Bruni and Beyond: NYC Reviewing (2007)

[oakapple]

Bruni has biases, no doubt about it. His most obvious bias is in favor of Italian restaurants (his Morandi smackdown notwithstanding). He's also biased in favor of steakhouses, Asian restaurants, and casual restaurants.

As I have remarked before, among restaurants that opened during his tenure, he has awarded three stars to only one conventionally formal non-Italian restaurant: Country. Every other three-star award has been: Italian, a re-review, or comparatively casual.

[Nathan]

of course he has biases, all critics do.

like I said, I don't know if he has bias against female chefs...but I see no evidence of it (for one thing he hasn't had much opportunity to show a bias).

the problem with McNally's purported statistical claim is that it assumes an equal distribution of female chefs across (what would be objectively considered) no-star, one-star, two-star, three-star and four-star restaurants. I don't keep tabs on the genders of NY chefs...but if anyone knows of any NYC restaurants with a female chef at the helm that has three or four star aspirations (as the restaurant now operates)...I'd like to hear it. In fact, I'd like to hear McNally name one.

Instead, he named two one-star restaurants that at least had a risible claim to being possibly two-star restaurants. but neither of those cases are manifestly egregious.

[Nathan]

another thought, of reviewed restaurants in the past couple years, the ratio of female 0-2 star chefs to female 3-4 star chefs is 14 to 0.

I'm not sure that's really any different than the male ratio (I'm throwing a number out here...someone can go count if they really feel like it) of 12 to 1.

my point is:

NY doesn't have very many three or four star chefs, period.

It doesn't appear to have any female three or four star chefs.

Why either of these is Bruni's fault is unclear to me (certainly the latter anyway).

[Nathan]

on final thought:

um, does anyone here think that if Bruni had one-starred Felidia that McNally wouldn't have included it as an example of Bruni's "bias"?

of course he would have.

[weinoo]

I don't keep tabs on the genders of NY chefs...

←

Oh, come on!! Everyone on this board knows the gender of the chef at every new restaurant of import that opens in this city.

And most probably knows the gender of every chef whose restaurant has been reviewed as well.

[Nathan]

I seriously don't.

I don't have the foggiest clue who's in the kitchen at Perry Street...and I've eaten there almost a dozen times. Is it still Benno at Per Se? Who's at Ramsay now?

I'm not a groupie, I don't follow that stuff. (and yeah, JG, Keller and Ramsay don't count for those restaurants under the McNally ground rules established for Felidia.)

edit: as I said above, I'm guessing all of the answers are male...but the point is, that's not Bruni's fault.

Edited May 8, 2007 by Nathan (log)

[Dave H]

I was curious at to the identities of the two non-Manhattan two-star female chefs whom Bruni, ruthless enforcer of the patriarchy that he is, failed to credit in his reviews. The first, of course, is Sripraphai Tipmanee, whose name I suspect no one would have ever heard if her restaurant wasn't eponymous. There is a bias here, but it has nothing to do with gender.

As for the second, I'm drawing a blank. I spent some time trying to google out the head chef at Spicy and Tasty (can't be done, I'm pretty sure) before trying to run through the other Outer Borough two stars. Hmm...didn't Al di La get two? Al di La chef...Anna Klinger!

Aha! So that's a potentially colorable claim. (I mean, McNally's overall argument is preposterous, but it is at least commonly considered an oversight not to mention the chef at a small Italian place--in a way that, fairly or not, it's not at a more "ethnic" ethnic restaurant.) So I click through to Frank's Al di La review to find...why, Anna Klinger, there at the top of the 7th paragraph.

Puzzling.

Oh wait. I see: since Frank failed to specifically mention that she was the BOH half of the husband-and-wife team, he technically "flatly refused to mention that the chef was a woman."

(Oh, and I checked the Sripraphai review on a hunch, and, sure enough, he identifies Ms. Tipmanee as the owner, but does not make explicit the fact that she is in charge of the kitchen.)

[Dave H]

So, unless I'm missing something, the only female-cheffed restaurant in New York that even pretends it could have a plausible shot at three NYT stars is Annisa, currently carrying two stars from Grimes. On my one visit there, I was pretty disappointed; I think it's a strong one star. But it turns out we don't need to guess what Frank thinks; he wrote a fairly in-depth Diner's Journal piece detailing two visits to the restaurant: one that seems to have been promising enough to make him consider Annisa for a possible three star re-review, and a second middling enough to convince him it couldn't do better than two. Among other things he mentions how much he likes the fact that a woman runs the kitchen, and what an embarrassment it is that this is so rare among serious NY restaurants. Anita Lo is discussed prominently throughout. It is fairly obvious where his thoughts on the subject lie.

