You'll get it when it's ready, and you'll like it

[markk]

-- and indeed I think foie gras is served at an illogical point in nearly 100% of fine-dining meals --

That got my curiosity. Where in the meal do you usually have it served, and where would you prefer it?

[Sneakeater]

FG will undoubtedly say beginning/end.

But I've got to say that my first meal at Atelier Robuchon, when I had the tasting menu, I thought the foie gras/quail (the last savory) came too late in the meal. I had already eaten too much to appreciate something that rich.

Edited January 5, 2007 by Sneakeater (log)

[Fat Guy]

Mark, I'd almost always prefer it at the very end of the savory part of the meal, for two reasons: first, because it's almost always the richest, fattiest savory course; second, because of its affinity for sweet wines like Tokaji.

K8memphis, you've got to try Susur in Toronto. The whole progression of the savory part of the meal is inverted. They start with the largest meat portions and end with the smaller seafood servings that most places would position as starters.

[Fat Guy]

I had already eaten too much to appreciate something that rich.

←

Membership revoked.

[Sneakeater]

I still cleaned my plate, though.

[Fat Guy]

Reinstated.

[philadining]

K8memphis, you've got to try Susur in Toronto. The whole progression of the savory part of the meal is inverted. They start with the largest meat portions and end with the smaller seafood servings that most places would position as starters.

←

Stephen, do you think that works? Despite whining about the randomness next door at Lee, my two meals at Susur were peak dining experiences for me. But I'm not sure I quite "got" the reverse progression either time. I like the idea of not saving the big, heavy, dramatic highlight of the meal for a spot where one is too full to really appreciate it, but I still think that lighter, more delicate flavors are better preludes for the more dominating ones, rather than the other way around. Susur's food was good enough that I didn't really care, but I think I might have liked it even a little better if it were presented in reverse, that is to say, conventional, order.

That said, at least there was some logic in the progression, rather than mere randomness.

And incidentally, even "backwards," the foie gras courses I had still appeared pretty early in the meal...

[Fat Guy]

I think it works fine as an interesting food concept. I wouldn't want to eat every meal that way, but twice a decade at Susur it's fun. It's kind of a nightmare for wine, though.

[scottie]

FG, do you still enjoy dining at Tabla's Bread Bar? You stated in last summer's foodblog that you enjoy dining there regularly. Is this still the case?

I ask because the servers there deliver the little spiel about "family style" and "you get it when it comes out."

Full disclosure: I'm a cook at the Bread Bar. The sous chef or the senior cook expedites. We do things in a coordinated, logical order, so I don't even know why the servers deliver this disclaimer. I guess to encourage tapas-style dining. But we do offer a tasting menu that progresses from lighter to heavier, and is served in order, not all at once.

[markk]

Mark, I'd almost always prefer it at the very end of the savory part of the meal, for two reasons: first, because it's almost always the richest, fattiest savory course; second, because of its affinity for sweet wines like Tokaji.

I'll have to ponder your first point, since I'm just used to it at the beginning; but I can tell you that I've eaten a trencherman's lot of foie gras (and then some) in a part of France where they don't serve dessert wines with it, specifically because they think those wines don't belong at the start of the meal. They pair sauteed foie gras with a dry but spicy Riesling, and cold foie gras with a young, unevolved late-harvest wine at the sweetest. It's a great way to go that early in the meal.

But back to your first point - of course, when one would have the 7-course foie gras dinner at D'Artagnan...

Edited January 5, 2007 by markk (log)

[godito]

In my experience, it IS complicated to get your kitchen crew organized enough to fire all the dishes at the same time, sepecially in a progression menu. This is what I have observed:

When the chef-expediter has high standards, all the dishes are placed on the pass at roughly the same time, and never before the runners-servers are ready to pick them up.

If a plate gets to the pass too early, the chef will yell "Re-plate table XX", and then everybody has to do so. Otherwise, the fish will get cold, or dry, or whatever.

