2007 Michelin New York

[milla]

There's no conflict between publishing bios and maintaining anonymity. Inspectors don't have to reserve using their real names. Bios could even be published without names. The failure to publish information about the inspectors should create, at least for the skeptic, a presumption that Michelin has something to hide. Likewise, the quirky nature of the guide indicates that the inspectors are collectively not well informed about the New York dining scene -- that they may learn enough in three or four years to fake their way through assembling the guide gives me little comfort. And what we know from the Remy book and general experience about Michelin's politicization and lack of rigor also introduce a negative presumption.

←

Bios could be published without names? Just tease them a little?

I don't buy it. the presumption that they have something to hide because they don't publish bios is an uninformed skeptic. There is another word for that.

Everything else is difficult to respond to due to the subjective nature of the comments and opinions.

I certainly understand your point, btw....

Edited November 4, 2006 by milla (log)

[chefboy24]

I'm glad to see that the posters on this site are not gonna let Eater tell them what to do.

←

was there ever a doubt in your mind?

[raji]

Certainly there are about as many people in Japan who speak passable English as there are people in the US who speak passable Japanese

I'd love to see any evidence for that claim. Perhaps you'll find it if you research the mandatory English education programs in Japanese schools. Not that guidebooks speak. I think you'll find that the number of Japanese who can understand written English is about infinity times the number of Americans who can understand written Japanese. Not that you need to understand much of any language to read a Michelin guide, since the Michelin red guides don't really say anything. They're great gifts for space aliens who speak purely mathematical languages and don't care about the reliability of their sources.

←

Japanese people are supposed to be able to *read* more English than they *speak*. Which is why your hotel concierge won't let you leave the hotel without a card or instructions written in Japanese detailing the places you want to go - and how to get back to your hotel. Note that I am not fussing at the Japanese. How many Americans can put together a single coherent sentence in French 10 years after their last high school course? I used to speak fluent Spanish - and my fluency has disappeared rapidly after 10 years of non-use. By the way - one reason Japanese may be able to read English better than they speak it is one form of "Japanese" writing is Romanji - which is the use of the Latin alphabet to write the Japanese language. But that's like saying I can "read" French (without understanding a word of what I'm reading).

←

Just to weigh in this part of the debate, all Japanese students take a mandated 6 years of English study (probably since the occupation) although it can be less in the countryside. The focus is on grammar and antiquated English situational speaking. Outside of English class the vast majority of Japanese hardly ever get to use it while they're learning it. A current debate in their educational system is also HOW they are taught - more progressive teachers want to teach English with natural pronunciation, while it is currently taught primarily with the pronunciation of the Japanese alphabet (nah nee new ney no, only 5 vowel sounds exist), because modern Japanese has incorporated SO MUCH foreign language, primarily English. If you take 1 day of Japanese and learn this alphabet, you can probably communicate with a Japanese tourist 1000% better just by pronouncing English using their katakana alphabet. (instead of saying Internet, say eentanetto)

As to their speaking ability, you'll find far more Japanese speaking English usefully than the reverse... it's often IN there, it's just a matter of shyness and lack of speaking experience. How many schools in the US offer Japanese; most American Japanese speakers took it in college.

And tourists are seemingly their #1 export! You can judge the state of their 15-year recession and exchange rate merely by counting heads at Rockefeller Center and Yankee games. Indeed many restaurants can stay open beyond their usefulness by catering to the right tour guides or getting featured on Japanese TV. So a pretty big economic force in NYC. Although a lot of the coin goes right back into the Japanese community as I can't tell you how many times I've had to go get Japanese food with a friend who's here for a few days just so they can tell me how much it sucks here...

The vast majority of tourists refer to the "bible" Chikyuu no Arukikata which means the way one walks the globe - it's a travel guide combining shopping, dining, entertainment -

http://www.arukikata.co.jp/city/NYC/index.html

Try clicking around and using babelfish, you can see their info doesn't age well.

I've been known to grab them out of the hands of tourists on the street and throw them in the trash.

