The time has come, a little more than five years to the day of my first post, to retire Horny for Food.
It has served its purpose as a proving ground for my experiments in ways to intimately, passionately and aggressively express my opinions, observations and research in the world of food, wine, dining--always with an undercurrent of sex.
The good news is, the proving ground worked and I'm able to happily retire this blog knowing that I have other outlets for my writing.
You can continue following me every Thursday at The Satellite Show pop culture blog, where I write a weekly column on (usually) food and wine.
And in even bigger news, you can follow me as a regular featured wine blogger at The Huffington Post in the Food Section. Right now I'm posting once a week and intend to do at least 2-3 posts a month into the future.
To my very few loyal readers, thank you for all of your support. Please continue reading through these archives. I may periodically repost some older entries and definitely look for past topics to be reexamined and expanded upon in my new outlets. And maybe Horny for Food will return in the future.
To any food and wine enthusiast or professional I may have offended by my writings here, know that it's not personal and that my only objective is to elevate discourse and stimulate discussion. Too much food and wine writing is equivocating, unadventurous and dull. I attempted to be provocative and humorous. Sometimes I succeeded and sometimes I failed, but hopefully each time I failed, I failed better.
Cheers.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Monday, January 31, 2011
Eagle Rock Brewery - Los Angles, CA
Slowly, Los Angeles is integrating itself into the California craft brew scene. I wrote a few months back about Craftsman Brewery in Pasadena and now it's time for Eagle Rock Brewery (and soon the relocated Angel City Brewery!). Eagle Rock Brewery's been in business for a few years in LA and finally opened up a taproom about a year ago.
Located not quite in Eagle Rock but in the decidedly less gentrified Glassell Park neighborhood, the modern brewery and taproom is located in a nondescript warehouse that can only be identified by the food truck parked in the driveway and the string of hipsters coming and going, lending the whole building the mystique of a speakeasy or secret indie brothel.
The taproom typically serves 5-6 Eagle Rock brews, including their staple Revolution XPA, Manifesto Witbier, Populist IPA and Solidarity English Ale plus 1-2 limited seasonal releases. They also have three guest-taps featuring beers from other tiny California craft breweries. Beers are available on-site by the taste or pint and available to-go in refillable growlers.
What I love about Eagle Rock Brewery (and about Craftsman) is that in a California microbrew scene that has become dominated by aggressive high-gravity high-bitterness beers, Eagle Rock produces a pair of excellent sub-5% abv beers including the Solidarity, one of the best true "session beers" I've had from California. The Revolution XPA is full-bodied with a nice dose of hops that should please the Arrogant Bastard drinker even though it clocks in at only 4.8% abv.
Even the higher gravity beers are well-balanced, with the Populist a fine example of a medium bodied moderately-hopped IPA that's more in the English style then in the bitter quintuple-hopped style that has become prevalent in California.
(Oh, and the beers are served in proper pint glasses for a mere $5--guest drafts are usually a buck or two more--bonus!)
There's no food for sale in the brewery, but there are complimentary peanuts and pretzels. A rotating cast of food trucks can be found in the parking lot almost every night Eagle Rock Brewery's open (Thursday-Saturday, 4-10PM, Sunday 12-8PM) and unique beer pairings are suggested for every truck's offerings. It's a laid-back and inexpensive way to enjoy great beer and great food in a friendly, convivial space.
Eagle Rock Brewery
3056 Roswell St.
Los Angeles, Ca 90065
www.eaglerockbrewery.com
Located not quite in Eagle Rock but in the decidedly less gentrified Glassell Park neighborhood, the modern brewery and taproom is located in a nondescript warehouse that can only be identified by the food truck parked in the driveway and the string of hipsters coming and going, lending the whole building the mystique of a speakeasy or secret indie brothel.
The taproom typically serves 5-6 Eagle Rock brews, including their staple Revolution XPA, Manifesto Witbier, Populist IPA and Solidarity English Ale plus 1-2 limited seasonal releases. They also have three guest-taps featuring beers from other tiny California craft breweries. Beers are available on-site by the taste or pint and available to-go in refillable growlers.
What I love about Eagle Rock Brewery (and about Craftsman) is that in a California microbrew scene that has become dominated by aggressive high-gravity high-bitterness beers, Eagle Rock produces a pair of excellent sub-5% abv beers including the Solidarity, one of the best true "session beers" I've had from California. The Revolution XPA is full-bodied with a nice dose of hops that should please the Arrogant Bastard drinker even though it clocks in at only 4.8% abv.