But if that person is gone (say, visiting tables, or dealing with providers, or on the phone, or whatever), or if he doesn't have such high standards, then a dish is placed on the pass a minute might go by before the rest of the dishes are ready. I think I might like my smart waiter to bring me my fish before it dries out and then go back to the kitchen to grab the rest of the dishes (food is at its best when it's just plated, afted that, texture, temperature and even flavor get lost)

Now, of course I like the former situation a whole lot more than the later. And I demand it when I'm paying over US$100 for a meal... but sometimes you can't expect much.

[godito]

btw, about the whole foie gras thing, I also like it later in the progression, but not so close to the desserts (which gets complicated during wine pairing). The way I see it, is I like my fish courses (and light meat courses) before my foie gras. And I like my game and my braises after. There are three reasons (well, there are about 20) why I to enjoy tasting menus: well cooked fish, well prepared foie, and prper braising technique.

After the braise, I'm ready form my cheese course.

[moosnsqrl]

In response to moosnsqrl, the one explanation that I've heard from restauranteurs is that it fits in with the "modern concept of grazing/informal dining" and that "young people like it".  And, I hate to say it, but anecdotal evidence gleaned from looking at other tables suggests that "young people" do like it.  (Idiots.)

←

Others have implied that I'm no longer a 'young person'; they're all dead now

I'm struggling with the explanation that these places are tapas (or tapas-y or -ish) because, when I think of tapas, that is the ultimate in controlling what you eat, how much and in what order. You just ask for something, eat it, ask for something else and on and on until you're full or it's approaching midnight and therefore almost time to start thinking about an actual dinner. How did we manage to turn a style of eating that originated either at a bar or at most a tiny, round stand-up-height cocktail table and turn it into something that won't fit on a dinner table without arriving in waves? Caramba!

[Sneakeater]

Others have implied that I'm no longer a 'young person'; they're all dead now

←

Uh-oh.

[Fat Guy]

FG, do you still enjoy dining at Tabla's Bread Bar?

←

You bet I do. But I've never been served a dish in a weird or uncomfortable sequence there. The dishes pretty much come out in waves, two or three depending on the size of your order, in about the same sequence as they appear on the menu. I'm sure if you dined at Bread Bar 50 times (I'm sure I have, in fact) and you ordered Goan avocado salad and pulled lamb naanini, you'd get the avocado salad first and the naanini second all 50 times. That's exactly how it should be. Likewise, I'm sure if you asked for that order to be reversed, you'd be accommodated. The only thing I don't like about Bread Bar's default sequencing is that they bring all the breads first. So the one thing I do to game Bread Bar is I often wait to order bread after the first plates of food hit the table.

[srhcb]

I have a 19 year-old daughter that would probably love such places.  They fit very well with her "the way things have been done in the past must be wrong and should always, always, always be challenged!"

←

In response to moosnsqrl, the one explanation that I've heard from restauranteurs is that it fits in with the "modern concept of grazing/informal dining" and that "young people like it". And, I hate to say it, but anecdotal evidence gleaned from looking at other tables suggests that "young people" do like it. (Idiots.)

←

I wonder if maybe this isn't a reaction by "young people" to the instantaneous service at fast food restaurants they commonly patronize?

In other words, the disjointed, grazing style of presentation is actually a perceived hallmark of an upscale dining experience.

SB

Edited January 6, 2007 by srhcb (log)

[srhcb]

I wonder if maybe this isn't a reaction by "young people" to the instantaneous service at fast food restaurants they commonly patronize?

In other words, the disjointed, grazing style of presentation is actually a perceived hallmark of an upscale dining experience.

←

Or maybe the unusual and erratic serving is the "young peoples'" idea of home-style dining?

SB (just like Mom didn't do)

[Reefpimp]

Or maybe everybody in the country has ADD and an attention span is becoming a thing of the past.

