Avant Garde In SF

[mcattaneo23]

For fear of being redirected to the Daniel Patterson post, which I found to be a very good discussion, I find myself pondering why isnt there any avant garde dining in or around San Francisco? Please do not get me wrong, I love the food here...its fantastic, I'm just curious.

Of course there is Chicago with Alinea, Moto, and Avenues to name a few. Then there is New York with WD and newly opend Gilt. DC has Jose Andres. Even Atlanta has its spot in ONE.midtown Kitchen.

Is this a matter of curious diners simply being content with the quality of products here and simple preparations, or simply a lack of options?? Are the chefs who are interested in this type of cuisine redirected to other cities to wxpress their ideas?

I believe this style of food can thrive in San Francisco if presented in the proper way. I am not convinced that Chef Morales is the best specimen of Avant Garde cusine for this city to base its decision on. The diners here are just as sophisticated as any in the country...someone needs to open their minds!! Please help a food lover get to the bottom of this situation!!

[dragonflychef]

well there has certainly been some exposure. for campton place before humm left and manresa in los gatos, however i think the main focus, at least in north cali is integrity of ingredients and more classical preparations, most other chefs i talk to, view avant garde food as more an intellectual approach, rather than a heart felt relationship with your ingredients, most also believe foams, atomizers, anti griddles , and liquid nitrogen as fads that will fade away, someone once said the perfect short rib never goes out of style

[AlexBernardo]

My best guess is that I feel this reflects the preference of the dining crowd. SF folks may be adventurous and love to try new things every now and then, but on a regular basis they prefer the familiar and the validated. I have lots of friends in town who peak at cassoulet and roast chicken, seared ahi and steamed mussels, tuna tartare and wood-fired thin pizza. Doesn't matter what style of resto it is, regional Italian, French, Cal-Ital, Greek. They expect to find most of these in the menu. It's almost death for a resto not to feature any of these dishes on the menu.

[docsconz]

This is a very interesting question. hile the quality of the ingredients of the area are probably as good or better than anywhere in the US and they beg to be featured, they are no better than what is available to the great avant-garde chefs of Spain for example. I would argue too that while technique is very important to avant-garde cuisine, the quality of the raw ingredients are no less so. Manresa certainly has the reputation of being a top "hypermodern" restaurant and I am very much looking forward to dining there.

[ingridsf]

What can I say. For all our reputation as debauched deviates (good times!) we’re just a bunch of food monogamists, some serial, some long-term, happy dontcha know, to order our roast chicken with Tuscan bread salad, foie gras lolly-pops, Tomales Bay oysters. “We’re a simple people, people of the land…*

Anyway.

“Innovative” is what I understand the term “avant garde” to mean. Unfortunately, avant garde has connotations of being overly intellectual, surreal, dry. An idea versus a flavor, an argument versus a taste. Like going to an art gallery where the pieces have cards mounted next to them that explain, explain, explain. Show, don’t tell!

I don’t know that I agree with the premise that the Bay Area has fewer innovative chefs than other US metro areas. As mentioned, we have Manresa. But there's the French Laundry; that's not innovative? We used to have Roxanne’s, too. There used to be a place, now gone, called Flying Saucer. Not thought of as a fancy place but definitely fit the definition of avant garde. It did well for quite a long time. Are there really that many more avant garde restaurants of similar quality elsewhere in the US?

Is seeking to create the perfect version of a classic recipe a lesser goal than trying to invent something new? (And whether that’s even possible is highly debatable.) The other thing I wonder is about the frequency with which chefs redo their menus. How many chefs in the Bay Area redo their menus seasonally, monthly, daily as compared to chefs elsewhere? Is offering a new menu every day "equivalant" to x units of new technique?

It does seem that there’s greater cachet (though not financial success) in doing the new and different even with flawed execution than there is in preparing a well-known dish as perfectly as can be done.