Even the higher gravity beers are well-balanced, with the Populist a fine example of a medium bodied moderately-hopped IPA that's more in the English style then in the bitter quintuple-hopped style that has become prevalent in California.
(Oh, and the beers are served in proper pint glasses for a mere $5--guest drafts are usually a buck or two more--bonus!)
There's no food for sale in the brewery, but there are complimentary peanuts and pretzels. A rotating cast of food trucks can be found in the parking lot almost every night Eagle Rock Brewery's open (Thursday-Saturday, 4-10PM, Sunday 12-8PM) and unique beer pairings are suggested for every truck's offerings. It's a laid-back and inexpensive way to enjoy great beer and great food in a friendly, convivial space.
Eagle Rock Brewery
3056 Roswell St.
Los Angeles, Ca 90065
www.eaglerockbrewery.com
Friday, January 14, 2011
HFF Quickie: Pelayo's Burgers - Long Beach, CA
Because of its mix of density and sprawl and its position as the birthplace (or at least homeland) of modern American fast food, not even the biggest fast food chains can penetrate every corner of Los Angeles. As a result, there are many unusual local mini fast-food chains and one-off restaurants. Often they're idiosyncratic (Cowboys & Turbans, anyone?) and often they're quite excellent for the price.
I visited such an establishment down in Long Beach this week, Pelayo's Burgers. It's an archetypal LA burger joint/taqueria hybrid located on PCH right where Signal Hill meets the LBC. Was it great? No. Was it good? Yes. Was it fresh? Yes. Was it cheap? Absolutely.
I had the Huevos Rancheros and it was a delightfully trashy mashup of refried beans, rice, respectably good eggs, a crisp-fried tortilla and a very good spicy homemade ranchero sauce. A few dashes of Tapatio and some additional tortillas and it was hangover-curing heaven. It was also less than six bucks and rivaled any bourgie brunch version I've had for twice the price.
The Boss Man had a half roast chicken with beans, rice AND french fries for not much more than $6 and by all reports it was delicious. Did the fries come pre-cut from the freezer? They did. But that's not always a bad thing in the world of cheap eats.
So it was nice to support a local business and get a fresh, filling meal for two for well under $20. And we were in, out and on our way in about twenty minutes.
So here's to ethnic dives, neighborhood one-offs and taco trucks. They're the best thing about LA dining.
Pelayo's Burgers
2300 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90804
I visited such an establishment down in Long Beach this week, Pelayo's Burgers. It's an archetypal LA burger joint/taqueria hybrid located on PCH right where Signal Hill meets the LBC. Was it great? No. Was it good? Yes. Was it fresh? Yes. Was it cheap? Absolutely.
I had the Huevos Rancheros and it was a delightfully trashy mashup of refried beans, rice, respectably good eggs, a crisp-fried tortilla and a very good spicy homemade ranchero sauce. A few dashes of Tapatio and some additional tortillas and it was hangover-curing heaven. It was also less than six bucks and rivaled any bourgie brunch version I've had for twice the price.
The Boss Man had a half roast chicken with beans, rice AND french fries for not much more than $6 and by all reports it was delicious. Did the fries come pre-cut from the freezer? They did. But that's not always a bad thing in the world of cheap eats.
So it was nice to support a local business and get a fresh, filling meal for two for well under $20. And we were in, out and on our way in about twenty minutes.
So here's to ethnic dives, neighborhood one-offs and taco trucks. They're the best thing about LA dining.
Pelayo's Burgers
2300 E Pacific Coast Hwy
Long Beach, CA 90804
Sunday, January 02, 2011
Points of Reference; or James Suckling Doesn't Get It
I watched the documentary Blood Into Wine recently. It's a very good and funny film about the efforts of Maynard James Keenan and Eric Glomski to produce serious wine out of Arizona. One of the featured parts of the film is when then-Wine Spectator writer James Suckling comes out to Jerome and tastes through Keenan's Caduceus Cellars line-up.
Now I have not tasted nearly as many wines as James Suckling has, particularly the wines of Northern Italy which some of the initial Caduceus wines drew from for inspiration, so I'll defer to his palate on flavors and nuance. Or for the sake of this article I will.
What pissed me off about Suckling's commentary is that virtually every comment he made was referencing the Arizona wines against wines from France and Italy--wines which are made thousands of miles away in very different places by very different people.
