Love at least had the good sense to call his restaurant the Lonesome Dove Western Bistro, which meant that people would have a pretty good idea what it was about, even if they had never heard of the chef. I remember that Lonesome Dove was packed when we went. Love had no trouble attracting diners initially; not enough of them had any desire to go back.
SHO Shaun Hergatt
#16
Posted 07 July 2009 - 07:08 PM
Love at least had the good sense to call his restaurant the Lonesome Dove Western Bistro, which meant that people would have a pretty good idea what it was about, even if they had never heard of the chef. I remember that Lonesome Dove was packed when we went. Love had no trouble attracting diners initially; not enough of them had any desire to go back.
Editor, New York Journal
#17
Posted 07 July 2009 - 07:11 PM
These guys come here, and we're all told, like, this is the biggest chef in Charlotte (and with all those banks there, you know he has a high-class clientele), everybody there is just crazy for his food -- and then it turns out (if everybody is lucky) to be perfectly fine just-below-what-we're-used-to-getting-here stuff.
At least, that's how people perceive it.
(I'm one of the few people who liked Lonesome Dove, BTW.)
#18
Posted 07 July 2009 - 08:45 PM
Love at least had the good sense to call his restaurant the Lonesome Dove Western Bistro, which meant that people would have a pretty good idea what it was about, even if they had never heard of the chef. I remember that Lonesome Dove was packed when we went. Love had no trouble attracting diners initially; not enough of them had any desire to go back.
heh, my husband and i were the only people in the restaurant, the chef did not seem to care (the kitchen had an open window)
there was a long list of things they did not do right.
but he was also sold to NY - much like Ducasse and some more recent transplants - as a big shot where he came from and he had that attitude to boot.
they are likely being smarter about opening fairly quietly and not positioning the chef as the best thing since sliced bread (same PR co as Love's opening), letting the food do the talking. or the media is not biting because Hergatt* does not have as much media presence as, say, Govind Armstrong. or maybe they just don't know what to do with SHO being so high end and not recession friendly.
To start, they should promote the hell out of the price.
*when i met him at a party about two years ago and he was talking about SHO, i didn't exactly get the impression that he was the shy let-my-food-do-the-talking type. quite the opposite. either that changed or he's getting some good counseling on how not to act like he's the best chef in town and he'll show NY (a la Love)
Everything is always OK in the end. If it's not OK, then it's not the end.
#19
Posted 07 July 2009 - 08:49 PM
#20
Posted 07 July 2009 - 08:52 PM
As for the food, I want to be clear about something. Just because some of it wasn't particularly to my taste doesn't mean it's "not exciting". Look how excited oakapple got about it. He's at least as reliable as I am (actually, I flatter myself by saying that). My reaction is just a data point, nothing more.
i don't have much of a dining budget these days and since there is always a running list of places i want to check out, gotta prioritize somehow.
i'm looking for different flavors too. the other night i almost went to Shang, but they raised their prices and dropped the more interesting dishes from the menu so i lost interest. and my husband reminded me of the Susur meal.
after trying some small plates at Table 8 in Miami, can't say that's calling either. i guess i'd be most excited to go back to Corton right now but it's hard to justify it as work eating while there are so many new places to check out.
Everything is always OK in the end. If it's not OK, then it's not the end.
#21
Posted 07 July 2009 - 09:03 PM
I mean, it's SO convenient.
#22
Posted 07 July 2009 - 09:03 PM
I cannot stress enough, though, that his case does not really resemble that of Govind Armstrong, Alain Ducasse, Susur Lee, or Tim Love. This isn't a clone of a restaurant that exists somewhere else. Hergatt hasn't been on the Food Network, isn't selling a cookbook, and has no other restaurants. He's more like April Bloomfield or Masa Takayama, in that he's all-in for New York, and isn't focusing on anything except this one restaurant. (Well, Bloomfield's attentions are now divided, but they weren't for a long time.)
Editor, New York Journal
#23
Posted 07 July 2009 - 09:05 PM
#24
Posted 07 July 2009 - 09:09 PM
I mean, it's SO convenient.
but the beef sucks. and i'd rather eat fish raw than cooked.
but Marc's photos of the canapes got me excited so maybe
by the way, was the drink after in lieu of dessert? you didn't mention dessert and you never skip it
Everything is always OK in the end. If it's not OK, then it's not the end.
#25
Posted 07 July 2009 - 09:11 PM
The first time I was there I had dessert. Damned if I can remember what it was.
________________________________________________________________
* Their dessert wine selection is better than their main by-the-glass selection, BTW.
#26
Posted 07 July 2009 - 09:12 PM
I mean, it's SO convenient.
or wait for BYO Mondays
Everything is always OK in the end. If it's not OK, then it's not the end.
#27
Posted 07 July 2009 - 09:13 PM
No no the beef doesn't suck. I just didn't like it.
The apparently famous (somewhere) salt-pressed Tasmanian trout is barely cooked, if at all.
#28
Posted 07 July 2009 - 09:21 PM
Based on one substantive visit to Table 8, his food is perfectly good. I was happy to eat it, and if he were cooking somewhere less unpleasant I'd be happy to eat it again.
But does it fill some great gaping hole here that otherwise would have been left to gape? No way.
#29
Posted 07 July 2009 - 09:46 PM
No no the beef doesn't suck. I just didn't like it.
you said it was bland. bland beef sucks.
The apparently famous (somewhere) salt-pressed Tasmanian trout is barely cooked, if at all.
but you didn't think it "memorable." i want memorable
it's not so much that i won't go. i likely will, i'm just looking forward to it less so it drops down the list.
yeah, i think my issue is that i'm looking for a memorable meal. i don't want an ok/good one. SHO seemed like maybe it would have potential for memorable. and maybe it does. shall see
Everything is always OK in the end. If it's not OK, then it's not the end.
#30
Posted 07 July 2009 - 09:50 PM
It was a fillet.
Have you ever had a beef fillet that wasn't bland? That cut is bland (and mushy) by definition. Hergatt's whole purpose for offering it must be to use it as a basis for his spicing -- as in every successful dish that includes it, it's used as a basis for the introduction of some other forms of flavoring.
Now I don't think it works in this case, because I didn't much like the spices, at least in the context of this dish. But I wouldn't say it sucked.