*”you know…idiots.” (tm Blazing Saddles)

[docsconz]

While Manresa and TFL are certainly within the greater Bay Area, they are not in San Francisco. It is somewhat but not totally surprising that the City itself does not have a major member of this style.

TFL while innovative is not really avant-garde or "hypermodern", a term that is gaining some favor as perhaps a more accurate description of these restaurants. Of course there really aren't too many in the rest of the US as a whole or even the world that fit firmly into this niche. The ones that come to mind are WD-50 and now Gilt in NYC, Minibar in D.C. and Alinea, Avenues and Moto in Chicago. Spain is the major repository of this style in Europe and perhaps along with The Fat Duck most stylistically in tune with the US "hypermodern" restaurants or vice versa. IMO the French and Italian adherents of "Molecular gastronomy" are stylistically somewhat different. There are, however, a number of top chefs who utilize a number of techniques taken from this movement even if their restaurants can not be neatly categorized within this framework. Michel Richard of Citronelle in DC is one who comes to mind.

While there is certainly a "cerebral" component to this cuisine, what it is not is dry or tasteless - at least not when done successfully. The best examples of the cuisine incorporate a lot of wit with either boldly evocative essences of familiar flavors that are often presented as a contextual surprise or challenging new flavor and texture combinations.

[ingridsf]

It might seem significant that the restaurants I mentioned are not within SF city boundaries but, living here, it doesn't seem so. Getting from SF to Los Gatos is not comparable to getting from Manhattan to, I dunno, Nutley. Staying out of SF could be plain old good business sense, if you can get the customers to come to you. Assuming space is in fact cheaper in Los Gatos!

I have no doubt hypermodern cuisine is not dry or tasteless. And, hey, I like me some wit. But avant-garde adherents might want to reconsider how the movement could be coming across to the uninitiated. If there was EVER a phrase destined to kill the mood for a meal of sweet sweet taste-making, it has to be "molecular gastronomy." ("To the re-flav-ulator!")

[mcattaneo23]

I too live here in the Bay Area and while yes I do love TFL and MAnresa and have been to both on a few occasions, they still do not fit the bill of avant-garde. TFL is about as classic as it gets, whimsical, but classic...and perfect in every way. Manrersa is definately more modern in its approach, but still not in the avant garde style.

Ingrid, avant garde goes beyond just being "innovative." While this is a component of the avant garde style there are many other things that go into this, including prenstation, foodstuffs, and length of menu. Doc I loved your point about avant garde chefs utilizing the same top notch ingredients that chefs are using here in SF. This is why I raise the discussion to begin with...we already have the ingredients...we just need the mind!!

Please do not get me wron, avant garde is not a style that I have yet been able to totally buy into. When it hits it hits on the mark, but when it misses...well just ask Chef Dufrense

[eje]

Ultimately, I think it comes down to money more than anything else.

You certainly have to have a willing and able chef of a certain bent; but, you also have to have backers who are willing to shell out for the lab like setting, experimental equipment, staff training, be patient through the experimental phases, etc.

Certainly, we have chefs experimenting with those techniques; but, until whoever holds the purse strings on San Francisco restaurants sees they can make a profit, we won't have a restaurant devoted to the "hypermodern".

[ingridsf]

I too live here in the Bay Area and while yes I do love TFL and MAnresa and have been to both on a few occasions, they still do not fit the bill of avant-garde.  TFL is about as classic as it gets, whimsical, but classic...and perfect in every way.  Manrersa is definately more modern in its approach, but still not in the avant garde style.

Please do not get me wron, avant garde is not a style that I have yet been able to totally buy into.  When it hits it hits on the mark, but when it misses...well just ask Chef Dufrense

←

I'm gathering then that avant-garde is a pretty narrowly defined term. Not complaining, just checking. Took a look at wd50's on-line menu and compared to Manresa's. Can you elaborate on where they part company, and how they stand in relation to Spain? And what makes the avant-garde style so desirable strictly fom a taste perspective? Cause I've got a lot of taste options, from many cultures that would be new to me, as well.