So I ask, what's the value in that?
Let me frame this argument with one basic conceit: the reason that certain wine regions of the world command a premium is largely a product of historical accident. In the United States, the eastern half of the country couldn't grow vitis vinifera grapes meaning that the established and entrenched wine making tradition had to begin in the West and Southwest. And even then, prior to Prohibition it was New Mexico that had the most land under vine, not California. California benefited from shrewd businessmen and a wealth of immigrants from wine-friendly regions of the world like Italy and Eastern Europe.
Globally, both the Middle East (probably the birthplace of the wine grape) and Eastern Europe (the home of some of its earliest and most significant varietal mutations) suffered under very wine-unfriendly regimes. In the Middle East, Islam's alcohol-prohibitions severely stifled growth of the industry, while under Communist rule in Eastern Europe, ancient vineyards and distinctive varietals were torn up and replanted with high-yielding vines to maximize production.
Or sometimes something as simple as a particular Champagne being acclaimed by a particular ruler, as was the case with Veuve Clicquot in the court of Tsar Alexander I, can catapult a wine's reputation. Alternately, flooding the market with a cheap little wine like Blue Nun can damage a wine's reputation for decades.
But these aren't products of deliberate effort or inherent quality--they're historical accidents. The English like wine. They can't (or at least couldn't) make wine in England so they purchased wine from abroad. Both historical ties and proximity meant that most of that wine was coming from France. This esteem for French wines transferred to the New World and as global demand increased, prices went up.
Are there some wineries which produce better wine than other wineries in the same region? Sure there are. Are there some countries which produce better wines, on aggregate, than others? Probably. But I would argue that there is no inherent reason that any region of the world within the grape-growing latitudes produces better wine than any other region. All it takes is finding the right combination of land, grapes and talent. The countries of Western and Southern Europe are the most esteemed and established wine producers largely because their wine industries have been allowed to develop relatively unfettered for a couple thousand years and have spent most of the modern era without either prohibition or centralization. We haven't even had 100 years of unfettered wine production in the United States.
Which is a long way of saying that it's pointless to refer to a wine produced in Arizona against a wine produced in the Northern Rhone or Tuscany. It's indicative, I think, of the out-of-date mindset of major wine writers. They still write from the reference point that wines, regardless of where they are produced, should be striving toward a perfection that is defined against a standard that is largely shaped by the big red wines of France, Italy and the Napa Valley.
And that's plainly absurd. These are wines that are produced in these places for specific reasons. Northern Arizona has about as much in common with Tuscany in terms of terroir as James Suckling has in common in terms of physique with LL Cool J and to continue to privilege these old-guard wines is foolish, counterproductive, and out-of-touch.
We live in a global wine world where great wines from every corner are readily available. The wine drinker who grew up without privilege and without reading Wine Spectator doesn't believe in the cult of the Esteemed Taster. Instead this drinker wants the raw data which, when coupled with personal recommendations, facilitates his or her individual decision making.
So we need to look at every wine region as aspiring to something unique to its location--not aspiring to Bordeaux. Tell me about the land, the grapes, the climate. Tell me how the wine tastes--is it balanced? Fruit-forward? Earthy? Don't give me some bullshit about how this wine isn't achieving something it never set out to achieve. What does that accomplish besides showing off how many fancy northern Italian wines you've tasted?
Continuing to privilege these specific wines and specific styles as if they're an aspirational goal for all wine regions is ridiculous. Anyone who continues to do so should, kindly, stop.
Now I have not tasted nearly as many wines as James Suckling has, particularly the wines of Northern Italy which some of the initial Caduceus wines drew from for inspiration, so I'll defer to his palate on flavors and nuance. Or for the sake of this article I will.
What pissed me off about Suckling's commentary is that virtually every comment he made was referencing the Arizona wines against wines from France and Italy--wines which are made thousands of miles away in very different places by very different people.
So I ask, what's the value in that?
Let me frame this argument with one basic conceit: the reason that certain wine regions of the world command a premium is largely a product of historical accident. In the United States, the eastern half of the country couldn't grow vitis vinifera grapes meaning that the established and entrenched wine making tradition had to begin in the West and Southwest. And even then, prior to Prohibition it was New Mexico that had the most land under vine, not California. California benefited from shrewd businessmen and a wealth of immigrants from wine-friendly regions of the world like Italy and Eastern Europe.
