Washington Post Food Section

[DonRocks]

TS whines about tasting menus this week.

And, of course, it's his right to dislike what he dislikes. But I thought this column was pretty poor. What's with wheeling out 1981-vintage Mimi Sheraton complaints? How many American restaurants from that era can even be reasonably, much less fairly compared to any of the top tables today? Small portions? Feh - Americans were still complaining that Chevy had downsized the '77-82 Caprice too much. Gimme a break.

I believe the earthier, more Anglo-Saxon term, "whinge," is highly appropriate here.

TS isn't. Apparently, for TS, even top restaurants are the fine-china equivalent of filling stations--fill the tank, maybe a Toast-chee amuse-bouche or Ho-ho mignardise and allow me on my way.

After reading Dave and Jake's posts, I re-read Tom's piece, and came away with one question: What is wrong with it?

The mention about Mimi Sheraton was to add some historical perspective, basically saying that, yes, what I'm writing about today is not new. In no way did I think he was relying on her complaint to make his point.

I can see the point that Komi and Restaurant Eve weren't the best examples to use, mainly because they drown out what the real issue is, at least in my mind: Far too many restaurants are doing a tasting menu these days, and not very well, either. Like Tom, I find myself shying away from these more and more as the months and years go by, not because I don't want to spend time in the restaurant, but because I can usually put together a better, less expensive tasting menu myself by cobbling together small plates. It's the same reason I generally avoid "suggested wine pairings."

A few years back, I used to disagree with Terry Theise on this issue: He'd go to a restaurant for the very first time, even a Michelin three-star, and NOT get the tasting menu. I'd argue that If I'm going to a place once, and only once, I want to see "what the chef can do." But except for the very top restaurants, the courses in tasting menus are "abridged editions" of courses originally intended to be served in larger portions. They lack flow from start-to-finish, coming across as something not unlike a "sampler platter," rather than as a symphonic poem. As an aside, I almost never, ever order "appetizer samplers" or "mixed grill" which often have different firing times within the plate, and end up languishing under a heat lamp while waiting for the slow-pokes to be ready).

This is a much longer piece than Tom usually writes on a Wednesday, and I found the premise interesting, and more importantly, poignant: I'm fairly certain that if I didn't dine out so much, I'd be more tasting-menu tolerant; as it stands, I get tired of them.

Cheers,

Rocks.

[synaesthesia]

He might dislike tasting menus because he is tired of them, but he neglects the fact that other people are perhaps less seasoned than him. And I see the point that perhaps too many people are doing them because it is the thing to do. I think that the small portions and rather lengthy menus do two things.

(1) Whet the appetite. Keeping it small also keeps it more pleasurable. Much like economic models there is usually a decreasing return with each additional bite. Each bite because less and less exciting. So it keeps you wanting more, something that I've experienced. Some people like that feeling, other people may not.

(2) Slow down and relax. The small portions are asking you to savor each bite. Not to wolf it down with the overhand fist grab on your utensils. As is the length. You may have consumed the same amount of food in the period of an hour as you did during the three hours. It's just that your stomach actually had the opportunity to take it in.

It can be grueling, and maybe that's why he takes issue. But if you do it every now and then, and have good company, it's nice to leave your troubles at the door and relax. My guess is for him it's work, and that isn't as much fun.

[Banco]

Though Don's points are well taken, I don't think their judiciousness was found in TS's review, so I have to agree with what most others have said about this article. What struck me most about it was the unfortunately rather American tight-assedness of Sietsema's approach, as though good taste and creativity should be enjoyed in moderation. What the hell is wrong with spending four hours in a restaurant in the hands of a master like Monis, unless you have "better", more "productive" things to do. A food critic who professes a love, curiosity, and knowledge of food but who is bashful and ashamed of enjoying it for more than a few hours is ultimately a hypocrite--or at least an attenuated hedonist, which is a pitiful thing to be.

[youngfood]

This is a much longer piece than Tom usually writes on a Wednesday, and I found the premise interesting, and more importantly, poignant: I'm fairly certain that if I didn't dine out so much, I'd be more tasting-menu tolerant; as it stands, I get tired of them.