[Dave H]

One last thought: doesn't this incident pretty well confirm that Morandi is in fact not nearly as Bruni-proof as alleged?

Meanwhile, just above the item collecting reactions to his bizarre rantings, Eater links to rumors that erstwhile feminist McNally has fired Jody Williams for having the unfeminine temerity to point out that, judging by Frank's review, her cooking was the only thing saving that place from a Poor.

[Leonard Kim]

I'm not disagreeing with anyone here, just clarifying my last post.

If you took 14 chefs and expected them to be distributed according to Bruni's averages, you'd expect no four stars, 2 three stars, 5 two stars, and 7 one or zero stars. In actuality, you get zero three or four stars, 2 two stars, and 12 one or zero stars.

It is possible, but improbable that this is dumb luck. I estimate a 6% chance it is just luck, which is just on the wrong side of statistical significance.

However, if there is a bias, I repeat, I doubt it's due to Bruni for all the reasons cited. I agree with Nathan and Dave H -- it's just the present reality that women chefs are underrepresented at the highest levels.

Edit: I followed McNally in lumping zero and one together. If you separate them out, the dumb luck probability goes up to about 9% (because female chefs are not being overrepresented in the zero star category -- so the issue is really just in 1-3 stars.)

Edited May 9, 2007 by Leonard Kim (log)

[oakapple]

In today's review Frank Bruni probably arrives at the correct ratings for Craftsteak and Craftbar (** and * respectively). But isn't it just typical that this is only the second re-review of his tenure, and it's a steakhouse?

Meanwhile, today's Critic's Notebook covers a pizzeria in Los Angeles. Apparently a damned good one, but an Italian restaurant nevertheless.

Put Frank on the steakhouse and Italian beat, and leave the rest of the restaurants to someone else.

[oakapple]

If you took 14 chefs and expected them to be distributed according to Bruni's averages, you'd expect no four stars, 2 three stars, 5 two stars, and 7 one or zero stars.  In actuality, you get zero three or four stars, 2 two stars, and 12 one or zero stars.

It is possible, but improbable that this is dumb luck.  I estimate a 6% chance it is just luck, which is just on the wrong side of statistical significance.

However, if there is a bias, I repeat, I doubt it's due to Bruni for all the reasons cited.  I agree with Nathan and Dave H -- it's just the present reality that women chefs are underrepresented at the highest levels.

←

There's plenty of bias against women chefs, but I don't think it's coming from Bruni.

In the first place, I'm not aware of any plausible three or four-star candidate with a woman chef that has opened during Bruni's tenure. He can only award the stars if the restaurants exist.

The real argument is at the two-star level, since every restaurant these days is a two-star candidate. That's McNally's real beef, since I'm sure he never saw Morandi as a three-star restaurant. But given the widespread critical complaints about Morandi, you can hardly blame Bruni for not loving the place.

So if McNally is serious, he would need to tell us which restaurants Bruni rated below the critical consensus. If enough of them have women chefs, then maybe there's a real pattern there. But I doubt it will be more significant than Bruni's bias in favor of Italian restaurants—a bias from which McNally benefited, as the Morandi review could very easily have been zero stars.

Question to Leonard Kim: Is Bruni's pro-Italian bias statistically significant?

[Nathan]

If you took 14 chefs and expected them to be distributed according to Bruni's averages, you'd expect no four stars, 2 three stars, 5 two stars, and 7 one or zero stars.  In actuality, you get zero three or four stars, 2 two stars, and 12 one or zero stars.

It is possible, but improbable that this is dumb luck.  I estimate a 6% chance it is just luck, which is just on the wrong side of statistical significance.

However, if there is a bias, I repeat, I doubt it's due to Bruni for all the reasons cited.  I agree with Nathan and Dave H -- it's just the present reality that women chefs are underrepresented at the highest levels.

←

There's plenty of bias against women chefs, but I don't think it's coming from Bruni.

In the first place, I'm not aware of any plausible three or four-star candidate with a woman chef that has opened during Bruni's tenure. He can only award the stars if the restaurants exist.

The real argument is at the two-star level, since every restaurant these days is a two-star candidate. That's McNally's real beef, since I'm sure he never saw Morandi as a three-star restaurant. But given the widespread critical complaints about Morandi, you can hardly blame Bruni for not loving the place.

So if McNally is serious, he would need to tell us which restaurants Bruni rated below the critical consensus. If enough of them have women chefs, then maybe there's a real pattern there. But I doubt it will be more significant than Bruni's bias in favor of Italian restaurants—a bias from which McNally benefited, as the Morandi review could very easily have been zero stars.

Question to Leonard Kim: Is Bruni's pro-Italian bias statistically significant?

