Bruni and Beyond: NYC Reviewing (2007)

[oakapple]

he didn't get Alinea at all....

←

I just re-read that review, and you have a fair point. Unreserved rapture was given only to El Bulli. There was much he liked at Alinea, but it seemed more respectful than truly adoring.

Whether he "got it" I can't say, since I haven't been there myself.

[Nathan]

he didn't get Will's desserts at Cru or Kahn's desserts at Varietal either...combined with Gilt and his mixed perception of Alinea...I don't think he's too enthused about molecular (though at least open enough to recognize El Bulli for what it is).

[oakapple]

1.  once again, let's have an example of a worthwhile place that others have ignored....you said there were "dozens"...I'm just asking for one.

←

Well, I did give one example upthread. But at a broader level, you didn't answer my question: Is it your contention that everything worth discovering has already been highly publicized? That someone paid to work at it full time couldn't find anyplace worth covering, that people like us don't already know about?

he didn't get Will's desserts at Cru or Kahn's desserts at Varietal either...combined with Gilt and his mixed perception of Alinea...I don't think he's too enthused about molecular (though at least open enough to recognize El Bulli for what it is).

←

I know this will surprise you, but you've convinced me. On a second look, it seems Bruni has had enough opportunities to hit a fair ball in this area, and except at El Bulli, he's struck out.

I would add that I personally think WD-50 deserves the upgrade to three stars. To be sure, it doesn't have the traditional formality of a three-star restaurant, but that clearly isn't a requirement these days. If A Voce and Del Posto and Perry St. and the Bar Room are three-star restaurants, then so is WD-50.

Edited May 3, 2007 by oakapple (log)

[Nathan]

I agree that WD-50 is a three star restaurant.

I really don't think there are any undiscovered restaurants in Manhattan (at least below 125th or so)...

there might be a good dumpling place that no one knows about or a better than expected Italian spot on Amsterdam (just making stuff up here)...but nothing that people would actually travel for..

[Fat Guy]

Even in towns with limited food media, there's no such thing as a serious restaurant that's unknown. So given that there's no such thing as an unknown restaurant period, the question becomes one of degree: how well known is it, and more importantly has it been getting the right kind of attention. A major critic will of course cover the major openings, but other duties include giving the right kind of attention (be it positive or negative -- a corrective in either direction) to restaurants that aren't getting it.

[oakapple]

I really don't think there are any undiscovered restaurants in Manhattan (at least below 125th or so)...

there might be a good dumpling place that no one knows about or a better than expected Italian spot on Amsterdam (just making stuff up here)...but nothing that people would actually travel for..

←

Obviously, any restaurant that's still in business past its 1st birthday has been discovered by someone. I prefer FG's formulation — a place that deserves more attention than it has lately (or ever) had.

Considered that way, I think it's fairly certain that such restaurants exist in Manhattan, though obviously the outer boroughs are more likely. Mind you, I'm not suggesting that there's an undiscovered major restaurant lurking out there. But New Yorkers do travel for "non-major" restaurants — Nathan and Sneakeater being the obvious exemplars. I mean, from (say) Times Square, there are an enormous number of restaurants in a 30-minute travel radius. Sorry, but I don't accept that they've all gotten precisely the amount of "buzz" they deserved.

I don't know about you, but for me, part of the adventure is discovering places not recommended by other people's publicity blurbs. Are you suggesting that you've never tried that, or if you did, that you never had a positive experience? Now, imagine that was your full-time job. You don't think you'd ever find anything?

Edited May 3, 2007 by oakapple (log)

[Nathan]

we've had "underappreciated restaurant" threads here. Esca was the leading vote recipient if I recall correctly.

of course there are underrated or overrated restaurants! I don't see how Bruni's not doing that.

he thought that Little Owl was underrated (in a sense) and gave it 2 stars..dramatically raising its profile. he thought that the Modern was overrated.

Rosanjin and Petrosino stand out precisely because they had garnered very little attention at all. I'm curious as to how many more such places exist. not very many I would wager.

[Sneakeater]

I'll bet there are at least dozens of restaurants like Petrossino. Some are better than others. Some worthy of general recognition, others not. Are you saying you think that, out of the multitudes of small Italian restaurants in New York, Petrossino is the only one that desreves more recognition that it's getting?

