Bruni and Beyond: NYC Reviewing (2007)

[oakapple]

I agree with your general perception of Bruni.  With that said, this interview doesn't make that case.

←

The interview, on its own, certainly doesn't. I mentioned it, only because it is yet another place where he uses "fussy" in that particular context. None of them are significant on their own. It's only when you look at his larger body of work that the correlation becomes apparent.

[oakapple]

Fine dining is a form of entertainment

I agree. If I don't have a good time eating - a restaurant is a failure in my opinion.

Have any of you dined at a restaurant on the basis of a Bruni review and been entertained - had a good time?

It's funny. I haven't been in NY for a few years - but we had the most fun at DB&D last time. Read about it in a review from who knows where - and the review said it had a limo outside where you could have a cigarette when it was cold. Sounded like fun to me - so I went. It was fun - and the food (at least then) was really good to boot. So have you ever found a place you liked this much on the basis of a Bruni review? Robyn

←

There have been places where I had a good experience after following a Bruni recommendation. Examples that come to mind include Oriental Garden, Keens Steakhouse, and The Orchard. I'm sure there have been others.

That's not to say that I had never heard of any of these places. But it was the Bruni review that made me think, "I've got to try that." I have usually not been disappointed when I followed his recommendations, although I am selective about when I do that.

[rich]

Steve just gave his opinion on the MSB thread that it's serving the best food in NYC at present. He also believes that under the current star system it should get "0."

If this is the case, what does that say about the current star system? How can a restaurant with the best food be given two stars by the Times and "0" by Steve based the the current criteria?

Is MSB the best case yet for the elimination of the star system. Is this a shot across the bow to other restaurants holding many stars to "wake up" (paraphrasing Steve here)?

Is MSB the restaurant that will finally (and happily for me) put the star system out to pasture?

Can anyone play taps?

[Fat Guy]

Well, just to keep it out of this topic, let's assume that Momofuku Ssam Bar is serving food that's as good or better than the four-star restaurants, in surroundings and with a style of service that don't deserve a star at all. Assuming all that for the purposes of argument, what are the choices? You can go with four stars, you can go with no stars, or you can go with some number of stars that loosely represents one of those "four stars for food minus one each for service and surroundings" computations even though the critic doesn't actually accept that sort of reasoning. Or you can evaluate the restaurant on a different scale altogether, or no scale. I think the compromise approach -- give a star rating that reflects fewer stars than the food alone deserves -- is what the Times uses and will continue to use, albeit inconsistently and without much awareness.

[JohnL]

Is the "Zagat" system wherein a place is reviewed for food, decor and service for eg better?

(I am not talking about the methodology of assessing the scores or stars).

[rich]

Is the "Zagat" system wherein a place is reviewed for food, decor and service for eg better?

(I am not talking about the methodology of assessing the scores or stars).

←

That type of system is infinitely better.

[mugsy]

Is the "Zagat" system wherein a place is reviewed for food, decor and service for eg better?

(I am not talking about the methodology of assessing the scores or stars).

←

That type of system is infinitely better.

←

boo zagat.... horray michelin!

[Nathan]

Is the "Zagat" system wherein a place is reviewed for food, decor and service for eg better?

(I am not talking about the methodology of assessing the scores or stars).

←

That type of system is infinitely better.

←

boo zagat.... horray michelin!

←

I don't think anyone disputes that Michelin is more accurate than Zagat...its the Zagat rating system itself that they are arguing for (and not the methodology behind that system or the ratings themselves)

Edited March 12, 2007 by Nathan (log)

[larrylee]

Admittedly I'm straying a bit, but going back to the review of Robert's and Adam Perry Lang... Daisy May's is now running ads on Time Warner Cable. Truly painful to watch.

[oakapple]

Steve just gave his opinion on the MSB thread that it's serving the best food in NYC at present.

Even with all of his expertise, I don't think he can say that. In the same concentrated period when he's made multiple visits to MSB and sampled virtually all of the menu, I don't believe he's done the same with every other restaurant that could make a plausible "best-in-New York" claim.

Steve can speak for himself, but what we probably have here is exciting, innovative, bracing, cool, but not necessarily best. It's more like "the girl I want to date is the very pretty girl that just came in and sat at the end of the bar ... that is, until the next very pretty girl comes in."

He also believes that under the current star system it should get "0."

If this is the case, what does that say about the current star system?

←

MSB is hardly the first example of a relatively casual restaurant that got stars for excellent food and minimal service/ambiance. It's not as if this restaurant came out of nowhere, and suddenly the star system can't accommodate it.