However there are tons, it's got to be the most covered topic of any travel literature I've ever seen. That includes TV coverage as there are daily and weekly shows dedicated to NY living and travel to this day... FujiTV broadcasts live from NY to Japan every weekday morning.

The younger set refers to the magazine and speciality guides, the most famous has to be the one produced by BRUTUS magazine which is really fantastic, I try to get it every year for shits and giggles and it's meticulous coverage of dining, shopping, architecture, etc.

Zagat's produced in Japanese now so they're getting bigger every year.

I'm going to laugh at seeing Michelin's Japan guide. It will undoubtedly be a guide that caters to Euro-laden tourists in foreign-friendly areas rather than the adventurous types with adventurous palates who can carve enough time out of the 14-hour flight to master the phrase "Let me get what's popular here" or "Do you have an English menu" and can respect the local customs - many places either have an English or picture menu.... maybe I should start a guide myself or arrange culinary tours, as everyone I know wants to go to Japan at least once, and a single visit open's ones eyes to what Japanese cuisine is capable of... that's one bitch of a flight though.

Edited November 5, 2006 by raji (log)

[Simon_S]

I've watched this thread with interest, since I am quite likely to be a visitor to NY sometime next year. My last visit (6-7 years ago) was very unsuccessful on the food front (in fact, I ate some really poor meals there) and it's not a mistake I intend to make again.

Under normal circumstances, when travelling to somewhere I don't know well in Europe, I will use Michelin as a first approximation guide. If I can supplement that with more in-depth knowledge from local forums here, great. In general, getting a picture of the "top-end" is quite easy. For me, 2 or 3 stars says something serious, and whether it's 2 or 3 is almost irrelevant. 9 times out of 10, the stars correlate pretty well with opinion found online, so I can generally figure out where to go for a top meal.

The problem arises in the more "day-to-day" stuff. This is where Michelin comes into its own. When I find myself walking around an area I don't know and I hear that stomach grumble, what then? A simple, text-light, symbol-heavy guide is exactly what I'm looking for.

Of course, if one has everything planned in advance, maybe it's possible to know where every meal will be eaten. However, a look at the NY board on this forum suggests that it is an absolute minefield for a tourist. I've looked at it for a while, and to be honest, I don't really know where to start. Of course, the people posting on that forum are people who know NY intimately, and could certainly be considered experts on the dining situation there. But it is the nature of such a forum that the posters assume a certain amount of knowledge from other posters. That way, detailed discussions are possible and the minutiae of menus and comparisons in very narrow categories can be examined. That's great, but it's not much use for me, searching as I am for broad-brush-stroke answers.

Honestly, for the tourist, I think guides that are too detailed are useless. I need the forest, not the trees. For detailed info, I'll look elsewhere.

Final thought: I've seen the viewpoint that Michelin just doesn't "get" NY (or San Fran, or whatever). Maybe so, but as a European going to NY, I'm not convinced I'm going to "get" it either. If my views tally with Michelin as an outsider, then that's pretty useful to me.

The fact remains, as a tourist looking for info on mid-level restaurants, there's no one source I trust more than Michelin, and there's no one source that I find more accessible.

Si

[Fat Guy]

That's the scenario in which guidebooks are indeed far more useful than online sources, reviews, etc. The information is organized and packaged with the walking-around or driving-around tourist in mind. I've been known to pull a dog-eared Zagat guide (I'm still using 2004 because nobody has sent me a free one since then) out of the glove compartment when I find myself in an unplanned, uninformed, unfamiliar neighborhood situation. I'm more likely to use Zagat for that, however, simply because the quantity of data is so much larger than what any other guidebook (and certainly Michelin) offers. Zagat is a relatively comprehensive, annotated, well organized (in many different ways), nicely sized address book of a city's restaurants. Nobody can touch Zagat for that. Technology is likely to push harder against the guidebooks soon, though. We're not too far away from people having really good mobile web access facilitated by GPS -- it should eventually be as common as having a cell phone. At that point the package the guidebook comes in will cease to be an advantage. That may open up the field a bit. Simon, the only thing you've said that I disagree with is the "If my views tally with Michelin as an outsider, then that's pretty useful to me." I think it's worth the investment of time and effort, when going anyplace, to learn why locals view things the way they do. Otherwise you wind up in the places that cater to tourists. For most tourists, that's what they want, but for anybody with 100+ eG Forums posts it's not likely to be the real goal.

