Bruni and Beyond: NYC Reviewing (2007)

[robyn]

I'm just outraged. I don't understand why this guy gets to keep his job. Can anyone offer a defense for this review? Is there a steak anywhere that's so sublime that I'd be willing to share my dining time and my table with Mahogany or Brianne?

←

Susan - You don't understand. It's just so fall on the floor funny for a bunch of gay guys to go to a strip club - and then stick cute little remarks into the review like "[w]e were...less susceptible to the scenery than other men might be...". Isn't it ? You do know Frank Bruni is gay - yes? And we both know a straight guy would get his head handed to him for doing this. Robyn

[oakapple]

I don't mind the one-star rating if the steak is, in fact, as good as he says. When I visited, it was not. Even the best steakhouses, alas, serve a mediocre hunk of beef sometimes. Given the price premium and out-of-the-way location, I won't be giving them a second chance anytime soon.

By the way, the subject of critic anonymity comes up here from time to time. This is one restaurant where, I would guess, Bruni was not recognized on most of his visits, or indeed, conceivably all of them.

[H. du Bois]

I'm just outraged. I don't understand why this guy gets to keep his job. Can anyone offer a defense for this review? Is there a steak anywhere that's so sublime that I'd be willing to share my dining time and my table with Mahogany or Brianne?

Susan - You don't understand. It's just so fall on the floor funny for a bunch of gay guys to go to a strip club - and then stick cute little remarks into the review like "[w]e were...less susceptible to the scenery than other men might be...". Isn't it ? You do know Frank Bruni is gay - yes? And we both know a straight guy would get his head handed to him for doing this. Robyn

←

I didn't know if he is or isn't, and didn't pick up from the review anything that would indicate one way or another. Frankly, I don't care.

There are places like this in New York. People go there, sometimes for the food, sometimes for the atmosphere. It's no big deal.

[oakapple]

I didn't know if he is or isn't, and didn't pick up from the review anything that

←

His orientation is irrelevant. But Bruni is indeed openly gay, and it adds a layer of humor to the review if you happen to know this.

[Leonard Kim]

Adam Perry Lang appeared on Iron Chef America last year, but I don't think they mentioned Robert's on the show. . .

Actually, this is irresponsible scholarship, but I had to share some of this. As some of you might have surmised, I've been assaulting the Times restaurant review archive (and for free! On another, old-but-recently resurrected thread FG offered money to someone to do basically what I've been doing.) I've just started on John Canaday, critic from 1974-76, and just four reviews in (going backwards), he may already be the funniest, most quotable, and least responsible restaurant critic I've encountered yet.

In his farewell column he gives a long, personal restaurant list but notes he's excluding restaurants in hotels, Chinatown restaurants, and restaurants-cum-nightclubs. He says he does so either because they're not on his professional beat or because he's "not interested." Each restaurant on the alphabetical list comes with a short comment. The first three (Alfredo's, Algonquin, Arirang. . .) read: "Further, and rather extensive, research is required before we can say that there isn't a weak dish on the menu," "We said 'no hotel restaurants' but the Algonquin isn't a hotel, it's an institution," "Another research problem. Do the waitresses who serve you this delicious, mildly exotic Korean food belong to the order Lepidoptera or Orchideae?

So fine, I think, it's his farewell column. Then the one before that opens:

The other day in checking over a list of one-star to three-star restaurants, I discovered that one out of every 15 had folded since this time last year.  The briefest life on that list was Le Colisee's, which suffered every form of bad luck known to restaurants plus one not frequently encountered, a holdup in which both the chef and proprietor were shot.

In the same review, he awards three stars to a restaurant, but devotes only four tiny paragraphs to it: the first describes the chef's "ashen" reaction when Canaday identified himself and told her he was going to give a positive review. The other paragraphs mention price, clientele, and decor. As for food? "Since the menu changes week by week, there is little point in our commenting in detail on last week's dinner. Everything was excellently prepared and beautifully presented." That's it.

The review before that includes this:

Two stars plus a third in parenthesis pending a final polishing up seems in order.

Sure enough, there are three printed stars, one in parenthesis. (Great John, how's my spreadsheet supposed to deal with that?)

The review before that starts like this:

Regarding fan clubs, let me suggest that when the membership decides to write letters to a restaurant reviewer urging him to try a place, it is a good idea to use different papers and different typewriters and different phraseology to give the impression that each letter is individually inspired.  Formulas to avoid are 'I just happened to be passing by the other night and dropped into . . .' and 'I hate to let the secret out, but . . . '

Later in that same review,

After two anonymous visits when we were quite happy to discover a potential three-starrer, we came back with friends under our own name and were not quite so well pleased.  The kitchen went out of its way to present things elaborately, and things got pretty slow.  The verdict that night would have been three on effort, two on achievement.  But three stars it is, if for no other reason than that this may be the only instance on record where anonymous guests came off better than identified restaurant reviewer.

Maybe he just got silly, knowing he was retiring soon. Marc mentioned another review of his upthread which seemed simply clunky.

