of the Time's restaurant critic.

It lays out the goals (hopes and dreams) of the owners of a new and ambitous venture in New York restaurants. I still see this as more comfortably ensconced in the Sunday Magazine.

Again, I see significant changes in the Time's direction and atmosphere. It is what it is.

[oakapple]

Furthermore, I think Bruni was given this piece for one simple reason....

←

Beyond that, I don't think Bruni was "given" the piece; he more-than-likely chose it himself, based on his broad remit to report on and critique trends in the NYC restaurant industry.