Bruni and Beyond: NYC Reviewing (2007)

[oakapple]

I don't buy it.  (this whole conversation is becoming rather arcane and pointless but....)  I'd guess that for full meals it's about 70% restaurants in the pipeline and 30% elsewhere.  easily.

Your level of confidence is interesting. The problem with your assumption is that the pipline has to come from somewhere. These are Bruni's last 10 reviews:

Momofuku Ssam Bar

Robert's Steakhouse

Sfoglia

Nish

Varietal

Rosanjin

The Four Seasons

The E.U.

Esca

Morandi

Of those 10, only three were prominent new restaurants that were reviewed fairly promptly after they opened: Nish, Varietal, Morandi. (I am generously counting Nish as a "new" restaurant.) As soon as they were announced, Bruni would have made a mental note that he had to review them.

That leaves seven reviews that were, in a sense, discretionary — he didn't have to review them. The question is, how many meals did he eat at restaurants not reviewed, to come up with those seven? I would guess quite a lot.

you're assuming that he can visit at most two restaurants a day.  I don't see that.  when this is what you do for a living and you can eat at odd hours (3-7 PM)...it's easy enough to check out several different spots for dinner and see if any of them strike you as deserving a longer take.

←

It's too tiresome to find the exact quote, but I think Frank Bruni himself has more-or-less confirmed that he eats about 10 work-related meals a week.

As FG noted, Bruni also has various travel engagements that take away from his usual dining pattern (e.g., the time he spent a week driving around the country eating fast food; or the time he spent a week having room service at hotels; or his week as a waiter.

Edited April 30, 2007 by oakapple (log)

[Fat Guy]

If you read the Robert's review, one conclusion you might draw is that it was based on three visits. Because of the way it was written as a narrative, one gets the sense that he describes each of his visits, and I count three descriptions. Also, it seems that for this review he visited other steakhouses, like Peter Luger and Sparks. In reviews where he does that sort of comparative dining (like for a review of a Danny Meyer restaurant), he's using up even more of the presumed 10-meal weekly budget than normal. And while it's theoretically possible to eat 20 meals out in a week, Bruni also has to write reviews, Diner's Journal, feature stories and Critic's Notebook, and he travels a fair amount. I'd also say that his budget is not truly unlimited. It's huge, but there's some point beyond which the Times would surely cry foul.

[Nathan]

I don't think he just dropped into Ssam Bar, Robert's, E.U. or Sfoglia. Each of those places had surrounding buzz. They were somewhat in the pipeline to begin with.

Being in media, he almost certainly gets lunch at the Four Seasons on occasion anyway.

Esca is the type of restaurant that by definition gets visited by a critic on occasion over time....

edit: as for Robert's, three visits is a lot for a steakhouse...that's about the one type of restaurant that you can do a fair review off of one visit (across the pond even major newspaper restaurant reviewers seem to review off of just one visit)

Edited April 30, 2007 by Nathan (log)

[oakapple]

I don't think he just dropped into Ssam Bar, Robert's, E.U. or Sfoglia.  Each of those places had surrounding buzz.  They were somewhat in the pipeline to begin with.

Being in media, he almost certainly gets lunch at the Four Seasons on occasion anyway. 

Esca is the type of restaurant that by definition gets visited by a critic on occasion over time....

So it appears your opinion is that, of the last 10 reviews, 9 were more-or-less obvious, and he didn't have to sample a much larger subset before arriving at them. Well: that certainly would explain what you've been saying.

edit:  as for Robert's, three visits is a lot for a steakhouse...that's about the one type of restaurant that you can do a fair review off of one visit  (across the pond even major newspaper restaurant reviewers seem to review off of just one visit)

←

I think there are a good number of reviews in New York (and not just bloggers) that are based off just one or two visits. The thing is, even for a cuisine as predictable as a steakhouse, Bruni visits at least three times. Edited April 30, 2007 by oakapple (log)

[Fat Guy]

To be clear, I have no problem at all with a restaurant review based on one visit, so long as it accurately represents that it is based on one visit. I also think that, with six visits under one's belt, one should be able to write a brilliantly nuanced review that really gets what a restaurant is all about. But that's not the point here. The point is simply that, if anybody is saying "Frank Bruni visits every restaurant he reviews six times" then I think that's about as credible a statement as, "Frank Bruni is always anonymous" or "Nobody at the Times takes comps."

[BryanZ]

It would be really nice if we could just ask him in person. If only...

[Fat Guy]

Send him an email. He'd probably answer.

[oakapple]

Send him an email. He'd probably answer.

←

I've e-mailed him in the past. He does not answer in person, which is understandable. (There have been blog posts lately about the crushing load of e-mails he receives — mostly along the lines of "You've got to try...." or "I had a terrible experience at....")

If your question/comment is of general interest, and if he wants to answer it, he will respond publicly on the blog.