[Simon_S]

Simon, the only thing you've said that I disagree with is the "If my views tally with Michelin as an outsider, then that's pretty useful to me." I think it's worth the investment of time and effort, when going anyplace, to learn why locals view things the way they do. Otherwise you wind up in the places that cater to tourists. For most tourists, that's what they want, but for anybody with 100+ eG Forums posts it's not likely to be the real goal.

←

You're right, FG, it's certainly not my goal. Expect my presence over in the NY forum shortly...!!

Maybe the point I was trying to make is not so relevant in NY. I was really thinking of Raji's post, above, and about what Michelin is trying to be. The comment "It will undoubtedly be a guide that caters to Euro-laden tourists in foreign-friendly areas rather than the adventurous types with adventurous palates" got me thinking. To my mind this, in many ways, is not really a criticism. Like it or not, Michelin *is* a guide for tourists eating in a strange land with, potentially, very different palates and expectations to the locals. I'm not sure that Michelin is or should be catering for the limited few with adventurous palates. The concept of "good food" may be reasonably well-defined when you stay in one tradition, but when attempting to cross cultures things get much more difficult. I don't want to drag this any further off-topic, but should the best dog-meat restaurant in Vietnam get 3 stars?

Katz deli in NY is a good example of a restaurant that I will certainly visit, but that I may not enjoy. Personally, I find sandwiches full to bursting to be somewhat stomach-churning. Is this a European thing? Possibly. To push this argument to it's (il?)logical limit, if I then, as a European with different expectations of a sandwich, find the Katz version objectionable, then maybe a guidebook for a European palate should echo my views, not the views of the locals.

I'm in murky territory here, and saying things I don't necessarily believe. I think I'll stop.

Si

[Fat Guy]

should the best dog-meat restaurant in Vietnam get 3 stars?

←

Depends on the wine list.

[raji]

To my mind this, in many ways, is not really a criticism. Like it or not, Michelin *is* a guide for tourists eating in a strange land with, potentially, very different palates and expectations to the locals. I'm not sure that Michelin is or should be catering for the limited few with adventurous palates. The concept of "good food" may be reasonably well-defined when you stay in one tradition, but when attempting to cross cultures things get much more difficult.

Well, I'm the type that, if I'm going all the way to Japan from NY, or all the way to NY from Europe for that matter, I'm going to want to "do in Rome". There are the types of tourists that will, for example, stay in a Hilton no matter where they go. So they like to say they've been in the Hilton in NY, and the one in Thailand, and the one in Brazil, even though it's essentially the same Hilton everywhere they go -

Same goes for restaurants, I get the feeling the Michelin grades on a scale where that restaurant could be picked up and plopped down in any cosmopolitan city - those are their standards, regardless of local color... how that's going to play in more "ethnic" locals, and NY is certainly the most ethnic of all cities, who knows...

[Sneakeater]

Simon, the only thing you've said that I disagree with is the "If my views tally with Michelin as an outsider, then that's pretty useful to me." I think it's worth the investment of time and effort, when going anyplace, to learn why locals view things the way they do. Otherwise you wind up in the places that cater to tourists. For most tourists, that's what they want, but for anybody with 100+ eG Forums posts it's not likely to be the real goal.

←

You're right, FG, it's certainly not my goal. Expect my presence over in the NY forum shortly...!!