Naive questions, but there it is.

[dragonflychef]

I too live here in the Bay Area and while yes I do love TFL and MAnresa and have been to both on a few occasions, they still do not fit the bill of avant-garde.  TFL is about as classic as it gets, whimsical, but classic...and perfect in every way.  Manrersa is definately more modern in its approach, but still not in the avant garde style.

Ingrid, avant garde goes beyond just being "innovative."  While this is a component of the avant garde style there are many other things that go into this, including prenstation, foodstuffs, and length of menu.  Doc I loved your point about avant garde chefs utilizing the same top notch ingredients that chefs are using here in SF.  This is why I raise the discussion to begin with...we already have the ingredients...we just need the mind!!

Please do not get me wron, avant garde is not a style that I have yet been able to totally buy into.  When it hits it hits on the mark, but when it misses...well just ask Chef Dufrense

←

so by this statement are you saying chefs in the bay area, because they may not choose to do the molecular gastronomy thing that they dont have minds?

sometimes the smartest thing is restraint and knowing when to leave it alone

[mcattaneo23]

so by this statement are you saying chefs in the bay area, because they may not choose to do the molecular gastronomy thing that they dont have minds?

sometimes the smartest thing is restraint and knowing when to leave it alone

←

[docsconz]

It might seem significant that the restaurants I mentioned are not within SF city boundaries but, living here, it doesn't seem so.  Getting from SF to Los Gatos is not comparable to getting from Manhattan to, I dunno, Nutley.  Staying out of SF could be plain old good business sense, if you can get the customers to come to you.  Assuming space is in fact cheaper in Los Gatos! 

I have no doubt hypermodern cuisine is not dry or tasteless.  And, hey, I like me some wit.  But avant-garde adherents might want to reconsider how the movement could be coming across to the uninitiated.  If there was EVER a phrase destined to kill the mood for a meal of sweet sweet taste-making, it has to be "molecular gastronomy."  ("To the re-flav-ulator!")

←

Molecular Gastronomy is a term coined by Herve This and other scientists to describe the scientific explanations and experiments defining the processes of food preparation. These approaches have been instrumental in creating new techniques that have resulted in true creativity.

I very much enjoy hypermodern cuisine that is done well. This approach has provided the all around most enjoyable meals of my life so far. Nevertheless, I would never wish to eat this style or any other exclusively.I am also an ardent believer in the gastronomic and agricultural tenets of the Slow food Movement. In no way do I see these two approaches as being mutually exclusive. I am for variety, tradition and creativity. each has its place and the world would be much poorer without any of them.

[robyn]

There are very few "avant garde" restaurants in the US - and most aren't around for very long. E.g., La Broche in Miami lasted for a few months - the chef at Mosaico just left after perhaps a year or 18 months. My overall impression is that people go to these places once - to say that they've been there - or perhaps enjoy the food - and they don't tend to be "regulars". Restaurants in high rent districts want cuisine that will generate a more reliable flow of business.

A lot of these restaurants tend to be what 3 star French restaurants were to restaurant travelers perhaps 20 years ago - you planned trips around them and ate there once. Only possible exception is that those 3 star restaurants in France had regulars as well as "eating travelers".

Quite frankly - I thought the food in San Francisco was great. And I had stuff I hadn't eaten before - like quince. Robyn

[docsconz]

There are very few "avant garde" restaurants in the US - and most aren't around for very long.  E.g., La Broche in Miami lasted for a few months - the chef at Mosaico just left after perhaps a year or 18 months.  My overall impression is that people go to these places once - to say that they've been there - or perhaps enjoy the food - and they don't tend to be "regulars".  Restaurants in high rent districts want cuisine that will generate a more reliable flow of business.