[BryanZ]

From Eater:

Eater is sitting on the last scenario, a very positive goose egg, looking for him to name-check his niece and nephew, and chalking the whole thing up to the Times wanting to mix things up.

From today's review:

But it’s best suited to the young, who regard it the way potheads do Amsterdam: as a naughtiness bazaar. My nephew Gavin, 6, and niece Bella, 4, let out ear-piercing squeals as soon as they walked in. Their parents promptly ordered chocolate martinis, made of creamy milk chocolate and vanilla vodka, with gummy bears instead of olives on skewers laid across the surface.

And there's more Gavin and Bella commentary.

A total waste of a review.

Edited May 2, 2007 by BryanZ (log)

[rich]

There are no more excuses, no more doubts, no more benefit of the doubt.

He really needs to head back to Rome and cover the pope and the Catholic church - it's a match made in "heaven." Neither has credibility anymore.

[oakapple]

There are no more excuses, no more doubts, no more benefit of the doubt.

He really needs to head back to Rome and cover the pope and the Catholic church - it's a match made in "heaven." Neither has credibility anymore.

←

Two explanations come to mind, and neither is to his credit. Either he is bored, or he needed some time off.

As I noted on my blog, the supreme paradox is that Room 4 Dessert, a serious dessert restaurant that deserves two stars, was relegated to $25 and Under. Meanwhile, Bruni wastes a column on a tourist trap that no one cares about, only to give it a goose-egg. What's next week's review: Ferrara?

[Nathan]

I guess I just don't have a problem with occasional whimsicality....

[rich]

As I noted on my blog, the supreme paradox is that Room 4 Dessert, a serious dessert restaurant that deserves two stars, was relegated to $25 and Under. Meanwhile, Bruni wastes a column on a tourist trap that no one cares about, only to give it a goose-egg. What's next week's review: Ferrara?

←

Marc, I agree that R4D should have received a "main column" two-star review, but maybe it's better off not getting one. He probably wouldn't have "gotten" R4D and labeled it "satisfactory."

[Nathan]

fwiw, R4D doesn't really have savory items.

MB apparently does.

edit: I could have dinner at MB, I couldn't at R4D.

Edited May 2, 2007 by Nathan (log)

[oakapple]

fwiw, R4D doesn't really have savory items.

MB apparently does.

edit:  I could have dinner at MB, I couldn't at R4D.

←

Yeah, we noticed that. But to the extent Max Brenner has any appeal at all, it's as a dessert place. Which is what the review basically says. There are about a hundred restaurants within a 5-block radius of Times Square serving versions of the Chef Boyardee / Toaster Oven savory food he sampled at Max Brenner. Surely that couldn't have been the motivation for the review—whimsical or not.

I mean, Frank has written a few "fun" reviews (Sascha, Waverly Inn, Robert's Steakhouse). But they were all at least quintessentially New York (non-chain) restaurants that belonged on his beat if they belonged on anybody's.

[Nathan]

oh, I agree, it's a wasted review.

but I put it in the Vong category. if he wants to do this once a year for fun...big deal.

(Sascha had a great deal of buzz (their PR bill must have been for a fortune), Waverly Inn has legitimately good food combined with massive amounts of buzz, and Robert's -- by most accounts -- is one of the best steakhouses in the city)

[Fat Guy]

I think the motivation for the review is clearly stated up front:

Max Brenner is now owned by an Israeli food corporation, which has succeeded in establishing it in Singapore, the Philippines, Australia and the United States.

It’s been saluted in People magazine and featured on cable television news broadcasts. And the Max Brenner restaurants in Manhattan have often been packed, an affirmation of a strategy that strikes me as both novel and shrewd.

Frank Bruni doesn't decide which restaurants are important. That decision gets made by the universe, and his job is to identify the important ones and review them. I think there's an entirely coherent case to be made for the importance of Max Brenner, and especially for the need to debunk it.

Nor did this seem like a lazy review. Bruni clearly got it in his head that he needed to give Max Brenner his attention. I don't think there's any error in judgment there.

[oakapple]

oh, I agree, it's a wasted review.

but I put it in the Vong category.

The Vong review fulfilled a purpose, since it's unquestionably a restaurant on Bruni's beat, and it adjusted the previous rating to a more realistic level.

(Sascha had a great deal of buzz (their PR bill must have been for a fortune), Waverly Inn has legitimately good food combined with massive amounts of buzz, and Robert's -- by most accounts -- is one of the best steakhouses in the city)

←

In mentioning those three, I was not passing judgment on the quality or review-worthiness of those restaurants. Those just happen to be three non-standard reviews that Bruni wrote when he wanted to have a bit of fun. They show that it's possible for him to review something that makes sense, while toying whimsically with the format.

