1862 replies to this topic

[oakapple]

[Crown is] an avowed (and apparently successful) attempt to appeal to a very specific crowd.

And Parm isn't?

If you don't like that crowd the most you can do is acknowledge your prejudice and then try to be fair.

That's the bare minimum requirement. But I think it's possible to review such a place without dripping condescension for the genre, even if it's not your personal cup of tea. I mean, Upper East Side one-percenters read The Times, too. If you're a professional, is it THAT hard to review a restaurant without being quite so blatant in your utter contempt for its intended clientele?

The other point I'd add, is that both my guest and I enjoyed Crown, and neither of us are one-percenters. Now, I'll allow we're not Crown's core audience. But to suggest that people like us can't enjoy such a place—when it's done well—is just wrong. I'm not going to disagree with Wells that the execution is mediocre: he didn't have my meals, and I didn't have his. But had the execution been better, I strongly suspect his patronizing attitude would have been the same; only the stars would've been different.

I think it's perfectly possible to review such a place while adopting a more neutral tone towards its mission, and a professional ought to be able to do that. I might add that it would be nice to have at least ONE critic in town who actually LIKED this type of restaurant—not that I ever had any realistic hope that Wells would be that critic.

[Stone]

All around, displayed like portraits against the wood paneling, were the residents of the East 80s, confident that for as long as their dinner at Crown lasted, the tiny flames and gentle wattage and dark lampshades would conspire to cast them and their jewelry in the kindest possible light.

Then a firefly would flash in a corner of the room and the portraits would be thrown into relief: a row of identical teeth, hair with an amethyst tint, an unyielding tightness in the flesh around the eyes. A pity, that light, but to order one must at least glance at the menu, and at Crown the caviar and oysters and foie gras and dry-aged sirloin are all written in a spindly font that is not easy to make out, particularly by people whose 40th birthday was celebrated in a previous century. And so, whenever a table contemplated dinner, phones would come out, their flashlight apps trained on the italic type.

This is really childish.

[Sneakeater]

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that to me -- and of course I haven't been there -- Crown seems like one of those "EPCOT" restaurants, where the concept predated and in fact is more important than the food. As I've said in connection with some of the lower-scale "EPCOT" restaurants, it's hard to know how the Times is supposed to evaluate such places, since enjoying the ambiance engendered by the concept seems more important than getting any deep satisfaction from the food. The food is just a prop.

The problem with New York now is that "EPCOT" restaurants almost seem to be more common than regular ones.

[oakapple]

Crown seems like one of those "EPCOT" restaurants, where the concept predated and in fact is more important than the food. As I've said in connection with some of the lower-scale "EPCOT" restaurants, it's hard to know how the Times is supposed to evaluate such places, since enjoying the ambiance engendered by the concept seems more important than getting any deep satisfaction from the food. The food is just a prop.

I am not sure that's really true, though. I mean, it seems to me that this place appeals to more-or-less the same clientele as Café Boulud, and no one has ever suggested that CB's food was a mere prop. Some pretty talented guys have cooked there. Now, the neighborhood and the clientele dictate, to an extent, what you can serve; but they don't imply a commitment to doing so indifferently.

In addition, look at the resumes of the people who are at Crown, not counting DeLucie. The executive chef is Jason Hall, who for two years was chef de cuisine at Gotham Bar & Grill. The pastry chef is Heather Bertinetti, who for three years was the acclaimed pastry chef at Michael White's places. These aren't the folks you hire if the food doesn't matter.

[Wilfrid]

And in case P. Wells is wondering why "

Italian-American cuisine is not beloved by the arbiters of good taste" - well, let me explain:

It's garbage, fucking garbage, garbage ingredients, garbage recipes, made by grandmas who can't cook for grandchildren who just want huge piles of too sweet garbage.

I am inclined to agree. "(I)gnor(ing) baked ziti, garlic bread, spaghetti and meatballs and lobster fra diavolo" is the way to go, if you're interested in eating well rather than just filling up.

I would never deny, on principle, that there could be exceptional examples of these dishes - any dishes - but by and large you are going to get what Orik said.

[Wilfrid]

I don't think the type of restaurants opening now has anything to do with potential stars awarded. It has to do with the economics of running the business. Lower opening costs and higher margins. Alex Stupak and his investors have a higher margin selling a taco and 3 Margaritas to each person at a 4-top and flipping that table 3 or 4 times than a $85 3 course dinner that might earn 3 stars in the NYT.

I agree. The economics come first. The critics serve as cheerleaders, reinforcing the misguided idea that we are all "choosing" to eat tacos and meatballs and fried chicken, rather than - as is the case - being driven by the economy to do so.

[Stone]

And in case P. Wells is wondering why "

Italian-American cuisine is not beloved by the arbiters of good taste" - well, let me explain:

It's garbage, fucking garbage, garbage ingredients, garbage recipes, made by grandmas who can't cook for grandchildren who just want huge piles of too sweet garbage.

I am inclined to agree. "(I)gnor(ing) baked ziti, garlic bread, spaghetti and meatballs and lobster fra diavolo" is the way to go, if you're interested in eating well rather than just filling up.

