21 replies to this topic

[g.johnson]

The topic arose because it seemed strange that a restaurant in France should specify that its eel came from the Sargasso Sea. In that context it seems fairly obvious that “all” refers to all eel that you’re likely to get in France, including that from the rivers of Bordeaux to use your counterexample.

[Vanessa]

Strangely,

No adult eel has been captured in the Sargasso Sea or anywhere near it.

v

[ginger milk]

The discussion had gone beyond Le Bristol to the sourcing of eel, with a poster referring to "all" eel being from the Sargasso sea and being incorrect about that.

It's not a statement of fact but a question if you look back.

[g.johnson]

Strangely,

No adult eel has been captured in the Sargasso Sea or anywhere near it.

v

That's because they're slippery buggers.

[alifewortheating]

My buddy just had lunch at Le Bristol yesterday, and was disappointed.
His full thoughts with photos and videos are available here, but here's the summary...

Basically, I left the restaurant confident that Le Bristrol had rightfully earned its three stars for its refinement of dishes, service, and ambiance. I just felt like they just lacked the inspirational spark that some of the other Parisian 3* restaurants, like L'Arpège and L'Astrance, have ... most of the flavors were boring.

In a way I wish I had gone last year before the third star was awarded. Some of the dishes seemed to have unnecessary plays on texture making them really gelatinous, which make me question if this was artificially done to make some of Frechon’s more classical cooking seem more modern and innovative. Perhaps this is his way of keeping things “new” to hold on to his third star. Leaving out this play on textures could have made the first three courses even more appealing and seem more natural.

The other thing I noticed was what seemed to be a tremendous discrepancy between the main courses ordered from the lunch menu, and from the à la carte menu. It was like two different restaurants, and made me wonder if there was a separate lunch menu chef who was preparing those items. The majority of the courses for which I had qualms came from the lunch menu. Could be a coincidence,and maybe I’m just too idealistic, but I feel like a three star restaurant should have consistency between the two menus. At least that’s been my experience.

[Orik]

We went mostly to satisfy my lievre fetish, having heard that Frechon's a la royale version is very good, and indeed it was great, one of the top three I've had (of dozens).

The meat was had powerful game flavor, a small piece of the kidneys shamelessly put to good use (in the sauce? in the torchon? hard to say), served with some raviolis of Jerusalem artichoke, but who cares. The sea urchin appetizer was also a great success, I think the pictures you can find somewhere on the ulteriorsnobwortheating bloglopoly tell the whole story about it. A second appetizer - raw scallops, oysters, curry oil - simple and good with a seemingly scientifically calculated balance between the amounts of oysters and scallops, and the other main course - a perfectly proficiently prepared sweetbread served with extremely poor white truffles.

Nice insanely priced cheeses, a very good not-very-sweet dessert (something with grapefruit and campari) - the food overall was excellent even if was not trying to be extremely creative or tell everyone how important turnips are. I'd go back despite the horrendous surroundings.

[Orik]

On the current menu at Bristol there's a must eat dish - sweetbreads cooked in tobacco leaves, served with coffee-licorice reduction. Just perfect.