←

Agreed that there's probably a bias against female chefs (it can't be statistically proven because we'd have to look at the number of women going to cooking school, the number of women applying for chef jobs, the number of women with three and four star chef aspirations and experience, etc. etc.); but I think we all agree that it's nonsense to blame that on Bruni. McNally, as a leading restauranteur, has a heck of a lot more pull in this field than Bruni.

Although McNally made much of there being no three or four star female chefs, he didn't even bother to mention any candidates for that status (for obvious reasons). He did mention two female one-star chefs who he implied could receive two stars. I addressed that above. Either of those restaurants could be plausibly a two-star restaurant. Neither of them is clearly wrongly rated at one star.

[Nathan]

In today's review Frank Bruni probably arrives at the correct ratings for Craftsteak and Craftbar (** and * respectively). But isn't it just typical that this is only the second re-review of his tenure, and it's a steakhouse?

Meanwhile, today's Critic's Notebook covers a pizzeria in Los Angeles. Apparently a damned good one, but an Italian restaurant nevertheless.

Put Frank on the steakhouse and Italian beat, and leave the rest of the restaurants to someone else.

←

well...it is the first west coast Batali restaurant (discounting his dad)....and it's been very positively received there.

[oakapple]

In Meanwhile, today's Critic's Notebook covers a pizzeria in Los Angeles. Apparently a damned good one, but an Italian restaurant nevertheless.

←

well...it is the first west coast Batali restaurant (discounting his dad)....and it's been very positively received there.

←

I'm not suggesting the trip was utterly without merit.

But I think he has to be called on it, when A) He is already known to have a pronounced Italian bias and a Batali bias; B) He flies out to L.A. on the paper's dime, pays multiple visits to a pizzeria—and apparently dines nowhere else.

[Nathan]

In Meanwhile, today's Critic's Notebook covers a pizzeria in Los Angeles. Apparently a damned good one, but an Italian restaurant nevertheless.

←

well...it is the first west coast Batali restaurant (discounting his dad)....and it's been very positively received there.

←

I'm not suggesting the trip was utterly without merit.

But I think he has to be called on it, when A) He is already known to have a pronounced Italian bias and a Batali bias; B) He flies out to L.A. on the paper's dime, pays multiple visits to a pizzeria—and apparently dines nowhere else.

←

do you really think the NY Times wasn't going to send someone to check out Batali's first restaurant elsewhere?

[oakapple]

In Meanwhile, today's Critic's Notebook covers a pizzeria in Los Angeles. Apparently a damned good one, but an Italian restaurant nevertheless.

←

well...it is the first west coast Batali restaurant (discounting his dad)....and it's been very positively received there.

←

I'm not suggesting the trip was utterly without merit.

But I think he has to be called on it, when A) He is already known to have a pronounced Italian bias and a Batali bias; B) He flies out to L.A. on the paper's dime, pays multiple visits to a pizzeria—and apparently dines nowhere else.

←

do you really think the NY Times wasn't going to send someone to check out Batali's first restaurant elsewhere?

←

As I said, "I'm not suggesting the trip was utterly without merit." That's despite the fact that Batali was basically only a consultant, and doesn't seem to be the primary creative drive behind the place. It's not a Batali restaurant the way Babbo is a Batali restaurant. Edited May 9, 2007 by oakapple (log)

[Nathan]

In Meanwhile, today's Critic's Notebook covers a pizzeria in Los Angeles. Apparently a damned good one, but an Italian restaurant nevertheless.

←

well...it is the first west coast Batali restaurant (discounting his dad)....and it's been very positively received there.

←

I'm not suggesting the trip was utterly without merit.

But I think he has to be called on it, when A) He is already known to have a pronounced Italian bias and a Batali bias; B) He flies out to L.A. on the paper's dime, pays multiple visits to a pizzeria—and apparently dines nowhere else.

←

do you really think the NY Times wasn't going to send someone to check out Batali's first restaurant elsewhere?

←

As I said, "I'm not suggesting the trip was utterly without merit." That's despite the fact that Batali was basically only a consultant, and doesn't seem to be the primary creative drive behind the place. It's not a Batali restaurant the way Babbo is a Batali restaurant.

←

true. but I'll note that a significant amount of dishes on the Mozza menu are from the Otto menu.

there's an Observer article that's directly on point for this thread:

http://www.observer.com/2007/feel-bruni-effect-new-york

[Leonard Kim]

Question to Leonard Kim: Is Bruni's pro-Italian bias statistically significant?

←

Hmm. This is a little tricky. If one compared his Italian ratings to his ratings at large, one could argue, as with female chefs, that any discrepancy has to do with an external bias in the real world. For example, no matter what his percentages are, there are no 4-star Italian restaurants, but that's not Bruni's fault.

You could simply count how many Italian restaurants he reviews, regardless of rating, compared to other critics, but I think Marc is suggesting the bias is actually in the ratings.