[Eatmywords]

Yea, It's pretty funny and as usual entertaining. My only problem is lack of content (as usual). Nothing on bread, beverages, non-beef entrees, dessert (other than the Bailey's shot). You know, the little things. I read Meehan right after on Kefi. It's about the meal, the entire experience. I feel like I know the place. I get clarity that Bruni seldom provides. If only roles were reversed.

Next week, I predict a heavy hammer falls on Varietal.

[Sneakeater]

It's interesting to see that the way people write shills is absolutely unchanged, even if the medium of their distribution has.

[Nathan]

Yea, It's pretty funny and as usual entertaining. My only problem is lack of content (as usual).  Nothing on bread, beverages, non-beef entrees, dessert (other than the Bailey's shot).  You know, the little things.  I read Meehan right after on Kefi.  It's about the meal, the entire experience. I feel like I know the place.  I get clarity that Bruni seldom provides.  If only roles were reversed.

Next week, I predict a heavy hammer falls on Varietal.

←

I knew that was going to be said. of course, there's really not much you can say about the food at a steakhouse. in contrast, almost every word in the Ssam Bar review was about food. but, yeah, he has had a tendency to spend too much time on extrinsic factors.

[rich]

Yea, It's pretty funny and as usual entertaining. My only problem is lack of content (as usual).  Nothing on bread, beverages, non-beef entrees, dessert (other than the Bailey's shot).  You know, the little things.  I read Meehan right after on Kefi.  It's about the meal, the entire experience. I feel like I know the place.  I get clarity that Bruni seldom provides.  If only roles were reversed.

Next week, I predict a heavy hammer falls on Varietal.

←

But you did get the slide show on-line. How could we have lived without that?

Wonder what the reaction would be if Penthouse published an issue without photos of naked women, just for laughs?

[Nathan]

Yea, It's pretty funny and as usual entertaining. My only problem is lack of content (as usual).  Nothing on bread, beverages, non-beef entrees, dessert (other than the Bailey's shot).  You know, the little things.   I read Meehan right after on Kefi.   It's about the meal, the entire experience. I feel like I know the place.  I get clarity that Bruni seldom provides.  If only roles were reversed.

Next week, I predict a heavy hammer falls on Varietal.

←

But you did get the slide show on-line. How could we have lived without that?

Wonder what the reaction would be if Penthouse published an issue without photos of naked women, just for laughs?

←

I have to admit I thought it was a little inappropriate.

of course, that's probably something to take up with Wells, not Bruni.

As for Varietal...I predict a star. I think Bruni will be nicer than other critics have been...he has a soft spot for young chefs with ambition.

[robyn]

I'm just outraged. I don't understand why this guy gets to keep his job. Can anyone offer a defense for this review? Is there a steak anywhere that's so sublime that I'd be willing to share my dining time and my table with Mahogany or Brianne?

Susan - You don't understand. It's just so fall on the floor funny for a bunch of gay guys to go to a strip club - and then stick cute little remarks into the review like "[w]e were...less susceptible to the scenery than other men might be...". Isn't it ? You do know Frank Bruni is gay - yes? And we both know a straight guy would get his head handed to him for doing this. Robyn

←

I didn't know if he is or isn't, and didn't pick up from the review anything that would indicate one way or another. Frankly, I don't care.

There are places like this in New York. People go there, sometimes for the food, sometimes for the atmosphere. It's no big deal.

←

You may be the only person reading the review who didn't pick up on it. Indeed - this is viewed as Bruni's "coming out" review in the gay community. There is also a lot of angry feminist reaction - as well as various other reactions (see links in previous cite). Indeed - the sexual tenor of the review and the reactions to it seem to be the most important things about it (distant second seems to be comparisons to the Chodorow review). Robyn

[BryanZ]

I now have a new goal in life. I must eat at Robert's. It will be done, hopefully with a crowd of obnoxious investment bankers. I will report, with pictures if at all possible.

[Nathan]

oh g---d, someone couldn't play a better stereotype of the "feminazi with no sense of humor" then this one:

http://www.nyu.edu/classes/siva/archives/004018.html

(is she really so ignorant that she thinks Bruni writes the captions on the slideshow?)

[Sneakeater]

I would actually bet money that Bruni wrote those captions.

[Nathan]

I would actually bet money that Bruni wrote those captions.

←

actually, I just read them..and you're right!

(but only because they're so deliciously over-the-top)

but, it's not something that he would normally do...

regardless, she misses everything.

[oakapple]

As for Varietal...I predict a star.  I think Bruni will be nicer than other critics have been...he has a soft spot for young chefs with ambition.

←

I haven't noticed such a soft spot. Just ask Paul Liebrandt. Bruni calls 'em as he sees 'em.

But I agree with the 1-star call on Varietal. The trouble is, it might be the kind of restaurant that "needs" two. In Dave H's terminology, the "which-category" of Varietal is two stars, but the "how-good" is just a star.

I would actually bet money that Bruni wrote those captions.