Maybe the point I was trying to make is not so relevant in NY. I was really thinking of Raji's post, above, and about what Michelin is trying to be. The comment "It will undoubtedly be a guide that caters to Euro-laden tourists in foreign-friendly areas rather than the adventurous types with adventurous palates" got me thinking. To my mind this, in many ways, is not really a criticism. Like it or not, Michelin *is* a guide for tourists eating in a strange land with, potentially, very different palates and expectations to the locals. I'm not sure that Michelin is or should be catering for the limited few with adventurous palates. The concept of "good food" may be reasonably well-defined when you stay in one tradition, but when attempting to cross cultures things get much more difficult. I don't want to drag this any further off-topic, but should the best dog-meat restaurant in Vietnam get 3 stars?

Katz deli in NY is a good example of a restaurant that I will certainly visit, but that I may not enjoy. Personally, I find sandwiches full to bursting to be somewhat stomach-churning. Is this a European thing? Possibly. To push this argument to it's (il?)logical limit, if I then, as a European with different expectations of a sandwich, find the Katz version objectionable, then maybe a guidebook for a European palate should echo my views, not the views of the locals.

I'm in murky territory here, and saying things I don't necessarily believe. I think I'll stop.

Si

←

Without wanting to lead this thread too far off-topic, the discussion that developed in the below-linked thread from the South America board seems pertinent to the above exchange between Si and Fat Guy:

http://forums.egullet.org/index.php?showtopic=92012

Edited November 6, 2006 by Sneakeater (log)

[robyn]

To my mind this, in many ways, is not really a criticism. Like it or not, Michelin *is* a guide for tourists eating in a strange land with, potentially, very different palates and expectations to the locals. I'm not sure that Michelin is or should be catering for the limited few with adventurous palates. The concept of "good food" may be reasonably well-defined when you stay in one tradition, but when attempting to cross cultures things get much more difficult.

Well, I'm the type that, if I'm going all the way to Japan from NY, or all the way to NY from Europe for that matter, I'm going to want to "do in Rome". There are the types of tourists that will, for example, stay in a Hilton no matter where they go. So they like to say they've been in the Hilton in NY, and the one in Thailand, and the one in Brazil, even though it's essentially the same Hilton everywhere they go -

Same goes for restaurants, I get the feeling the Michelin grades on a scale where that restaurant could be picked up and plopped down in any cosmopolitan city - those are their standards, regardless of local color... how that's going to play in more "ethnic" locals, and NY is certainly the most ethnic of all cities, who knows...

←

I don't know what the hang-up is in this thread about tourists. Remember the definition of Michelin higher starred restaurants - 2 are worth a detour - and 3 are worth a journey. As a practical matter - due to cost - and frequently a matter of a travel (many higher ranked Michelin restaurants aren't in major metro areas) - almost *everyone* in those restaurants in a tourist (if your definition of a tourist is someone from out of town). What's wrong about that?

There's really a whole boutique subset of tourism these days - culinary tourism. And it frequently revolves around diners traveling reasonable or great distances to eat in excellent or fabulous places. I'm sure that Alinea is a culinary tourist destination that has zero relation to anything that anyone in Chicago will tell you is typical of Chicago. Does that mean it's a place that should be avoided?

As for "local color" - well what is local color? Frankly - as travelers become more sophisticated - they don't want to eat so-called ethnic food in New York (or any similar large city). They want to eat it in the country of origin. Now - if one is a local in New York - he or she might not want to go to Italy to eat Italian food one night - or China to eat Chinese food the next. But that doesn't mean that I as a tourist really care about going to Brooklyn to find the best Thai restaurant in New York. When I go to New York - I save most of my calories for the best that New York has to offer - which is basically not so-called "ethnic food". Ditto when I travel to other places. I had absolutely no desire to eat at the best Italian restaurant in Tokyo - because - if I wanted Italian food - I'd have gone to Italy.