And even if MSB was the first of a kind, you don't change the system for one restaurant. I do agree with Rich — and have always agreed — that the Times should give separate ratings for food, service, and ambiance.

Edited March 12, 2007 by oakapple (log)

[JohnL]

I just read the two star review of "Nish" in today's paper.

I don't have much to say about the stars or the reviews of the food but this is one wordy restaurant review!

All the verbiage dedicated to advancing and elaborating on Bruni's "hook" that "Nish" is a dressed down version of March because the restaurant/dining world in NY is changing. Any English professor worth his or her salt would hand this back to Bruni and tell him to cut a hundred words and use clear and precise language. If anything a review (of anything) demands brevity and precision. OY!

[oakapple]

All the verbiage dedicated to advancing and elaborating on Bruni's "hook" that "Nish" is a dressed down version of March because the restaurant/dining world in NY is changing.

←

That isn't just the "hook" of the Nish review. It's the "hook" of Bruni's entire tenure as restaurant critic. He doesn't miss a chance to tell us that, in his opinion, diners no longer want "mannerisms" and "white linens," which he finds "prissy."

[Fat Guy]

Whether he's for it or against it, he's certainly correct about the trend. Even the fanciest restaurants in town are now casual by historical standards.

I thought the review was good, if not terribly insightful. Most of these comments were old news when, say, Cafe Boulud opened. But I think he gets it right, mostly.

[Nathan]

You know, I was dining at Ssam Bar last night and I don't get FG's contention that it gets no stars.

First of all, he's wrong simply because the Times explicitly does not confine its stars to "fine dining restaurants" -- I assume that FG is arguing that it should...which is an argument....but the fact is that it doesn't.

Second, where does that leave Nish or Perry Street?

Its an argument that would have made more sense 20 years ago. But then you have Honmura An.

edit: I know I've said this before, but I couldn't help thinking about it again last night...wouldn't it have been perverse if Bruni had given Ssam Bar three stars? and I would have enjoyed it immensely.

I think Ssam Bar is a great litmus test -- is food what you care about? or is it really all the trappings of fine dining? its loud (too loud for a meeting, clients, or a first date...unless you're like me and really don't want to talk to your dates), uncomfortable, rambunctious and forces you to concentrate only on the plate in front of you. it's a thing of beauty.

Edited March 14, 2007 by Nathan (log)

[oakapple]

edit:  I know I've said this before, but I couldn't help thinking about it again last night...wouldn't it have been perverse if Bruni had given Ssam Bar three stars?  and I would have enjoyed it immensely.

I think Ssam Bar is a great litmus test -- is food what you care about?  or is it really all the trappings of fine dining?  its loud (too loud for a meeting, clients, or a first date...unless you're like me and really don't want to talk to your dates), uncomfortable, rambunctious and forces you to concentrate only on the plate in front of you.  it's a thing of beauty.

←

Bruni, as much as any critic, has shown he is willing to bend the "traditional" star system. Unfortunately, the way it currently operates, you can't tell if he thought the food alone was worth three stars. The fact that any one of us may think it is, does not mean he thinks it is.

In any event, as long as you have one overall rating that takes multiple factors into account, you must live with the fact that restaurants like Ssam Bar are going to be rated lower than the food alone might justify.

[Sneakeater]

Well, you know, he spent all that time in Rome . . . .

Edited March 14, 2007 by Sneakeater (log)

[Nathan]

edit:  I know I've said this before, but I couldn't help thinking about it again last night...wouldn't it have been perverse if Bruni had given Ssam Bar three stars?  and I would have enjoyed it immensely.

I think Ssam Bar is a great litmus test -- is food what you care about?  or is it really all the trappings of fine dining?  its loud (too loud for a meeting, clients, or a first date...unless you're like me and really don't want to talk to your dates), uncomfortable, rambunctious and forces you to concentrate only on the plate in front of you.  it's a thing of beauty.

←

Bruni, as much as any critic, has shown he is willing to bend the "traditional" star system. Unfortunately, the way it currently operates, you can't tell if he thought the food alone was worth three stars. The fact that any one of us may think it is, does not mean he thinks it is.

In any event, as long as you have one overall rating that takes multiple factors into account, you must live with the fact that restaurants like Ssam Bar are going to be rated lower than the food alone might justify.

←

I agree with this...but it doesn't go to my point.

[JohnL]

Whether he's for it or against it, he's certainly correct about the trend. Even the fanciest restaurants in town are now casual by historical standards.

I thought the review was good, if not terribly insightful. Most of these comments were old news when, say, Cafe Boulud opened. But I think he gets it right, mostly.