←

It's clear that he did, because they're in the first person, and if it were someone else, they'd be credited. The style is also quite recognizable.

[Nathan]

As for Varietal...I predict a star.  I think Bruni will be nicer than other critics have been...he has a soft spot for young chefs with ambition.

←

I haven't noticed such a soft spot. Just ask Paul Liebrandt. Bruni calls 'em as he sees 'em.

When I wrote that I thought of Liebrandt as the exception that proves the rule...I still do. (of course, I'm not sure that Bruni thought of two stars as the slapdown that we did)

[flinflon28]

As for Varietal...I predict a star.  I think Bruni will be nicer than other critics have been...he has a soft spot for young chefs with ambition.

←

I haven't noticed such a soft spot. Just ask Paul Liebrandt. Bruni calls 'em as he sees 'em.

When I wrote that I thought of Liebrandt as the exception that proves the rule...I still do. (of course, I'm not sure that Bruni thought of two stars as the slapdown that we did)

←

Lordy...I wish I could goto dinner at Gilt under Paul's reign again.

That was a great meal and alot of fun too.

[oakapple]

When I wrote that I thought of Liebrandt as the exception that proves the rule...I still do.  (of course, I'm not sure that Bruni thought of two stars as the slapdown that we did)

←

Gilt under Liebrandt was about as expensive as Daniel and Jean Georges, with luxurious service and a very serious wine program. It's hard to believe anyone would put together a restaurant like that, and not be aiming at three stars (or indeed four). And I think Frank Bruni, like most of us, is well aware of that.

[robyn]

oh g---d, someone couldn't play a better stereotype of the "feminazi with no sense of humor" then this one:

http://www.nyu.edu/classes/siva/archives/004018.html

(is she really so ignorant that she thinks Bruni writes the captions on the slideshow?)

←

There are quite a few people who don't have a sense of humor about this kind of stuff - including the writer on Gridskipper (a good travel site): Bruni Goes To The Penthouse Club To Eat the Meat.

Actually - the part I like best in the piece is where they say the guy has no taste. He's lucky he became a restaurant critic and not an interior designer. Robyn

[oakapple]

Indeed -  this is viewed as Bruni's "coming out" review in the gay community.

←

I am reasonably sure that Bruni was already out. I can't say where I read that, but I think it's pretty widely known (and in general I am far from up-to-date on such things).

There is this piece, in which Bruni wrote: "nothing says lovin' like a stud muffin at the oven." That's not something a straight guy writes.

[Sneakeater]

There was some list in (I think) New York Magazine years ago -- before Bruni was the restaurant critic -- of powerful out gays and lesbians in New York. There was a sublist of people at the Times, and then political reporter Bruni was on it.

This was years ago.

(I want to emphasize that this wasn't a list outting people. It was a list of people who were already out. I think it was tied to Gay Pride Week or something.)

Edited February 28, 2007 by Sneakeater (log)

[Nathan]

There was some list in (I think) New York Magazine years ago -- before Bruni was the restaurant critic -- of powerful out gays and lesbians in New York.  There was a sublist of people at the Times, and then political reporter Bruni was on it.

This was years ago.

(I want to emphasize that this wasn't a list outting people. It was a list of people who were already out.  I think it was tied to Gay Pride Week or something.)

←

I think it's probably more accurate to say that although Bruni's orientation was common knowledge among those of us who were paying attention...as well as among those who keep tabs on that stuff in general (which I'm not one of), this is the first time it's essentially explicitly come up in a restaurant review written by Bruni (there have been hints before).

edit: The only reason that I can think of why any of this matters at all is that it does provide a foundation for the humor evinced in today's review....I suppose it is a necessary basis for the joke. As for the more important matter of the food at Robert's...Bruni's not alone in his opinion that the steaks are superb....I've heard that since it opened over three years ago. (heck, the best steakhouse for years in South Florida was in a strip club)

Edited February 28, 2007 by Nathan (log)

[Sneakeater]

That's true. He just hadn't had the opportunity to comment on his affinity for the ouvre of Diana Ross before.

(I have to say that, as much as I don't respect him as a critic, I'm gonna love the guy forever just for that one moment in this review.)

Edited February 28, 2007 by Sneakeater (log)

[Dave H]

If you separate how-good from which-category, the implication is that the best restaurant of each kind gets four stars. I've no objection to a system that works that way, but it would instantly invalidate all of the existing ratings. For that reason, among others, I don't really see it happening.

←

Another reason to switch from 0 - 4 stars to A - F (or something equivalent) would be to make clear the ratings were totally incompatible. But yes, this is another reason my proposal is pretty unlikely to happen; New York Magazine was lucky not to have another rating system in place when they started their current one.

Of course, the Times would only make a switch like this if they thought the current star system was in some sort of crisis and becoming unworkable. Some of us clearly think so, but then we probably worry about it a lot more than the people at the Times do. Maybe in future years if this trend we're picking up on of ambitious food becoming unyoked from formal service becomes truly widespread... Of course then they could just move to a componentized food/ambiance/service system instead.