You are right about there being certain international standards when it comes to the highest levels of dining. Especially in terms of decor and service. You can thank people like Philippe Starck and Adam Tihany for the former. Which isn't to say that all places look the same. But there is a certain aesthetic. And you know what. I like it. So do most high end tourists. I don't want to go to a 3 star Michelin restaurant in Germany that's full of cuckoo clocks. Or any place anywhere that's full of pictures of the owner hugging celebrities who died 10 years ago. On the other hand - in many high end restaurants (but not all) - you will find cuisine that is distinctive to the country. Chefs who bring the best of culinary techniques to bear on the best of what their country has to offer. That is in general what a lot of tourists - like me - are looking for these days.

By the way - when it comes to hotel chains - you seem to have rather parochial ideas about them. Hotel chains for the most part aren't "American" - they're international. The Four Seasons in Tokyo isn't anything like the Four Seasons in Miami. The Ritz Carlton in Osaka isn't anything like the Ritz Carlton in Atlanta. Also - a fair number of luxury hotel "chains" (like Four Seasons or MO or Peninsula if I recall correctly) aren't even US based. More business-oriented chains like Hilton or Marriott or Starwood cater to business travelers - who tend to have similar needs whether they're American or German or Japanese.

Finally - when traveling - even the most adventurous dining travelers need their "basics". I need a cup of American coffee in the morning (and I travel with instant and the fixings just in case - I know I'll always be able to find hot water). For other people - it might be their tea - or European coffee. For some - they want bacon and eggs in the morning - others want a pastry - others want broiled fish and rice (and I never eat anything for breakfast!). That is why most fine hotels - no matter where you are - have American breakfasts - "Continental" breakfasts - Japanese breakfasts - etc.

Anyway - I and a lot of other people are culinary tourists - and proud of it. I suspect there are quite a few excellent restaurants that wouldn't do as well as they do without us. Robyn

[robyn]

I've watched this thread with interest, since I am quite likely to be a visitor to NY sometime next year. My last visit (6-7 years ago) was very unsuccessful on the food front (in fact, I ate some really poor meals there) and it's not a mistake I intend to make again.

Under normal circumstances, when travelling to somewhere I don't know well in Europe, I will use Michelin as a first approximation guide. If I can supplement that with more in-depth knowledge from local forums here, great. In general, getting a picture of the "top-end" is quite easy. For me, 2 or 3 stars says something serious, and whether it's 2 or 3 is almost irrelevant.  9 times out of 10, the stars correlate pretty well with opinion found online, so I can generally figure out where to go for a top meal.

The problem arises in the more "day-to-day" stuff. This is where Michelin comes into its own. When I find myself walking around an area I don't know and I hear that stomach grumble, what then? A simple, text-light, symbol-heavy guide is exactly what I'm looking for.

Of course, if one has everything planned in advance, maybe it's possible to know where every meal will be eaten. However, a look at the NY board on this forum suggests that it is an absolute minefield for a tourist. I've looked at it for a while, and to be honest, I don't really know where to start. Of course, the people posting on that forum are people who know NY intimately, and could certainly be considered experts on the dining situation there. But it is the nature of such a forum that the posters assume a certain amount of knowledge from other posters. That way, detailed discussions are possible and the minutiae of menus and comparisons in very narrow categories can be examined. That's great, but it's not much use for me, searching as I am for broad-brush-stroke answers.

Honestly, for the tourist, I think guides that are too detailed are useless. I need the forest, not the trees. For detailed info, I'll look elsewhere.

Final thought: I've seen the viewpoint that Michelin just doesn't "get" NY (or San Fran, or whatever). Maybe so, but as a European going to NY, I'm not convinced I'm going to "get" it either. If my views tally with Michelin as an outsider, then that's pretty useful to me.

The fact remains, as a tourist looking for info on mid-level restaurants, there's no one source I trust more than Michelin, and there's no one source that I find more accessible.