JEBUS AITCH CHRYSOPHASE ON A RED HOT PLANCHA!!! It's three hundred bucks for dinner!! take your damn time and enjoy it like the good Lord intended!!!!

[markk]

I wonder if maybe this isn't a reaction by "young people" to the instantaneous service at fast food restaurants they commonly patronize?

No, because today's kids drink fine wines with their meals.

(Well, if you were on that other thread, you'd get it.)

[Sneakeater]

I have a 19 year-old daughter that would probably love such places.  They fit very well with her "the way things have been done in the past must be wrong and should always, always, always be challenged!"

←

In response to moosnsqrl, the one explanation that I've heard from restauranteurs is that it fits in with the "modern concept of grazing/informal dining" and that "young people like it". And, I hate to say it, but anecdotal evidence gleaned from looking at other tables suggests that "young people" do like it. (Idiots.)

←

I wonder if maybe this isn't a reaction by "young people" to the instantaneous service at fast food restaurants they commonly patronize?

In other words, the disjointed, grazing style of presentation is actually a perceived hallmark of an upscale dining experience.

SB

←

Actually, if I had to psychoanalyze the "young people", I'd guess that they want to abjure all the traditional indicia of "upscale" dining (while, at least for some of them, maintaining food quality). What I'm trying to say is that, perhaps, to them, traditional service seems too, well, when I was a VERY young person, they'd have called it "square".

Edited January 6, 2007 by Sneakeater (log)

[Fat Guy]

FG, do you still enjoy dining at Tabla's Bread Bar?

←

I'm sure if you dined at Bread Bar 50 times (I'm sure I have, in fact) and you ordered Goan avocado salad and pulled lamb naanini, you'd get the avocado salad first and the naanini second all 50 times.

←

Tonight, on visit 51, they came out in reverse order. Scottie, were you toying with me?

[Fat Guy]

I'd be reluctant to accept that sequenceless service is a preference of the younger set. Follow the money. It's simply more profitable and convenient for restaurants to offer this sort of service. Saying it's what the people want is a suspicious claim under those circumstances. Were I to believe that restaurateurs were just dying to serve food in order, but that younger customers were complaining about it, then that would be one thing. But I think it's more accurate to say that young people will tolerate it and have even come to associate it with cool places.

[Sneakeater]

This may be veering slightly off-topic, but the way "young people" view restaurants these days kind of mystifies me.

I was at an arts reception recently at one of the downtown NYC club-restaurant barns, and I was talking to this mid-20s i-banker/financial services type. He asked me what I thought of the restaurant and I said I thought its menu was much too vast and that it was too much work to try to suss out the good things. I added that I thought menus that big were a bad idea, because nobody could do so many things well. It made it seem to me that they didn't take their food seriously.

He looked at me quizically. "If the menu doesn't have everything," he said, "how can you go out with a group and know that everybody'll find something they like?"

Edited January 7, 2007 by Sneakeater (log)

[Sneakeater]

Although, to be fair, it seems likely that small focussed menus are a fairly recent development.

Do you remember that Menu exhibition they had at the New York Public Library a year or two ago? Around the turn of the last century, menus were VAST (and, as someone noted in some other thread here, almost entirely a la carte).

Edited January 7, 2007 by Sneakeater (log)

[ghostrider]

What's weird is that I've noticed at many places lately (mainly casual or youth-oriented places, where I'm eating at the bar) they actually ask me, when I place my order, whether I want what clearly seems to be an appetizer to come first, or whether I want all my dishes at once.  As if the whole idea of "courses" has disappeared.  As if people actually PREFER eating that way.  Has this gotten that far?  Is this something that Young People understand but I don't?  It's bizarre to me.

←

We, & several other diners, have noticed this same thing at a new Turkish restaurant in our area. We all assumed that it had to do with the Turkish Way Of Dining. Now I'm wondering if they were just trying to be trendy.