I liked it too. I'm not sure I'm sick of them or that I feel the same way that he seems to (too much food...too much time), but his view is legitimate and I think he addresses and timely topic. I suspect most of his readers are still pretty much in the dark about tasting menus and the price, time, and sheer quantity of food involved in many of them. Tasting menus are a big commitment in time and money, if you aren't that into what you eat or don't want to spend a few hundred dollars on dinner for two, they probably aren't for you.

[jparrott]

What's wrong with it?

He starts by conflating Komi with pretty much every other place in town that does a tasting menu, when Komi is very open about its format. He punctuates the Komi smear with the old "hush and reverence" canard (which is also redolent of Ms. Sheraton and her ilk), which is also misleading. Komi is hardly the most hushed and reverential place. It's no more dressed up than Rupperts was, and the playfulness of the cooking all the way through is far more Jonathan Waxman than Jonathan Edwards. If TS didn't feel like being held "hostage" or "torture"d for 90 minutes of foodborne fun, he should've canceled his reservation. It's not that hard to get a weeknight table. Or get up and smoke a ciggie.

"By 7:50 p.m. we're both full." Oh come on. You shouldn't've eaten so much lunch then.

His first argument is that they take too long. Well, they're only mandatory at a couple of places. If you've got a late engagement, there are only about 4,998 other places you can dine those night.

"Tasting menus rob customers of their sense of control." Only if they choose them. And who said fine dining is solely about control for the customer? That's a pretty hackneyed view, borne out neither by traditional nor modern dining sensibilities.

He specifically doesn't argue that "Far too many restaurants are doing a tasting menu these days, and not very well, either," unless you think of a short list of restaurants with tasting menus as tacitly making that argument. It's too bad, because that's not a bad argument.

But let's look at the list. Minibar's "marathon" takes 2 and a half hours, tops, and includes constant interaction. Citing Tavira's "three-course" "tasting menu" is gratuitous padding of the list. Tosca's tasting menu format is uber-traditional--just because each diner gets his own composed plate rather than serving himself from a communal platter doesn't change the ethic that the kitchen is attempting to project. And the BlackSalt anecdote seems to blame the consumer for the problem (I'm sure Messrs. Black and Wells would've come up with some other format for the space if the demand were not there). TS seems to think that by cobbling together each of these flawed examples, he can create such a rhetorical flourish that is poorly formed thesis will survive.

Next, TS tilts at the sacred cows. Like most top places, I'm sure Per Se will provide a souvenir menu if asked--if that doesn't jog his taste memory, then perhaps he shouldn't worry about taking notes in the 99% of places where he is recognized. And the Ziebold anecdote is a complete non-sequitur. That was a surprise. Normal diners can get the price of what they are about to receive, just by asking.

"I felt that I was there for the amusement of the chef rather than the other way around." Perhaps. But what does that have to do with Tavira?

"Precisely, say the chefs who cook that way." Way to diminish your sources before they even get a word in, especially when one of those sources pinpoints a key factor, "[Customers] can also sample luxury ingredients -- foie gras, toro, truffles -- that would be prohibitively expensive in large portions." TS and his tight-schedule, lobbyist readers need not worry about that, of course. Someone else is picking up the tab.

And the little number-play at the end? Nothing like painting one of DC's most prominent chefs and restaurateurs as a self-serving opportunist in the advancement of the as-yet-unspecified thesis.

One gets the very strong sense that TS isn't enjoying his job anymore.

[DonRocks]

Though Don's points are well taken, I don't think their judiciousness was found in TS's review

It's not a review. It says up in the title that he's 'making a case,' and I think he did a fair job of presenting both sides of the argument - a substantial portion of the piece was devoted to the opposing viewpoint. I give Tom credit for having chosen the popular and beloved Komi to make his point - rather than some strawman he could easily shoot down - and likewise for having chosen the powerful CityZen and Restaurant Eve to represent the counterpoint.

And as much as I love Komi and Restaurant Eve Tasting Room, I have never left either without being stuffed, exhausted, and more often than not, crocked as a jackal that got into the moonshine - and I have a collection of lollipops in my dresser drawer.

Cheers,

Rocks.

[synaesthesia]

There is a certain irony that his four star restaurants are the ones with tasting menus....

[jparrott]

to make his point

What was his point? That he personally doesn't like tasting menus?

Dude, get a blog.