Si

←

On my trips to New York (and other major cities) - I generally make my 2 or 3 big deal reservations in advance using multiple sources - and carry what I think is the most comprehensive guide in my purse for the day-to-day stuff. If I left for New York tomorrow - that guide would be Zagat's. Robyn

[Nathan]

I just returned from a trip to northern Italy so I'm late to the thread.

completely agree with oakapple's last post.

agree with most of Robyn's posts.

exception: by and large, Germans speak excellent English. having hundreds of thousands of American soldiers parked there for years will do that.

thought on the Japanese points: I don't have Raji's knowledge of Japan...but I did have a Japanese chef/student for a roommate for 2 years. When I first met him his reading knowledge of English was excellent and his spoken was ridiculously poor. according to him, this was standard in Japan...everyone learns how to read English but few no how to pronounce it.

another note: in Italy, anyway, three-star Michelin restaurants all seem to be off the beaten path...in fact, I was unable to hit a couple that had been highly recommended to me (indeed the personal recommendations from people in the restaurant business jibed with Michelin's) because it would have required renting a car.

another thought on "tourist places" v. places frequented by locals. sometimes the locals are wrong. I have friends who insist on asking cabdrivers etc. for recommendations everytime we travel. I find this pointless and inane. would one really recommend that a tourist visiting NY rely upon cabdrivers and people on the street for dining recommendations? the opinions of informed and sophisticated locals are obviously the best guide...but only if you can find them. the idea that any given local knows better than a guidebook is idiotic. (exceptions perhaps being food-obsessed countries like Italy and Spain)

sometimes the local palate is very flawed. although I recommend that someone traveling to Prague go out to somewhere in Prague 3-10 and find a pivnice and order some pork knee and the like....I can also say that local advice for more sophisticated dining is horribly off. (which makes sense considering history.) any decent place there relies upon tourists to stay afloat.

so, yeah, there are situations where guidebooks are your best, well, guide.

second Robyn on hotel chains. they're almost all franchises anyway.

I will say that as someone who is 6'3" I much prefer staying in "American" hotels in most of Europe (I would like to be able to stand up in the shower)

one point of disagreement though: I think you will find that at high end restaurants in England they are certainly aware of Per Se.

Edited November 7, 2006 by Nathan (log)

[robyn]

Nathan - Hope you had a great trip to Italy. We never had a bad meal in Italy.

In general - I agree with your observations about recommendations from locals - even more with regard to directions than restaurants. OTOH - we have had some good luck with recommendations from local guides. Including one from a cab-driver in Rome who we hired to drive us around for an afternoon (he dropped us off at his "favorite place" - which turned out to be an excellent 1 star Michelin place). Another from a guide we used in Cairo (very nice food but unfortunately my husband ate the salad and got sick). Etc.

Even recommendations from hotel concierges are usually suspect - because most of the time they haven't eaten in the restaurants - they're just telling you what they've read in the restaurant guides.

I personally have more than a dozen family members and some old friends in NYC - and can't trust most of them most of the time for dining recommendations except when we're dining with them at local places in their own neighborhoods (and - even then - their choices are generally "so-so"). A few simply don't have the money. Most have money - but some don't have time to spend fussing with restaurants (they're super busy with work - kids - etc.) - or they simply don't care about restaurants except from a social point of view (e.g., I have one cousin who's very wealthy - 65 - but to keep at a size 4 - she won't eat anything other than a salad without dressing no matter where she's dining). On the other hand - sometimes something special happens. When all of us cousins got together in NYC for my late grandmother's 100th birthday party (maybe 12 years ago or so) - one of my cousins got us a table for 12 at Nobu on a Friday night. He really didn't know anything about the restaurant - he had just heard it was new and interesting. And because he was the dentist for the chef's kids (talk about a strange connection) - they treated us like royalty.

Overall though - I think that most of the time most people travel - they'll find that decent guidebooks are the most productive way to get enjoyable dining experiences.

I will let you know about English in Germany (we found little on our last trip - but that was a long time ago). At a minimum - it never hurts to learn a little of a country's language. Most people really love it when you take the time to learn a little of their language (and a little about their culture). You wind up learning more - and enjoying your travels more too.

As for standing up in showers - I simply appreciate real American style showers of any height. You've never seen anything as pathetic as me trying to "shower" with a handheld shower in a tub. Whenever I try to do that - I think I should have a personal flood insurance policy . Robyn