A lot of these restaurants tend to be what 3 star French restaurants were to restaurant travelers perhaps 20 years ago - you planned trips around them and ate there once.  Only possible exception is that those 3 star restaurants in France had regulars as well as "eating travelers".

Quite frankly - I thought the food in San Francisco was great.  And I had stuff I hadn't eaten before - like quince.  Robyn

←

One of the problems is that this is not an easy cuisine, either to prepare or to appreciate. However, when it is done well it just clicks on so many cylinders. As for not generating regulars - check out the threads on Alinea and WD-50. I have twice travelled to Chicago in the past year primarily to eat at Alinea and I plan on doing so again, hopefully multiple times in the future. I also hope to return to El Bulli and plan to return to WD-50 as often as I can. In addition Minibar is high atop my list and Manresa is my primary culinary destination for my upcoming Bay Area visit as this has been high atop my wish list for some time.

Hypermodern cuisine is very labor intensive and difficult to prepare as it requires great creativity. Effect simply for its own sake is not sufficient. The effects have to work and produce a cuisine that is not only brilliant for its artistry, but also and predominantly for its culinary values.

Because hypermodern cuisine is so creative it is difficult for many diners to grasp, especially those who are set in their ways and "know what they like". That is not a criticism of anyone, simply an observation. Hypermodern cuisine requires a trust of the chef that is difficult for many people to give. When it works, though, IMO there is nothing better.

[ingridsf]

I'm pretty hungry as I write this. Hey, how about a cuisine that requires chefs to be dying for a nosh as they cook? We might see some very interesting concoctions out of that movement....

I don't think the original question was based on the idea that the avant-garde style was better than the considerable range of what we're already enjoying here. Why not add to what we have, right?

My response: Okay.

But thus far I'm not hearing much that moves me to seek such a restaurant out. And time requires choices.

Look, there's competition to be Ingrid's Next Top Restaurant. There's a long list of what I already want to eat, going back to the first thing, which were more steamed clams in melted butter when I was three. Is it possible to get enough of them? I'd like to find out. There are innumerable things in their unadulterated states that I have yet to taste, like mangosteens. I'm all but a blank slate on Swedish cuisine; shouldn't I go to at least one Swedish restaurant before prioritizing the hot new thing? Then there's St. John's. Am I really supposed to blow off Fergus Henderson and fried pig's tails for a foam, however fascinating the philosophy behind it? Well, color me unsophistimicated because I will always pick a piece of pig.

[ingridsf]

Because hypermodern cuisine is so creative it is difficult for many diners to grasp, especially those who are set in their ways and "know what they like". That is not a criticism of anyone, simply an observation. Hypermodern cuisine requires a trust of the chef that is difficult for many people to give. When it works, though, IMO there is nothing better.

For whatever it's worth, if people like you, who really enjoy and admire avant-garde cuisine, want more people to give it a try, I'd talk about the pleasure it gives you sensually. I've been wanting to go to Manresa (I know, it's not avant-garde) because of all of the posts by people who focused on the food itself. Yeah, of course I want the other cylinders you mentioned; but they don't mean jack to me without having the food as my reference point. So use the food to convince me to get to the restaurant. I'm in a much better position to grasp its philosophy, etc. after I have some first hand experience of it.

In my opinion -- and only in my opinion -- some of the descriptions of this cuisine are shooting it in the foot. I'm quite serious about avoiding phrases likes "molecular gastronomy" and "hypermodern." They may be accurate but they're about as appetizing as an episode of Sprockets.

I know it wasn't meant this way but hearing that my not feeling the lack of whatever it is avant-garde cuisine provides means that I'm set in my ways, or not open minded, or not trusting is a little like hearing, "You're a fogey and you know what? THAT"S OKAY."

Um, thanks?

[docsconz]

Because hypermodern cuisine is so creative it is difficult for many diners to grasp, especially those who are set in their ways and "know what they like". That is not a criticism of anyone, simply an observation. Hypermodern cuisine requires a trust of the chef that is difficult for many people to give. When it works, though, IMO there is nothing better.