Or a two-paragraph slot on page 5.

Oh wait. He has one of those.

[Hannah]

I tend not to go for the tasting menu most places, simply because I'd rather be able to order something other than what the spouse has (that way we both get to try both things), but there's no reason to be offended that the option is available - I think the story could have done without the heaping helping of "how dare they!"

[Banco]

It's not a review. It says up in the title that he's 'making a case,' and I think he did a fair job of presenting both sides of the argument - a substantial portion of the piece was devoted to the opposing viewpoint. I give Tom credit for having chosen the popular and beloved Komi to make his point - rather than some strawman he could easily shoot down - and likewise for having chosen the powerful CityZen and Restaurant Eve to represent the counterpoint.

And as much as I love Komi and Restaurant Eve Tasting Room, I have never left either without being stuffed, exhausted, and more often than not, crocked as a jackal that got into the moonshine - and I have a collection of lollipops in my dresser drawer.

Cheers,

Rocks.

You're right, it's not a review. My mistake. As for the substance of the article, I don't see the balance that you apparently do. Tom comes across as a timid gastronome, a gourmand with reservations (forgive the pun). I think Jake hit the nail on the head.

[cjsadler]

I give Tom credit for having chosen the popular and beloved Komi to make his point

Really? When he started talking about all the Komi mezzethakia, my thought was "oh man, I need to get back there!" If the Komi example was supposed to somehow make his point, it completely backfired with this glutton diner.

[DonRocks]

Really? When he started talking about all the Komi mezzethakia, my thought was "oh man, I need to get back there!" If the Komi example was supposed to somehow make his point, it completely backfired with this diner.

It isn't the mezzethakia that breaks the camel's back; it's the arrival of the entree after the pasta course, which falls not as a straw, but as a reinforced-concrete girder.

[brian]

I didn't care for the sidebar piece on the couple visiting CityZen - it seemed to be more related to a journalist's perspective than a diner's by emphasizing what details they could remember about the meal instead of how much they enjoyed the experience.

[chickenlover]

It isn't the mezzethakia that breaks the camel's back; it's the arrival of the entree after the pasta course, which falls not as a straw, but as a reinforced-concrete girder.

Don, maybe you are getting VIP portions. When I was there I ordered the standard menu and thought the amount of food was perfect. I probably could have skipped dessert though.

[jparrott]

From the chat:

But as I pointed out, all the fine points and niceties get lost in the parade of dishes.

No, you didn't point that out. You used your "friend" and his whining as "evidence" for your assertion of same. I can argue just as easily that the parade of dishes, their ebbs and flows, generate a whole new set of fine points and niceties (such as trying the same wine with several different dishes, etc) over an above the fine points and niceties of a given dish.

I interviewed a number of foodsters, some of whom would not agree to go on record for fear of losing their status at Komi, who feel the same way.

Unverifiable and gratuitous. Nor did he point out that the "main" courses at Komi are a bit smaller than they were when Johnny first started with the format.

[Poivrot Farci]

I give Tom credit for having chosen the popular and beloved Komi to make his point - rather than some strawman he could easily shoot down - and likewise for having chosen the powerful CityZen and Restaurant Eve to represent the counterpoint.

You mean for goofing on a freshman while justifying his stalwart Freemason chef friends?

His partisanship is no less torturous.

Those G-town cupcake ladies can briefly challenge abstemious misogyny.

[Waitman]

Lovely to see Tom accepted as a regular poster -- "attacking" Komi and getting righteously put in his place for goring the golden ox.

Of course, Komi is the obvious starting point for such an article becuase -- save possibly the more-coursed but speedier-paced Mini Bar -- it is the course-count winner, topping 20 when Johnny is in full flight. Where else is going to start: Citronelle, with its mere seven courses?

Stipulating that I love Komi (and CityZen and Citronelle) I think it's a fine moment to take on a trend which has something of an annoying side to it. I know that amongst Thomas Keller's ideosynchrasies he has a great fear that diners lose interest in a dish after a few bites -- a fear that he of all people should not harbor -- but I'd echo Tom and say that after lunch at the FL I, too, had a bit of a blur in the middle of the meal, sometime after the salad and before the lobster. There is a sense sometimes that one is getting novelty rather than quality, or that there is riffing just for the sake of riffing, kind of the Chopin approach to fine dining.