[oakapple]

Just a brief word about Petrosino's arc: $25 & Under in January 2003, a 2-star Bruni review in September 2004, closed in February 2006. Whether deserved in Petrosino's case or not, it's something Bruni should do more of. It's also yet another example of a little Italian place that got two stars from him—a genre in which he specializes.

Little Owl doesn't count at all: its full review came just two months after the place opened. There's no dispute that Bruni tracks all the new openings, and reviews the ones he finds worthy.

The Modern doesn't count, either. Like Little Owl, it was reviewed within the first few months after it opened. We all know he does that.

Esca was probably one of the top 5 best-written reviews of Frank Bruni's tenure. Obviously it was a restaurant that already had a pretty high profile (as all of Batali's restaurants do), but he raised it even higher.

Outside of Italian restaurants, the Rosanjin review seems to stand alone.

[Nathan]

Petrosino was d_____ good, beyond underrated...and not really comparable to Little Owl and other Italianesque neighborhood places.

It had a beautiful decor, much more ambitious (and comfortable)....it was basically in the Il Buco vein (the Petrosino aesthetic -- both in decor and culinary aspects was quite different) as a date place.

foodies never seemed to make it there..I never figured out why. It was very good.

I think Bruni raised its profile significantly (I wouldn't have gone there if it wasn't for his review)...but apparently not enough.

edit: I don't think there are dozens of restaurants like Petrosino. I thought it was as good as Lupa (different type of place of course). In fact, I enjoyed my meal there just as much as I did my meal at A Voce.

Edited May 3, 2007 by Nathan (log)

[ulterior epicure]

he didn't get Will's desserts at Cru or Kahn's desserts at Varietal either...combined with Gilt and his mixed perception of Alinea...I don't think he's too enthused about molecular (though at least open enough to recognize El Bulli for what it is).

←

There's a difference between "missing the point of" and "appreciating (as in understanding), but not agreeing with" something. I've neither had Goldfarb's desserts at Cru, Kahn's desserts at Varietal, nor visited Gilt. I've not been to el bulli either.

But, I have been to Alinea (twice) and WD~50 (and moto, if counted), I'd say I "get" what's at play, but I just can't say I'm wild about it. Either way, however, most of my friends know to take a discount on my knocks on molecular gastronomy, because they know I haven't found that much pleasure out of those eating experiences. That doesn't mean I don't "get it." I maybe able to thoughfully articulate my appreciation of that type of cuisine, but I'm not going to gush about it.

[edited for grammar]

Edited May 3, 2007 by ulterior epicure (log)

[Sneakeater]

Petrosino was d_____ good, beyond underrated...and not really comparable to Little Owl and other Italianesque neighborhood places.

It had a beautiful decor, much more ambitious (and comfortable)....it was basically in the Il Buco vein (the Petrosino aesthetic -- both in decor and culinary aspects was quite different) as a date place.

foodies never seemed to make it there..I never figured out why.  It was very good. 

I think Bruni raised its profile significantly (I wouldn't have gone there if it wasn't for his review)...but apparently not enough.

edit:  I don't think there are dozens of restaurants like Petrosino.  I thought it was as good as Lupa (different type of place of course).  In fact, I enjoyed my meal there just as much as I did my meal at A Voce.

←

What I mean is that there are dozens of small Italian restaurants. The City is lousy with them. Only a few are probably extraordinary -- but we only know about them if (a) we happen to stumble upon one or (b) some reviewer points it out.

You only know how good Petrosino was because Bruni reviewed it. If Bruni hadn't reviewed Petrosino, you never would have gone there. It would have been another of the multitudes of small Italian places that get reviewed in "$25 and Under" (or used to before that column's focus became more seriously downmarket) and that we all immediately forget about. So you never would have known how good you thought it was.

So how can you say that, among the dozens of other places like Petrosino -- small Italian places that we all ignore -- there are no others worthy of note? Absent reviews, you'd have to eat there to know. And probably, you wouldn't bother.

Edited May 3, 2007 by Sneakeater (log)

[Nathan]

Petrosino was d_____ good, beyond underrated...and not really comparable to Little Owl and other Italianesque neighborhood places.

It had a beautiful decor, much more ambitious (and comfortable)....it was basically in the Il Buco vein (the Petrosino aesthetic -- both in decor and culinary aspects was quite different) as a date place.

foodies never seemed to make it there..I never figured out why.  It was very good. 