Globally, both the Middle East (probably the birthplace of the wine grape) and Eastern Europe (the home of some of its earliest and most significant varietal mutations) suffered under very wine-unfriendly regimes. In the Middle East, Islam's alcohol-prohibitions severely stifled growth of the industry, while under Communist rule in Eastern Europe, ancient vineyards and distinctive varietals were torn up and replanted with high-yielding vines to maximize production.
Or sometimes something as simple as a particular Champagne being acclaimed by a particular ruler, as was the case with Veuve Clicquot in the court of Tsar Alexander I, can catapult a wine's reputation. Alternately, flooding the market with a cheap little wine like Blue Nun can damage a wine's reputation for decades.
But these aren't products of deliberate effort or inherent quality--they're historical accidents. The English like wine. They can't (or at least couldn't) make wine in England so they purchased wine from abroad. Both historical ties and proximity meant that most of that wine was coming from France. This esteem for French wines transferred to the New World and as global demand increased, prices went up.
Are there some wineries which produce better wine than other wineries in the same region? Sure there are. Are there some countries which produce better wines, on aggregate, than others? Probably. But I would argue that there is no inherent reason that any region of the world within the grape-growing latitudes produces better wine than any other region. All it takes is finding the right combination of land, grapes and talent. The countries of Western and Southern Europe are the most esteemed and established wine producers largely because their wine industries have been allowed to develop relatively unfettered for a couple thousand years and have spent most of the modern era without either prohibition or centralization. We haven't even had 100 years of unfettered wine production in the United States.
Which is a long way of saying that it's pointless to refer to a wine produced in Arizona against a wine produced in the Northern Rhone or Tuscany. It's indicative, I think, of the out-of-date mindset of major wine writers. They still write from the reference point that wines, regardless of where they are produced, should be striving toward a perfection that is defined against a standard that is largely shaped by the big red wines of France, Italy and the Napa Valley.
And that's plainly absurd. These are wines that are produced in these places for specific reasons. Northern Arizona has about as much in common with Tuscany in terms of terroir as James Suckling has in common in terms of physique with LL Cool J and to continue to privilege these old-guard wines is foolish, counterproductive, and out-of-touch.
We live in a global wine world where great wines from every corner are readily available. The wine drinker who grew up without privilege and without reading Wine Spectator doesn't believe in the cult of the Esteemed Taster. Instead this drinker wants the raw data which, when coupled with personal recommendations, facilitates his or her individual decision making.
So we need to look at every wine region as aspiring to something unique to its location--not aspiring to Bordeaux. Tell me about the land, the grapes, the climate. Tell me how the wine tastes--is it balanced? Fruit-forward? Earthy? Don't give me some bullshit about how this wine isn't achieving something it never set out to achieve. What does that accomplish besides showing off how many fancy northern Italian wines you've tasted?
Continuing to privilege these specific wines and specific styles as if they're an aspirational goal for all wine regions is ridiculous. Anyone who continues to do so should, kindly, stop.
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Some very good wine writing!
There's a very interesting article from the UK-magazine The World of Fine Wine that's circulating on Twitter. It's the first insightful article I've read in a glossy magazine that takes on the current relevance of pioneering wine critic Robert M. Parker, Jr that is not from a position of "is he under attack?" or "is he still influential?" but rather "he is under attack" and "he is influential but his influence is decreasing rapidly every year."
This is something I've been writing about a lot recently, so I won't bore you with rehashes of my arguments. It was simply refreshing to hear this from not only a Legitimate Wine Critic but a writer who has written one of the definitive Parker biographies.
Ms. McCoy writes about the self-evidence of Parker's decline in influence as inevitable and then outlines why: the proliferation of other critics using the 100-point scale, the rise of a younger wine consumer not concerned with the "imprimatur [of] an aging guru," the dilution of his own brand through score inflation and hiring additional tasters, and the expansion of the global wine market beyond something that is comprehensible by even the most thorough reviewer.
I also appreciated the reference to perennial wine douche bag W. Blake Gray acknowledging that he "admitted in an interview that he uses it (the 100 point scale) instead of awarding stars as a way of marketing himself." That's like buying a first-class ticket for the Titanic while it's sinking, isn't it?