Most tasting menus kill my wife. But, of course, it's either the whole table or no one most of the time, and the suggestion that the chef could just skip a course or two is met with incredulity. Compounding this (cf Cathal's quote) is the sense that that "the good stuff" is on the tasting menu, which means that my wife and I are doomed to either eating the prole's fare or her having her stomach pumped. (And where is it written that 10 small courses is innately better than 4 larger course, anyway?) . And you feel so totally unfashionable these days not getting the tasting menu - you can practically see the waiter's shoulders slump you prove just how cheap and/or unsophisticated you are.

And, while I do enjoy a tasting menu myself, I hardly need one to make it the evening's entertainement. I do poop out after three hours or so and find anything longer a little trying and have been known to come pretty close to that with a mere four or five courses.

For all that, I do enjoy a good tasting menu. And I think that Tom does a reasonable job presenting the other side. It's far from a rant, just staement of opnion from someone who has certainly eaten enough meals to be allowed to have one. I was hoping for more of a rant.

[Mark Slater]

Any comments on the article about this guy?

[jparrott]

Yeah, his thing says I like wines with lots of oak.

The beveragization of wine.....continuuuuuuuuues.

[Mrs. B]

Any comments on the article about this guy?

I think it's cute that they share the car that way

[DonRocks]

Any comments on the article about this guy?

Nothing about him personally, but I think it's a reasonably safe bet that five years from now, the Budometer will be about as well-known as the Snarlapus.

Cheers,

Rocks.

[synaesthesia]

Bemoaning Eve Zibart taking the WaPo retirement buyout, amongst others. One of the very few highlights in the WaPo Food section. The leaving of her and the others is a real shame. But I'm sure she'll enjoy her retirement.

[youngfood]

Does anyone still read the Post's wine column? I feel like the kid who keeps putting his hand back on the hot stove. For some reason, I read it each week despite the fact that I find the columns almost entirely worthless. I want to like them - I'm not wine expert and I drink on a budget, so I take all the help I can get - but they read more like a journal of what the authors drank that week with a few very limited observations about each individual bottle or sometimes what the authors had for dinner that night. Today's highlight was that New Zealand Sauvignon Blancs go well with tropical flavors while Chardonnay is the pick for buttery dishes. I appreciate the difficulty of writing about wine in a way that is accessible to the average WP reader, but can anyone who reads a wine column really be learning anything from generalizations as basic as these? Seems to me that the wine column is lagging behind the rest of the Post's food section these days.

[mdt]

Does anyone still read the Post's wine column?

Nope.

[Mark Slater]

Does anyone still read the Post's wine column? I feel like the kid who keeps putting his hand back on the hot stove. For some reason, I read it each week despite the fact that I find the columns almost entirely worthless. I want to like them - I'm not wine expert and I drink on a budget, so I take all the help I can get - but they read more like a journal of what the authors drank that week with a few very limited observations about each individual bottle or sometimes what the authors had for dinner that night. Today's highlight was that New Zealand Sauvignon Blancs go well with tropical flavors while Chardonnay is the pick for buttery dishes. I appreciate the difficulty of writing about wine in a way that is accessible to the average WP reader, but can anyone who reads a wine column really be learning anything from generalizations as basic as these? Seems to me that the wine column is lagging behind the rest of the Post's food section these days.

Astute observations. This is why the answer to your first sentence is "No". Plus, the writers seem to have a taste for inexpensive, easily available bulk wine that they like to write rapturously about.

[cjsadler]

I appreciate the difficulty of writing about wine in a way that is accessible to the average WP reader

I agree with you on the WP column. Contrast it with Eric Asimov's wine columns and blog for the New York Times (here's the column today). Interesting that the NYT feels its readers can handle a wine column at this level, but the WP seems to feel they need to bring things down to the level of the 'average' reader (this comment has been made in defense by some of the WP food section staff here on DR). Are we Washingtonians really that much more clueless than New Yorkers?

[JPW]

Astute observations. This is why the answer to your first sentence is "No". Plus, the writers seem to have a taste for inexpensive, easily available bulk wine sent to their officesthat they like to write rapturously about.

Edited your post for you, Mark

[Banco]

Are we Washingtonians really that much more clueless on things cultural than New Yorkers?