I think Bruni raised its profile significantly (I wouldn't have gone there if it wasn't for his review)...but apparently not enough.

edit:  I don't think there are dozens of restaurants like Petrosino.  I thought it was as good as Lupa (different type of place of course).  In fact, I enjoyed my meal there just as much as I did my meal at A Voce.

←

What I mean is that there are dozens of small Italian restaurants. The City is lousy with them. Only a few are probably extraordinary -- but we only know about them if (a) we happen to stumble upon one or (b) some reviewer points it out.

You only know how good Petrosino was because Bruni reviewed it. If Bruni hadn't reviewed Petrosino, you never would have gone there. It would have been another of the multitudes of small Italian places that get reviewed in "$25 and Under" (or used to before that column's focus became more seriously downmarket) and that we all immediately forget about. So you never would have known how good you thought it was.

So how can you say that, among the dozens of other places like Petrosino -- small Italian places that we all ignore -- there are no others worthy of note? Absent reviews, you'd have to eat there to know. And probably, you wouldn't bother.

←

I see your point.

One false assumption that you're making (which doesn't necessarily obviate your larger point)...is that Petrosino was a small neighborhood Italian place.

It wasn't.

It was decent-sized and had a decor that looked like it could have been done by AvroK. You couldn't peek inside without realizing that it was much more ambitious (or swanky anyway) then all those little Italian restaurants on Bleecker or 2nd Ave on the UES. I tend to wonder if it wasn't in its location a tad too early. If it opened there today, the decor alone would create a lot of buzz (see FRO.G).

Bruni actually describes it pretty well:

http://events.nytimes.com/2004/09/29/dinin...68983ca&ei=5070

(oakapple will have fun with some of the language in this one)

[Sneakeater]

All I can tell you is that I walked by Petrosino countless times, and it never occurred to me to pay it any attention at all.

[Nathan]

the interior decor was actually rather stunning (especially the bar and the walls).

edit: my question is, are there really likely to be many places like that "undiscovered" in the city?

I think Petrosino merely opened a couple years too soon.

Edited May 3, 2007 by Nathan (log)

[rich]

Just a brief word about Petrosino's arc: $25 & Under in January 2003, a 2-star Bruni review in September 2004, closed in February 2006. Whether deserved in Petrosino's case or not, it's something Bruni should do more of. It's also yet another example of a little Italian place that got two stars from him—a genre in which he specializes.

←

Can a case be made that his review hastened its demise?

Maybe. Since he tends to start with the premise that all Italians are two stars and works from there. By awarding Petrosino two stars he made it more than it was. When diners came they were disppointed because it didn't live up to its two-star appointment - thus causing it to close. If he had given it one, maybe people would have been happy and continued to return.

And just maybe he gave it a second star because of the decor since that appears more important to him than food.

[Nathan]

huh? Petrosino closed two years after Bruni reviewed it! it also, imo, easily deserved its two stars. this was also at the beginning of Bruni's reviewing career...no rep to speak of.

he didn't make it more than it was...it was merely forgotten...(you'll notice that apparently no one here ever went there besides me)

Edited May 3, 2007 by Nathan (log)

[rich]

huh?  Petrosino closed two years after Bruni reviewed it!  it also, imo, easily deserved its two stars.  this was also at the beginning of Bruni's reviewing career...no rep to speak of.

he didn't make it more than it was...it was merely forgotten...(you'll notice that apparently no one here ever went there besides me)

←

Actually, less than a year and a half, but it doesn't matter.

I would have gone if I knew you thought it was that good.

Edited May 3, 2007 by rich (log)

[Nathan]

to be honest...I forgot about it over the last year or so...so many new places opened and talked about...

besides, it was entirely a date place. I don't go to date places. I think we were the only non-couple there the couple times I went.

[oakapple]

Can a case be made that his review hastened its demise?

←

It would be a tough case to make. The life expectancy of a new restaurant—reviewed or not—is not that great. There are a number of restaurants that have thrived even though Bruni panned them, and there are a number of restaurants that have closed even though he loved them.

I suspect that most Bruni reviews, even the less-than-rapturous ones, are good for business. It would be hard to measure, but I'll bet that even Max Brenner got busier this week, even though it's tough to imagine a more negative review.

[Nathan]

It is with a heavy heart that I come here to finally speak truth to power.