For whatever it's worth, if people like you, who really enjoy and admire avant-garde cuisine, want more people to give it a try, I'd talk about the pleasure it gives you sensually. I've been wanting to go to Manresa (I know, it's not avant-garde) because of all of the posts by people who focused on the food itself. Yeah, of course I want the other cylinders you mentioned; but they don't mean jack to me without having the food as my reference point. So use the food to convince me to get to the restaurant. I'm in a much better position to grasp its philosophy, etc. after I have some first hand experience of it.

Have you read the posts on the food in topics such as Alinea, WD-50 or Philadelphia's Studio Kitchen for example? If they don't get you excited about the food, nothing will. I'm also not sure that Manresa does not fit into this world. That I will know better after first-hand experience at the end of March. I know that Chef Kinch uses many of the same techniques, is creatively original and focuses on multi-course tasting menus, things all these restaurants have in common.

In my opinion -- and only in my opinion -- some of the descriptions of this cuisine are shooting it in the foot.  I'm quite serious about avoiding phrases likes "molecular gastronomy" and "hypermodern."  They may be accurate but they're about as appetizing as an episode of Sprockets.     

I know it wasn't meant this way but hearing that my not feeling the lack of whatever it is avant-garde cuisine provides means that I'm set in my ways, or not open minded, or not trusting is a little like hearing, "You're a fogey and you know what?  THAT"S OKAY."

Um, thanks?   

←

I do believe that someone who is inflexible, fogey or not, will not take to this cuisine as it requires too much trust of the chef. That doesn't mean that someone who is not into it is necessarily inflexible or a fogey, though. One must approach this cuisine with a thoroughly open mind to get the most out of it. As for the descriptors, I think they work for people who like that sort of thing. Avant-garde is really a catch-all phrase for anything leading the way. Nouvelle cuisine was the avant-garde in the 60's and 70's. Hypermodern is a new term to try to distinguish the approach of these chefs with very different styles that are philosophically akin.

As for your statements above about how many conventional things you haven't tried that you are eager to, I say, go for them, but why is this style mutually exclusive from any of them? I feel the same way. There are many cuisines that I need to explore more and am thrilled to do so. There is no need for mutual exclusivity.

[mcattaneo23]

Doc, as I am sure you will discover, I find Manresa to be on the border. Chef Kinch does not take it quite as far as Chef Achatz et.al. He does incorporate some of the techniques such as sous vide cookery, but many of his dishes I would say are much less "experimental." Per one of your previous posts, although I have never eaten there, I think he fits into the category with Citronelle. A restaurant that I have been to that i think would be a accurate comparison would be a Bouley. Definately mixes in textures, temperatures etc.

Ingrid, as for convincing you with the food descriptors, I believe that this food goes beyod descriptions. It is more about an experience with food than it is just about the food. If you are not into this, then there is nothing wrong with that, it is just the style that you personally prefer.

For an example, I am very much looking forwad to the dinner at Incanto on Monday. This restaurant sits as a distinct dichotomy to the avant garde movement, and yet I still am very excited to try this restaurant. I think that the two styles are very different and yet can still be enjoyed and appreciated for their differences. Thanks for a great discussion!!

[ingridsf]

Doc, I realized right after posting I've never checked those threads. D'oh! Indeed I should. If I could, I'd actually go to those places and see for myself. But that's exceedingly unlikely.

Which brings me to your point about one style not being mutually exclusive, not better than the other. But I'm saying, Hey, there are only so many meals in this life, esp at that price level. Trusting the chef on a sense-level is not as difficult as trusting on a wallet-level, if I may be so crude as to say so. It's not impossible though.

***

I'm going to return to an earlier question I put out there about how even the flawed execution of the new/different seems to carry greater cachet than superior execution of established cuisines. At what point do you quit forgiving in the name of applauding ambition and snap, "Just get me a steak frites, I'm starving here!"