I would never deny, on principle, that there could be exceptional examples of these dishes - any dishes - but by and large you are going to get what Orik said.

I'm sorry. Are we now stating that red-sauce Italian food is intrinsically bad? I should be embarrassed to admit that I like chicken/veal parmigiana, a good meatball, lasagna and lobster fra diavlo?

Utterly absurd.

[Wilfrid]

I think I said completely the opposite of "intrinsically" bad. Indeed, "extrinsically" would seem to be the perfect term. It's usually, for the most part, bad.

No reason for embarrassment. We all like some kinds of mediocre food, for all kinds of obvious reasons.

[Sneakeater]

I am not sure that's really true, though. I mean, it seems to me that this place appeals to more-or-less the same clientele as Café Boulud, and no one has ever suggested that CB's food was a mere prop. Some pretty talented guys have cooked there. Now, the neighborhood and the clientele dictate, to an extent, what you can serve; but they don't imply a commitment to doing so indifferently.

To me, that's the difference between Crown and Cafe Boulud. Cafe Boulud is a restaurant organically (if you will) growing out of the neighborhood, serving a particular clientele's needs almost instinctively, without artifice. Crown seems more like a conceit.

Keeping within the Boulud organization, compare Cafe Boulud with DBGB, which to me seems more like Crown.

In addition, look at the resumes of the people who are at Crown, not counting DeLucie. The executive chef is Jason Hall, who for two years was chef de cuisine at Gotham Bar & Grill. The pastry chef is Heather Bertinetti, who for three years was the acclaimed pastry chef at Michael White's places. These aren't the folks you hire if the food doesn't matter.

I think I'm saying more that the food is secondary than that it doesn't matter AT ALL. And, of course, names and resumes are part of the production. We've seen that at countless places.

[oakapple]

I don't think the type of restaurants opening now has anything to do with potential stars awarded. It has to do with the economics of running the business. Lower opening costs and higher margins. Alex Stupak and his investors have a higher margin selling a taco and 3 Margaritas to each person at a 4-top and flipping that table 3 or 4 times than a $85 3 course dinner that might earn 3 stars in the NYT.

I agree. The economics come first. The critics serve as cheerleaders, reinforcing the misguided idea that we are all "choosing" to eat tacos and meatballs and fried chicken, rather than - as is the case - being driven by the economy to do so.

I'll "third" the motion. But reviews matter, and at the margins I think critic cheerleading does influence menu and design choices, especially when nearly 100 percent of the critics are cheering for the same thing for years on end.

It's worth noting that Frank Bruni and Adam Platt started their act well before the current economic malaise set in.

[oakapple]

I am not sure that's really true, though. I mean, it seems to me that this place appeals to more-or-less the same clientele as Café Boulud, and no one has ever suggested that CB's food was a mere prop. Some pretty talented guys have cooked there. Now, the neighborhood and the clientele dictate, to an extent, what you can serve; but they don't imply a commitment to doing so indifferently.

To me, that's the difference between Crown and Cafe Boulud. Cafe Boulud is a restaurant organically (if you will) growing out of the neighborhood. Crown seems more like a conceit.

I agree to a considerable extent. But I strongly suspect that if Café Boulud opened today, Wells’s review would show similar contempt for the clientele and the genre, much as Frank Bruni did when he reviewed such places, regardless of their quality.

There is an extra layer of contempt for DeLucie, because coddling rich people is basically all he has ever done as a chef, but I don't think that totally explains this review. I mean, before Boulud had Daniel, he was at Le Cirque, which catered to a very similar crowd. It did a better job of that, but they were/are all places for UES one-percenters.

[Sneakeater]

I agree to a considerable extent. But I strongly suspect that if Café Boulud opened today, Wells’s review would show similar contempt for the clientele and the genre, much as Frank Bruni did when he reviewed such places, regardless of their quality.

I agree. Note that my initial post said that Crown seemed to me to be a special case, but that we'll probably get a lot more evidence of a genuine antipathy to fine dining.

[Sneakeater]

There is an extra layer of contempt for DeLucie, because coddling rich people is basically all he has ever done as a chef, but I don't think that totally explains this review. I mean, before Boulud had Daniel, he was at Le Cirque, which catered to a very similar crowd. It did a better job of that, but they were/are all places for UES one-percenters.

But of course, the difference is that Chef Boulud did it by cooking superbly within a certain style, whereas Chef DeLucie does it by contriving things like macaroni-and-cheese-with-truffles. (Also, unlike Chef Boulud, Chef DeLucie started out fairly downscale. I don't know what his training is, but the first time I was aware of him he was cooking popular Italian at the Maritime Hotel.)

[Wilfrid]

I'll "third" the motion. But reviews matter, and at the margins I think critic cheerleading does influence menu and design choices, especially when nearly 100 percent of the critics are cheering for the same thing for years on end.

Agreed. The critical superstructure does matter, but too many get fixated on it while overlooking the economic base. Comrade.

[Adrian]

Another case of the star rating being utterly irrelevant. It seems like Wells "got" the place. The star rating hides information in that context.