[oakapple]

I think the motivation for the review is clearly stated up front:

Max Brenner is now owned by an Israeli food corporation, which has succeeded in establishing it in Singapore, the Philippines, Australia and the United States.

It’s been saluted in People magazine and featured on cable television news broadcasts. And the Max Brenner restaurants in Manhattan have often been packed, an affirmation of a strategy that strikes me as both novel and shrewd.

Frank Bruni doesn't decide which restaurants are important. That decision gets made by the universe, and his job is to identify the important ones and review them. I think there's an entirely coherent case to be made for the importance of Max Brenner, and especially for the need to debunk it.

←

Pretty much the same argument can be made for Olive Garden (except for the Israeli part).

I also think there's an argument that good criticism identifies the important restaurants, rather than just following the breadcrumbs left by tourists and that shrewed observer of the culinary scene, People magazine.

[Fat Guy]

Speaking from personal perspective, I have walked past Max Brenner a few times while heading from, for example, Momo-Ssam to Degustation, and have wondered about it. It seems to have gourmet cachet, and I've heard plenty of positive talk about it. Whereas, there's no confusion about the Olive Garden on the part of any modestly well-informed person. So I don't think they're equivalent situations. And I think Bruni does a fine job of explaining himself.

[Nathan]

imo, the food buzz is so heavy in Manhattan that there are no unidentified important restaurants.

Rosanjin stands out precisely because it apparently was the one really good restaurant (assuming Bruni was right) that no one knew about.

edit: to echo FG, more than once I've heard typical Manhattan non-foodies who wouldn't be caught dead going to OG refer to MB in rhapsodic terms.

Edited May 2, 2007 by Nathan (log)

[oakapple]

imo, the food buzz is so heavy in Manhattan that there are no unidentified important restaurants.

Rosanjin stands out precisely because it apparently was the one really good restaurant (assuming Bruni was right) that no one knew about.

←

Presumably Rosanjin wasn't on your radar before Bruni put it there. I guarantee you there are dozens more. This guy is paid handsomely, full-time, to find such places. He ought to be able to identify far more than you and I can. If he cannot, it's a failure of imagination or effort.

Remember, that "buzz" you refer to has to be created by somebody. It requires, you know, a "discovery." An intelligent critic who does this full-time damned well ought to be able to find more than one.

Edited May 2, 2007 by oakapple (log)

[Sneakeater]

Speaking from personal perspective, I have walked past Max Brenner a few times while heading from, for example, Momo-Ssam to Degustation, and have wondered about it. It seems to have gourmet cachet, and I've heard plenty of positive talk about it. Whereas, there's no confusion about the Olive Garden on the part of any modestly well-informed person. So I don't think they're equivalent situations. And I think Bruni does a fine job of explaining himself.

←

Just to add, when the first Max Brenner opened, it was featured in Eater and other food blogs. I think it may even have had a thread here. It definitely got the kind of attention from serious sources that, say, Olive Garden never has.

(EDITED TO ADD: Here's the link to the eG thread: http://forums.egullet.org/index.php?showto...6888&hl=brenner. Sure, the consensus utlmately established that the place wasn't very good -- but at least one initial post compared it to Jacques Torres. And there was plenty of interest. Why would a place worthy of a thread here not be worthy of a NYT review?)

Edited May 2, 2007 by Sneakeater (log)

[Sneakeater]

Rosanjin stands out precisely because it apparently was the one really good restaurant (assuming Bruni was right) that no one knew about.

←

I don't want this to sound like a "mine is bigger than yours" type comment, but I had certainly heard of Rasanjin before Bruni reviewed it. And my sources are almost exactly the same as yours. I think you just might not have been paying attention in that case (I want to emphasize that I don't mean that as a pejorative -- I mean, big deal, you didn't pay attention to some delivery place opening a small dining room). But I wouldn't universalize it.

Edited May 2, 2007 by Sneakeater (log)

[Nathan]

imo, the food buzz is so heavy in Manhattan that there are no unidentified important restaurants.

Rosanjin stands out precisely because it apparently was the one really good restaurant (assuming Bruni was right) that no one knew about.

←

Presumably Rosanjin wasn't on your radar before Bruni put it there. I guarantee you there are dozens more. This guy is paid handsomely, full-time, to find such places. He ought to be able to identify far more than you and I can. If he cannot, it's a failure of imagination or effort.

Remember, that "buzz" you refer to has to be created by somebody. It requires, you know, a "discovery." An intelligent critic who does this full-time damned well ought to be able to find more than one.

←

really? dozens more? you should be able to name one then.

the start-up costs for a serious restaurant are such that restauranteurs have no choice but to invest in publicity. combined with the voracity of foodblogs (see Eater's "Plywood Report" -- where even minor pizza joints get mentioned ("Mosco Pizza" was mentioned in a Plywood Report on Friday...when I walked past it on Saturday it was open)...I wish there were hidden gems in the city. there just aren't.