As dear Linda Richman would say: "Discuss." (If you want.)

***

I, too, will be at Incanto. Can't wait!

[robyn]

I have twice travelled to Chicago in the past year primarily to eat at Alinea and I plan on doing so again, hopefully multiple times in the future. I also hope to return to El Bulli and plan to return to WD-50 as often as I can. In addition Minibar is high atop my list and Manresa is my primary culinary destination for my upcoming Bay Area visit as this has been high atop my wish list for some time...

←

Dining once or twice at a place over a year or two hardly makes one a "regular". Quite frankly - with a lot of these places - they've opened and closed by the time I got around to visiting the city in which they're located. Alinea hasn't been open for even a year - and I suspect it won't be around next time I'm in Chicago (2007 or maybe 2008). Ditto with someone like Blais in Atlanta (I get there more often than I get to Chicago). His original place opened and closed between my trips there. Ditto with La Broche in Miami. I did manage to get to Mosaico in the short time the original chef was there (but I travel to Miami more often than most places). Robyn

[docsconz]

I have twice travelled to Chicago in the past year primarily to eat at Alinea and I plan on doing so again, hopefully multiple times in the future. I also hope to return to El Bulli and plan to return to WD-50 as often as I can. In addition Minibar is high atop my list and Manresa is my primary culinary destination for my upcoming Bay Area visit as this has been high atop my wish list for some time...

←

Dining once or twice at a place over a year or two hardly makes one a "regular". Quite frankly - with a lot of these places - they've opened and closed by the time I got around to visiting the city in which they're located. Alinea hasn't been open for even a year - and I suspect it won't be around next time I'm in Chicago (2007 or maybe 2008). Ditto with someone like Blais in Atlanta (I get there more often than I get to Chicago). His original place opened and closed between my trips there. Ditto with La Broche in Miami. I did manage to get to Mosaico in the short time the original chef was there (but I travel to Miami more often than most places). Robyn

←

The only reason I haven't been to alinea more frequently is because I don't live there. I would venture though that trips specially made for a restaurant would qualify even if it isn't as often as I would like. I am not a gambler, by any means, but I would put a wager on Alinea being there long after 2007. It is a truly special restaurant and it does not seem to have a shortage of patrons. There are plenty of traditional restaurants that open and close within a short period of time. So long as the business plan is sound a good restaurant of any ilk should survive.

[docsconz]

***

I'm going to return to an earlier question I put out there about how even the flawed execution of the new/different seems to carry greater cachet than superior execution of established cuisines.  At what point do you quit forgiving in the name of applauding ambition and snap, "Just get me a steak frites, I'm starving here!"

As dear Linda Richman would say:  "Discuss."  (If you want.)

***

I, too, will be at Incanto.  Can't wait!

←

I do not believe that this is the case. If the food doesn't pass muster it shouldn't matter what kind of cuisine is produced. It is harder to be a successful hypermodern chef, though, because people are expecting constant creativity. It is not enough to be new and different, though. The food must be that and delicious or else it won't survive. Why this food carries additional cachet (if it does) is because when it is successful it adds much more than simply delicious food.

[rjwong]

It is harder to be a successful hypermodern chef, though, because people are expecting constant creativity.

←

docsconz, I'm not completely convinced of that statement. People have always expected constant creativity. You should see all the trendy restaurants (and their copycats) that are popping up in Los Angeles. Rather, it is just plain hard to be a successful chef, period.

[dragonflychef]

It is harder to be a successful hypermodern chef, though, because people are expecting constant creativity.

←

docsconz, I'm not completely convinced of that statement. People have always expected constant creativity. You should see all the trendy restaurants (and their copycats) that are popping up in Los Angeles. Rather, it is just plain hard to be a successful chef, period.

←

russell, here here, doing anything at the top level is tough to achieve,and even harder to maintain and improve upon