Most telling is her analysis of Parker's "circling the wagons," first by deleting critical comments from his forums, then by putting all of his message boards behind a pay wall. It would appear that Parker recognizes the viability of the assault on his role as critical monolith and is shielding those who still drink his Kool-Aid (Flavor Aid, actually) by walling in his garden. He doesn't want those lawyers and ibankers who've been going to him for their holiday gifts every year to start questioning the value of his ratings.
So cheers to Ms. McCoy for a thoughtful and informative piece of writing. It's not just about Parker, it's a very astute and succinct analysis of the current power relationship in the world of wine media.
This is something I've been writing about a lot recently, so I won't bore you with rehashes of my arguments. It was simply refreshing to hear this from not only a Legitimate Wine Critic but a writer who has written one of the definitive Parker biographies.
Ms. McCoy writes about the self-evidence of Parker's decline in influence as inevitable and then outlines why: the proliferation of other critics using the 100-point scale, the rise of a younger wine consumer not concerned with the "imprimatur [of] an aging guru," the dilution of his own brand through score inflation and hiring additional tasters, and the expansion of the global wine market beyond something that is comprehensible by even the most thorough reviewer.
I also appreciated the reference to perennial wine douche bag W. Blake Gray acknowledging that he "admitted in an interview that he uses it (the 100 point scale) instead of awarding stars as a way of marketing himself." That's like buying a first-class ticket for the Titanic while it's sinking, isn't it?
Most telling is her analysis of Parker's "circling the wagons," first by deleting critical comments from his forums, then by putting all of his message boards behind a pay wall. It would appear that Parker recognizes the viability of the assault on his role as critical monolith and is shielding those who still drink his Kool-Aid (Flavor Aid, actually) by walling in his garden. He doesn't want those lawyers and ibankers who've been going to him for their holiday gifts every year to start questioning the value of his ratings.
So cheers to Ms. McCoy for a thoughtful and informative piece of writing. It's not just about Parker, it's a very astute and succinct analysis of the current power relationship in the world of wine media.
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Umami Burger Redux
So I went to Umami Burger again recently. That burger is still really damn good. It's so good, that I don't even object to it winning "Burger of the Year" accolades from GQ--even if such an assertion is dubious on premise.
I also think Umami Burger is unfairly maligned. Typically there are two inevitable responses by a gourmet burger-hater. Either: 1. it's just a burger or; 2. In-N-Out is better.
First, to the "It's just a burger" assertion--you're right. It is just a burger. It's ground meat on a bun with toppings. And lobster's just a bug on the bottom of the sea and caviar is just cured sturgeon eggs. To assign the burger any higher or lower state in the culinary world because of its nature is absurd. You can make a bad burger, you can make a good burger. Is it perhaps a bit easier to make a serviceable-to-good burger than it is a steak? Probably. But it's just as hard to make a great burger as a great steak, and the burger as to be less expensive and made at higher volume (typically).
Second: No, In-N-Out is not better. Not even for the price. In-N-Out makes a good burger, for the price it's a great burger. But Umami Burger is better. It's 3-4 times better. It's 10x better. The meat is better quality. Every patty is handmade on site, the meat is hand ground and hand seasoned. The flavor combinations are thoughtful and interesting. It is, in my estimation, a step better than all other premium ($8+) burgers on the market that I've had.
Why is the burger lesser privileged? There's no inherent reason why we happily pay $20+ for an 8oz steak but balk at paying more than $6 for a burger other than that we are used to burgers being cheap. And a frozen, grey patty that's made from random cuts of meat and is 20% oatmeal should be cheap. But good meat is good meat and should, theoretically, command the same price.
I like Umami Burger a lot. It's one of my go-to's if I need a good, filling lunch for less than $20. And by always coming up with new combinations and patty variations, they give customers a reason to come back. Get Umami Burger and leave your presumptions aside, at least until you take a bite.
www.umamiburger.com
I also think Umami Burger is unfairly maligned. Typically there are two inevitable responses by a gourmet burger-hater. Either: 1. it's just a burger or; 2. In-N-Out is better.
First, to the "It's just a burger" assertion--you're right. It is just a burger. It's ground meat on a bun with toppings. And lobster's just a bug on the bottom of the sea and caviar is just cured sturgeon eggs. To assign the burger any higher or lower state in the culinary world because of its nature is absurd. You can make a bad burger, you can make a good burger. Is it perhaps a bit easier to make a serviceable-to-good burger than it is a steak? Probably. But it's just as hard to make a great burger as a great steak, and the burger as to be less expensive and made at higher volume (typically).