I can be silent no more.

It is indubitably clear that Bruni has a specific personal bias in his reviewing. Specifically, Bruni has a bias against heterosexual male chefs in both haute restaurants and molecular/avant garde restaurants. I note the following:

Bruni gave two stars to each of the following restaurants: Gordon Ramsay, The Modern, and Gilt. He gave one star to Varietal and the Russian Tea Room. He has not altered the two stars given to WD-50 by the noted heterophobe, William Grimes. I could go on. Case closed.

Edited May 8, 2007 by Nathan (log)

[Nathan]

(for those who may not be aware, the foregoing was a parody.)

today, McNally has made a laughingstock of himself by accusing Bruni of a gender bias in his reviews. I have no way of knowing whether Bruni is biased against female chefs...what I do know is that there is no evidence (or at least none adduced by McNally) that this is the case.

Due to the relative paucity of female chefs in NY, McNally can't make a statistical argument, so he makes his claim based off of two restaurants: the Spotted Pig and Prune (well, his contention is really predicated upon the Morandi review...but he doesn't dare actually say that). Even if Bruni's ratings of the Pig and Prune were indefensible, they still wouldn't have any statistical significance, but, neither of those ratings were especially controversial.

I've dined enough times at both the Spotted Pig and Little Owl to be comfortable in saying that they are quite similar, even equivalent in culinary terms (and closely located). Since LO has two stars, while SP has one, McNally has at least a colorable argument here that SP is underrated. Of course, SP is slighty more expensive, has far dodgier service and is drastically more uncomfortable...I assume that McNally thinks that because the hoi polloi may spot Jay-Z dining at the SP, that makes up for those factors. well, maybe so. but color me unconvinced that Bruni downgraded SP due to Bloomfield's gender.

as for Prune, I've only been there once. but I'm not sure that a place known primarily for its brunches was massively underserved with a one-star rating. I haven't had dinner there. maybe it was. but I don't remember much outcry at the time. further, Bruni implied in his blog that he didn't think much of Uovo, opened by Hamilton's culinary disciple...who happened to be male.

I suppose McNally meant to Imus Bruni; more likely, he Chodorowized himself.

Edited May 8, 2007 by Nathan (log)

[Megan Blocker]

FYI, for those who haven't seen it, I'm assuming this is the fracas to which Nathan refers:

Morandi owner Keith McNally has planted a letter with Eater accusing the Times critic of being biased against woman chefs. “Bruni had never given a female chef in Manhattan anything more than one star, ever,” McNally writes. The complaint goes on for a long time and seems unlike McNally, who has almost always stayed above the fray.

Click here for more, via Grub Street. And here's Eater's own coverage.

[rich]

I admit it. I have a gender bias.

I went a year and only dined at places with female chefs.

Everyone knows that female chefs cook rings around any male chef - even my wife knows that.

Saying that, does anyone think the NY Times chief restaurant critic knows if a male or female is the chef of any given place? That would be beyond his scope.

I do know he has a bias to mostly naked women writhing around his table.

Edited May 8, 2007 by rich (log)

[Leonard Kim]

I read the links and it does seem that McNally did his homework in that he appears to have read all of Bruni's reviews in order to make his assertions.

There are some things he says that are subject to statistics.

1) 2 female chefs have 2 stars

2) 12 female chefs have zero or 1 star.

Given Bruni's known rates of giving out stars, you can do a chi-square test. As I see it, it's actually not that probable that this is just dumb luck, though by the usual standard (5%) this just barely fails to be statistically significant. So I credit McNally with an interesting observation which may well point to some bias somewhere.

But if there is a bias, it has certainly not been proven that it's Bruni's. My own opinion is that any bias is likely to be out there in the "real world" of high-end restaurant business. As Nathan's post suggests, it's only Bruni's fault if he seems obviously to have gotten these 14 ratings wrong.

One detail is that McNally self-admittedly doesn't count Felidia. I guess it's his right to focus only on who's running the kitchen. Bruni's 2-star and up reviews do include a number female owners (and also pastry chefs.)

McNally makes some factual statements of questionable relevance.

1) neither of the 2 star female chefs are in Manhattan

2) the gender of the 2 star female chefs are not mentioned in the reviews

and one subjective assertion that seems silly to me (Bruni does a "song and dance" about chefs' maleness.)