VIEW ALL ADANNA'S BLOG ENTRIES
The stars are out of
the bag – New York
sous les étoiles de Michelin (The Michelin guide has arrived)!
This morning, on WNYC, there was a not-so-brief but certainly mysterious radio note on the arrival of the Michelin guide, no doubt designed to grab the immediate attention die-hard foodies. The radio take on the guide was that it would be interpreted “as a slight” by some of New York’s top chefs, although no list of potential slightees was provided.
Already, word on the street (or at least on gawker.com) is that the usual suspects have once again been centrifuged to the culinary surface, while many hopefuls remain un-starred and left among the detritus of ho-humdum.
One star, two star,
three star, new star…
Let’s return to the idea of a perceived slight. Why is this so? What is the problem here? Why is this so much fun to talk about? *Sigh* all of this has impinged upon our self-perception as a restaurant town.
How?
There are three factors at work here, above all reputation. Far beyond the whole Michelin Guide arrival scare is the current state of the hallowed New York Times rating system, which in recent years has been viewed as somewhat skewed, or less reliable than it used to be. While one can speculate all day as to why this trend might be, it reflects a shift away from traditional expectations, perhaps out of boredom, perhaps out of (gasp!) a less refined pallet. Nevertheless, the
MG rating is less a challenge to the Zagat, which is the People’s Guide, than it is to the New York Times’ sacred right to place stars in the sky and to mythify the worthy while raining down hard like an angry Zeus on any pretender.Does this mean that the Times’ stars will shine less brightly in the Gotham sky, or that
the bling of Michelin will draw all suppliant eyes away from the Old Gray Temple? Maybe.
For a chef of the highest order, reputation is everything, and as far as rankings go, Michelin is of the highest order, accepted world-wide, published in book form – with a red cover.
So, aside from reputation, what is there? Let’s talk about gastronomy and the gastronomic. What levels of and in what concentration can the New York market support restaurants that are “gastronomique”? Oh, I forgot, let’s talk about gastronomy for a minute. What does that mean? Gastronomy is about perfection (all that balance, marriage of flavors, textures, surprises, aftertaste, foretaste and so that one reads about). It’s about getting dressed up to go out to eat and paying attention to what you are putting in your face, it’s about understanding the very sublime dishes that a truly talented chef can put on the plate, it’s about the art of eating. We return to the notion of talent. But here is a caveat. Beware of Volume.
Voluminous Needs.New York
demands that everything be done in volume. The greater the volume of plates put out, the harder it is to meet the requirements of perfection. Can the same chef achieve the same level of perfection at 500 covers as he/she does at 50?
Volume reflects something that we don’t like to talk about. RENT. Yes, the rent around town is too damn high, and sometimes the only way for an owner to make money is to do volume. It is truly a feat to be able to put out 500 covers of really decent food, never mind something approaching the gastronomic. Kudos to all those chefs out there who night after night plate 500 entrees while maintaining a high standard.
A restaurant with a dining room that seats 200, and expects
to turn them at least once but probably more, is hoping for 500 covers for dinner. That’s a lot of food. Meanwhile back in the kitchen, everyone is trying to stay in time while giving the utmost attention to that quantity of food.
When you are staring down the barrel of 500 covers and you’ve got one person at each station (fish, grill, sautee of whatever), he/she becomes a machine, flipping the fish or portioning the sauce. It’s hard to see the whole thing as art at this point. This is not to say that the chefs and cooks are not artistes or that they don’t care. They are working within their parameters. We are demanding a lot of them.
Next, there is Business. The business of the restaurant often dictates the kind of gastronomy that it will support. One always has to be thinking of the bottom line. Rent, water, gas, electricity, risk insurance, workers compensation insurance, licenses, liability concerns, fixtures and furnishings, payroll, taxes, inspectors, contractors, and more. In order to create a gastronomic experience, there is a tremendous outlay of money, running into the double digit millions. How long are investors willing to wait in order to see a return? If it cost 20 million to open a place, how much in gross sales should one expect annually? How much should food costs be? Labor? All of these concerns must be factored into the equation, and when you sit down at the table to admire and then consume your Scottish Pheasant terrine with chestnuts and medjool dates with poached quince, you are probably not concerned about the food costs. But the chef is. He/she has to be.
One star, two star, three star, four… wish I could afford a few stars more.
Tags:
3 stars, gastronomy, michelin guide, new york times, zagat
© All rights reserved.
Posted on 11/2/2005
(
Permanent Link
)
Send to Friend