Second: No, In-N-Out is not better. Not even for the price. In-N-Out makes a good burger, for the price it's a great burger. But Umami Burger is better. It's 3-4 times better. It's 10x better. The meat is better quality. Every patty is handmade on site, the meat is hand ground and hand seasoned. The flavor combinations are thoughtful and interesting. It is, in my estimation, a step better than all other premium ($8+) burgers on the market that I've had.
Why is the burger lesser privileged? There's no inherent reason why we happily pay $20+ for an 8oz steak but balk at paying more than $6 for a burger other than that we are used to burgers being cheap. And a frozen, grey patty that's made from random cuts of meat and is 20% oatmeal should be cheap. But good meat is good meat and should, theoretically, command the same price.
I like Umami Burger a lot. It's one of my go-to's if I need a good, filling lunch for less than $20. And by always coming up with new combinations and patty variations, they give customers a reason to come back. Get Umami Burger and leave your presumptions aside, at least until you take a bite.
www.umamiburger.com
Thursday, December 09, 2010
Crappy Service
I recently dined at a local favorite of mine here in Los Angeles. I won't name names because I do like the restaurant and plan to return. It's a restaurant, in fact, whose service I've defended to others in the past. It's a restaurant that has been lauded for its food and maligned for the quality of its waitstaff, which I'd never found wanting. Until, well....
Unfortunately, I had very shitty service there last night.
I'm lenient when it comes to service. As long as I feel modestly taken care of, I let a lot of things slide. Casualness. Harriedness. I don't really care as long as I feel that I'm being maintained--I'm being checked on, well recommended and not hurried.
Our server made zero appearances at our table except to 1. take our order and 2. refill our wine. That's it. Only things that could directly earn him revenue.
Sure, food can be dropped by a runner. I don't mind. I've worked at restaurants where that was the case. I did, however, always go by the table shortly after they'd taken a few bites and checked on everything. Not the case. And he wasn't particularly busy. We had a late reservation and, although still full when we arrived, by the time our food arrived there were only a half dozen tables and at least two waiters still working.
The problems went deeper than an inattentive waiter, too. The bussers--who admittedly did a good job keeping our water glasses filled--were very eager to clear our plates. On one occasion we were practically forced to take food off of the platter and move it to our share plates so that they could, inexplicably, clear the platter for no end other than to clear the plate or slightly accelerate our departure.
For dessert, we also had a very bad creme brulee. I blame this on the service because it was bad due it obviously lacking brulee-ness. This was plainly visible as soon as it was dropped. We would've said something but, again, the server was gone. The top was barely cooked and the dessert, although full of excellent flavor, was annoyingly bad because of it. The custard was cold in parts and, again, the bruleed top was barely browned. That's the type of thing that a server or food runner needs to notice and rectify before it's served. I've done it numerous times as a waiter and, sure I've been yelled at by chefs and cooks, but in the end I've never served an inferior product to a customer. I get it. It was late. Maybe they'd put the blowtorch away. But that's never an excuse to offer a poorly-executed dish. If you can't adequately serve the creme brulee, then 86 it after 9PM.
The last egregious error on the restaurant's part was that, despite there being 3 or 4 tables still left in the restaurant, the back waiter staff began rolling out the brooms and dustpans and sweeping up. That's completely unacceptable--it hurries your paying customers and makes them feel uncomfortable. It's not worth it. In another 30 minutes everybody would've been out of there. Every restaurant I've worked at have contracted with an overnight cleaning crew who takes care of the heavy-duty cleaning well after closing.
(Yes, we had a late reservation but it was for 9:15 and the restaurant closed at 10PM. The place was packed when we arrived and we were not the last table to leave. If you want to have everyone out the door at 10PM, you need to close at 9PM.)
Will I be back? Probably. But if this happens again I might not be.
Unfortunately, I had very shitty service there last night.
I'm lenient when it comes to service. As long as I feel modestly taken care of, I let a lot of things slide. Casualness. Harriedness. I don't really care as long as I feel that I'm being maintained--I'm being checked on, well recommended and not hurried.
Our server made zero appearances at our table except to 1. take our order and 2. refill our wine. That's it. Only things that could directly earn him revenue.
Sure, food can be dropped by a runner. I don't mind. I've worked at restaurants where that was the case. I did, however, always go by the table shortly after they'd taken a few bites and checked on everything. Not the case. And he wasn't particularly busy. We had a late reservation and, although still full when we arrived, by the time our food arrived there were only a half dozen tables and at least two waiters still working.