←

I didn't say he was incorrect.

I believe he does get it right, for the most part.

However,

He just overdoes it. Commentary on historical perspective etc should be more subtle (and certainly incisive). Make the point and move on.

Bruni is overbearing to me. He often becomes so hung up in his hook that he overlooks more pertinent and valuable information.

For eg he mentions the all raw milk cheese selection and then elaborates on how the cheeses are listed on the menu--the use of icons etc because it fits his theme or the evolving restaurant. In doing so he neglects to indicate what some of those selections are or how they were served and how they tasted.

He neglects to say how the food differs from what Nish offered at March save for the reference to the beggars purses being no longer offered. How about indicating how the current fare here compares to other popular au current establishments? How about some information that interested diners could use?

[Leonard Kim]

In the June '04 Vogue, almost exactly coincidental with the start of Bruni's tenure, Jeffrey Steingarten commented on the same (or very similar trend.) The essay itself is specifically devoted to chain restaurants, but he talks about "fast-casual-elegant" in general as well. For Steingarten, the time factor (70 minutes vs. 4 hours) is significant as well as the casual/formal thing. But there may well be a restaurant-specific trend here, perhaps spurred by the growth of chain restaurants that ape fine-dining experiences.

Quotes:

It is this fast-casual-elegant movement that has me really spooked. For at the same moment that restaurant chains are pressing up against the fine-dining stratum, fine dining is undergoing an identity crisis. Several of the great restaurateurs in New York City have told me that fine dining is threatened on all sides. These days, people rarely want to spend four hours eating dinner. Fewer customers will sit still for long tasting-menus. Many of them find formality oppressive. No, they don't want hamburgers or pizza. Serve them foie gras, charge anything you want, but make it quick and make it hip. . . .

Customers want to be in and out of a fast-casual-fine-dining restaurant in between 70 and 85 minutes, or so Sweat's research shows. . . .

NY Times historical quote of day:

"There's one trouble at Mortimer's--the noise. We can't really get three-star enjoyment in a restaurant where you can't talk. . . it is the restaurant's fault when the music is there at all if it means that normal table conversation has to be carried on in shouts. Apparently there are people who like the noise, so if you are one of them, add your own third star. Now on to the three-star food." John Canaday, 4/29/76

Edited March 15, 2007 by Leonard Kim (log)

[Sneakeater]

I would have liked to see a slideshow of the week Bruni spent staying in hotels.

[Megan Blocker]

Gawker weighs in on Bruni's hotel special with a multi-editor chat...

BALK BTW It's a weird blend of servicey-meets-Frank's patented single-entrendre review: "But the stranger in my room at the London NYC hotel on a recent night had my full attention, because he was doing something I wasn't at all accustomed to. He was crawling across the floor and under the coffee table." I mean, COME ON.

Rhymes with Memily Yes. F*cking With Us.

Rhymes with Story That's half an entendre.

[docsconz]

Discussion on the question of a trend towards casual fine dining has been split to here.

[Nathan]

for once, NY restaurant industry insiders should be happy with Bruni:

http://dinersjournal.blogs.nytimes.com/200...avior/#more-209

I also highly recommend reading comments 8 and 24 for their amusement factor.

[robyn]

for once, NY restaurant industry insiders should be happy with Bruni:

http://dinersjournal.blogs.nytimes.com/200...avior/#more-209

I also highly recommend reading comments 8 and 24 for their amusement factor.

←

What Bruni is saying is that people should be polite. I am sure that New York is not unique in having its share of impolite diners.

As for the hat/cap thing mentioned in one of the comments - it is - here where I live - and at a couple of places I've encountered in NY - more of an anti-hip-hop/gang related thing. No backwards caps (we even have mall rules which disallow them) - so you can't wear caps - and because you don't want to appear discriminatory - you ban hats - like that old guy wears - too.

Similar rules apply to shoes. No basketball shoes allowed - so to appear non-discriminatory - all athletic footware is banned. I am almost an old lady - but I wasn't allowed to go into at least one nice New York restaurant because I was wearing "athletic" walking shoes with an otherwise ok outfit (sorry - but when I'm doing a few miles of city walking - heels don't cut it - and I didn't know enough to carry an extra pair of shoes with me). Robyn

[chefboy24]

for once, NY restaurant industry insiders should be happy with Bruni:

http://dinersjournal.blogs.nytimes.com/200...avior/#more-209

I also highly recommend reading comments 8 and 24 for their amusement factor.

←

i'm generally happy with bruni?