I think the case could reasonably be made that yes, there is a large percentage of Washingtonians who know or care little about good food and wine, and that this percentage is a good deal higher than in New York City.

[synaesthesia]

I think the case could reasonably be made that yes, there is a large percentage of Washingtonians who know or care little about good food and wine, and that this percentage is a good deal higher than in New York City.

Well then it's up to the trend setters to educate them, rather than to talk down to them. It's exactly this down-the-nose attitude that has arguably held us and other cities back.

[Mark Slater]

Well then it's up to the trend setters to educate them, rather than to talk down to them. It's exactly this down-the-nose attitude that has arguably held us and other cities back.

Some of us do what we can to educate every day. I hardly think it is elitist to point out that the writers for a major metrpolitan newspaper only feature million case + wineries.

[Banco]

Some of us do what we can to educate every day. I hardly think it is elitist to point out that the writers for a major metrpolitan newspaper only feature million case + wineries.

Indeed. I also question whether featuring ordinary or mediocre wines in a wine column reflects a "down the nose" attitude toward the readership as synaesthesia suggested. On the contrary, I think it reflects the reverse snobbery that inevitably results from a reflexive paranoia at being branded elitist. That kind of snobbery, more than genuine condecension, is I think the chief enemy of refinement and taste in this country as a whole.

[synaesthesia]

Indeed. I also question whether featuring ordinary or mediocre wines in a wine column reflects a "down the nose" attitude toward the readership as synaesthesia suggested. On the contrary, I think it reflects the reverse snobbery that inevitably results from a reflexive paranoia at being branded elitist. That kind of snobbery, more than genuine condecension, is I think the chief enemy of refinement and taste in this country as a whole.

People in the business definitely do try very hard to educate consumers, and I haven't met many elitists. A lot of passionate people who want people to try something good and new. There are a number of people in this town who do a great job at it. My point is their jobs would be easier and helped by a more supportive media that goes beyond the basics. Not shilling, but teaching. If the demand is there, restaurants will be more able to diversify their lists and bring more interesting stuff into this area.

As for the writers, it would be very easy to include both more accessible, mass market wines and those that are more rare and unique. As someone who doesn't know very much it's helpful to know what to seek out instead of blinding wandering around and picking Yellowtail. Unless this is some sort of exclusionary tactics to keep plebes from taking all the good stuff.

And I think that this is a rule across all the topics covered. If we had articles about izakaya (of which the only one is in a place where the startup costs are lower - Blue Ocean) or the latest ingredient, people would begin looking for it and it would get here earlier. I've heard that some in the section don't view DC as an important food city, and I don't think it's there yet either. But I also don't think we're that far from it. What we need in the food section is people to advocate for that point of view, to proclaim as so many New Yorkers do that we are the best - not Charlottesville or some other town. I believe, in some part, that half of the big idea of the New York scene is the hype and the ability for someone to introduce a new concept. So if we keep it up, eventually we might believe our own hype and the prophecy will be self-fulfilling.

[synaesthesia]

Wow, is there really nothing better to talk about than this? And then there was this...

First in an occasional series of rants about dining out.

God save us. I also didn't realize it was acceptable to start publishing blog posts in print.

I am going to go eat a Ceaser salad now.

[monsterriffs]

Wow, is there really nothing better to talk about than this? And then there was this...

God save us. I also didn't realize it was acceptable to start publishing blog posts in print.

I am going to go eat a Ceaser salad now.

Summertime and the reporting is eeeeeeeeasy.

[hmmboy]

Wow, is there really nothing better to talk about than this? And then there was this...

God save us. I also didn't realize it was acceptable to start publishing blog posts in print.

I am going to go eat a Ceaser salad now.

I very much enjoyed the article on typos in menus this moning. IMO we're lucky to have Jane Black writing in this town. Earlier in the week a nice piece on the Aspen Food & Wine Fest and then the whole animal piece and menu typo piece today. All very different but entertaining food related articles. Keep up the good work Jane!!

[Poivrot Farci]

on typos...

"Cote de boeuf" (circumflex accent aside) is spelled wrong in the online version of the 2941 review.
This variety of lollipop journalism hardly alleviates the strict consumer-focused mission of WashPo's 21st century June Cleaver "what's for dinner dear?" recipe rolodex reporting.