If I compare his ratings of Italian restaurants to previous critics, there's always the argument that Italian restaurants are more ambitious now, aiming for 3-4 stars off the bat, and that might explain higher ratings. Based on some of his writings, I wouldn't be surprised if Bruni held that opinion. With that caveat, this is probably the way to go, so I'll do a comparison against, say, Grimes, unless you have a different preference, and get back to you.

Edited May 9, 2007 by Leonard Kim (log)

[Sneakeater]

I think what you would really have to do is compare how Bruni rates Italian restaurants as against how he rates comparable French/contintental restaurants. This may be so subjective (what is "comparable"?) that it might not be doable.

(Whenever I hear about Bruni's supposed Italian bias, I think, "What about Alto?" I guess oakapple would say that in that case, the Italian bias was trumped by the anti-fancy bias.)

Edited May 9, 2007 by Sneakeater (log)

[Jesikka]

In Meanwhile, today's

there's an Observer article that's directly on point for this thread:

http://www.observer.com/2007/feel-bruni-effect-new-york

←

I think the most amazing part of that article is the following statement from McNally: “People don’t realize that neither Balthazar nor any of my restaurants ever received really good reviews. But they’re all still around and thankfully quite busy,” Mr. McNally said via e-mail. “I certainly don’t engage a P.R. person or anything like that. I simply try to make my restaurants the kinds of places that I’d like to go to. Nothing else. Hopefully, other people feel the same way."

He's trying to say that he has no PR?? Is he kidding?

As thought his very comments on this topic aren't part of a PR campaign?

On that note, can anyone confirm/deny the rumor that Jody Williams is going to be fired?

[oakapple]

I think what you would really have to do is compare how Bruni rates Italian restaurants as against how he rates comparable French/contintental restaurants.  This may be so subjective (what is "comparable"?) that it might not be doable.

(Whenever I hear about Bruni's supposed Italian bias, I think, "What about Alto?"  I guess oakapple would say that in that case, the Italian bias was trumped by the anti-fancy bias.)

←

The two biases I perceive are:

1) Higher percentage of Italian restaurants reviewed

2) Higher average ratings given Italian restaurants than other types of restaurants

I think both of these things are objectively ascertainable. The only conceivable argument is precisely what constitutes an Italian restaurant, given that so many restaurants these days straddle culinary borders. For instance, I'd put both The Little Owl and The Orchard in the Italian category, though they're not exclusively so.

We could check for an Italian bias against the rest of his reviews, or againist Grimes's & Reichl's reviews. The check for an anti-tablecloth, anti-French/Continental bias might be another day's work, but I don't want to presume on Leonard's time.

For the purposes of this study, I would leave four-star reviews out of the picture. Since no NYT critic has given four stars to an Italian restaurant, we can assume the relevant population is zero.

[Nathan]

McNally probably doesn't hire PR firms, he doesn't need to. Batali doesn't, for that exact reason. They know that anything they open will get covered heavily from well before the opening.

but sure, his comments are a form of PR...but he didn't deny doing PR, he denied specifically hiring PR people...which is perfectly plausible.

[Nathan]

I think what you would really have to do is compare how Bruni rates Italian restaurants as against how he rates comparable French/contintental restaurants.  This may be so subjective (what is "comparable"?) that it might not be doable.

(Whenever I hear about Bruni's supposed Italian bias, I think, "What about Alto?"  I guess oakapple would say that in that case, the Italian bias was trumped by the anti-fancy bias.)

←

The two biases I perceive are:

1) Higher percentage of Italian restaurants reviewed

2) Higher average ratings given Italian restaurants than other types of restaurants

I think both of these things are objectively ascertainable. The only conceivable argument is precisely what constitutes an Italian restaurant, given that so many restaurants these days straddle culinary borders. For instance, I'd put both The Little Owl and The Orchard in the Italian category, though they're not exclusively so.

We could check for an Italian bias against the rest of his reviews, or againist Grimes's & Reichl's reviews. The check for an anti-tablecloth, anti-French/Continental bias might be another day's work, but I don't want to presume on Leonard's time.

For the purposes of this study, I would leave four-star reviews out of the picture. Since no NYT critic has given four stars to an Italian restaurant, we can assume the relevant population is zero.

←

Is Bouley Upstairs an Italian restaurant?

you can't just exclude four star restaurants since there are French restaurants with four-stars...those have to be considered in company with formal Italian restaurants (Del Posto certainly had four-star aspirations).

in other words, if one set is "serious Italian restaurants" then another must be "serious French restaurants" which must include four star French restaurants.

[Sneakeater]

It seemed very disigenuous to me for McNally to be denying Bruni's influence when at the same time he's mounting this ridiculous (and to my mind transparently homophobic) campaign against Bruni.