[qwertyy]

Wow, is there really nothing better to talk about than this? And then there was this...

God save us. I also didn't realize it was acceptable to start publishing blog posts in print.

I am going to go eat a Ceaser salad now.

Menu typos bug the hell out of me, so I was actually looking forward to this article. But I think it fell flat.

Am I the only one who's kind of annoyed by the way the Post has changed the online look of the Food and other sections? They've eliminated the authors on the home pages and have downgraded the appearance of some articles to a one-line header with no summary. I've read less and less of Post.com since they've gone this direction.

I will say this, though: they have really increased the number and diversity of the recipes they run, and I'm impressed by how much better this part of the Food section has gotten. Most weeks I think they do better than the NY Times, which has sometimes been running as few as two or three recipes a week (though this week has more).

[Heather]

Wow, is there really nothing better to talk about than this?

Typos can be amusing. It was the fantasizing about editing typos anonymously in the restaurant that fell flat for me. I'm as elitist as the next gal, but can't cast the first stone here, having been the victim of spellcheck and my own fumbling fingers too many times. Her Thanksgiving article had a similar vibe.

Steve Raichlen rocks. More please.

[Heather]

Good section today, especially this. This Yankee girl had no clue that there were regional variations to chicken-fried steak.

[youngfood]

Good section today

I thought so too and particularly enjoyed the various pieces by Jane Black. Best Post food section in a while.

[JPW]

As one who typically harshes on the WaPo Food Section, I feel that I have to give them kudos when they pull out a good one. Thiese and Piper? Check. Spirits column on the manhattan? Check. Carman on the very soon to be trite burger joint concept? Check. And for the first time since they took over, I actually found the wine column both educational and entertaining.

[B.A.R.]

Yes, this weeks was excellent. That's about 5 for 52 though, well below the Mendoza line.

[jparrott]

Although people who use bourbon instead of rye in Manhattans are usually doing it to cover up bad vermouth.

</sweeping generalization>

[JPW]

Although people who use bourbon instead of rye in Manhattans are usually doing it to cover up bad vermouth.

</sweeping generalization>

When I was a wee lad, I used to make Perfect Manhattans for this guy.

Believe you me, I made them just the way he wanted (on the rocks, Canadian Club, no bitters, 3 cherries)

Sometimes it's the potential threat of bodily harm ...

[Heather]

In light of the whole tiresome Murky Coffee iced espresso flap it is especially delicious to see an iced espresso beverage featured in the lead story of today's food section. I eagerly await some coffee jerk's* breathless explanation of how the carbonation in the Perrier inhibits the deleterious effects of pouring espresso over ice.

* This is what my husband and his friends called themselves at Cafe Kairos on 44th St. in Philadelphia, circa 1991. The term "barista" was not yet in use.

[Mrs. B]

Walter Nicholls has a lovely article in the Escapes column of the Post's Style section on buying farm fresh food from the Amish in southern Maryland.

[Waitman]

I'm a little bitter -- I was driving through here the other day and, in between trying not to run over the buggies all out for a Sunday drive, plotting a return visit and subsequent article. An area that seems well worth checking out.

[Heather]

There's also a substantial Mennonite settlement in Southern Maryland (old and new order), mostly in St. Mary's County. Tobacco farming was a way of life down there, and there was a unsuccessful push by the state several years ago to transition the farms to other crops. I hope they can make a good living selling chickens to city folks.

Here's a link to St. Mary's County farmer's markets.

[JPW]

After a string of successes, today's section fell decidedly flat. Tim Stark's article was surreal. Not in a good way, but in a "what the fuck is this about?" way. Even one of my usual favorites, Greg Kitsock's beer column, didn't do it for me this week.

The wine column has been covered elsewhere.

[qwertyy]

After a string of successes, today's section fell decidedly flat. Tim Stark's article was surreal. Not in a good way, but in a "what the fuck is this about?" way. Even one of my usual favorites, Greg Kitsock's beer column, didn't do it for me this week.

The wine column has been covered elsewhere.

AND I'm not quite sure what you're talking about because Post.com continues its infuriating style of not crediting authors in the teasers on the section front.

Post.com just bugs me all around lately.