The problems went deeper than an inattentive waiter, too. The bussers--who admittedly did a good job keeping our water glasses filled--were very eager to clear our plates. On one occasion we were practically forced to take food off of the platter and move it to our share plates so that they could, inexplicably, clear the platter for no end other than to clear the plate or slightly accelerate our departure.
For dessert, we also had a very bad creme brulee. I blame this on the service because it was bad due it obviously lacking brulee-ness. This was plainly visible as soon as it was dropped. We would've said something but, again, the server was gone. The top was barely cooked and the dessert, although full of excellent flavor, was annoyingly bad because of it. The custard was cold in parts and, again, the bruleed top was barely browned. That's the type of thing that a server or food runner needs to notice and rectify before it's served. I've done it numerous times as a waiter and, sure I've been yelled at by chefs and cooks, but in the end I've never served an inferior product to a customer. I get it. It was late. Maybe they'd put the blowtorch away. But that's never an excuse to offer a poorly-executed dish. If you can't adequately serve the creme brulee, then 86 it after 9PM.
The last egregious error on the restaurant's part was that, despite there being 3 or 4 tables still left in the restaurant, the back waiter staff began rolling out the brooms and dustpans and sweeping up. That's completely unacceptable--it hurries your paying customers and makes them feel uncomfortable. It's not worth it. In another 30 minutes everybody would've been out of there. Every restaurant I've worked at have contracted with an overnight cleaning crew who takes care of the heavy-duty cleaning well after closing.
(Yes, we had a late reservation but it was for 9:15 and the restaurant closed at 10PM. The place was packed when we arrived and we were not the last table to leave. If you want to have everyone out the door at 10PM, you need to close at 9PM.)
Will I be back? Probably. But if this happens again I might not be.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
What happened to California Cabernet?
I was visiting my parents for the Thanksgiving holiday and, in what has become a holiday tradition, I raided their wine cellar.
My parents have long been wine enthusiasts. Some of my earliest childhood memories are of being dragged to tasting rooms on family camping trips in Napa or the Sierra Foothills. They have an extensive collection of small production California wines (from some wineries that don't even exist any more) that generally weren't available anywhere but from the tasting room or in restaurants. On my last few visits, I've been going through their wine cellar and pulling out wines that are ready to be enjoyed or nearing past-the-peak-ness to drink with our holiday fare. We've been drinking a lot of circa 1999 Cabernet Sauvignon.
These wines largely pre-date the advent of mass Parkerization, when California wine makers manipulated their wines to increase alcohol and concentration so as to appeal to the Wine Advocate's palate, a process that reached its peak in the early 2000s, when every new boutique winery strove for a 90+ to justify its existence to investors. As a result, these wines are lower in alcohol--13% or less, virtually unheard of in Cabernet from California in recent years--and showcase more lightly steeped tannins, better integrated cedar and spice aromatics, and actual blackberry fruit flavors instead of candy and cough syrup.
(And any asshole who tells you that California can't make lower alcohol wines because our climate is too good and warm and hot is full of shit. 1998 was still one of the hottest years on record and I've had Napa Cabs from that year that were 12.5% alcohol. Zins that were 13.5%.)
Are they great wines? No. They're wines that probably sold for the mid-to-high teens out of the tasting room. But they're largely estate-grown wines made in an honest, straight-forward way. No manipulation. Moderate oak. And while admitting that it lacked a certain heft that I've come to expect from my California red wines, after 10 years in the bottle, it had a level of balance and, well, pleasant-ness that I've never had in California Cabernet that was under $30 a bottle.
I found these wines to be in the same mode as the inexpensive imports from Spain, Portugal and Southern France that I enjoy routinely--the wines I buy for $15 a bottle at a good wine shop and drink with a simple evening meal. Medium to medium-full bodied, moderate tannins, acidity, and earthy characters to balance out the fruit. It's a style of wine I haven't encountered much from California in my 6 or so years of earnest, serious wine drinking, let alone at the price that these wines originally sold for.
So what happened? I'm not sure exactly, other than that we started manipulating wine instead of making it. The good news is, we still have excellent fruit and if we just picked good grapes and let good wine come into being, we can start producing something that's honest and interesting again in California.
My parents have long been wine enthusiasts. Some of my earliest childhood memories are of being dragged to tasting rooms on family camping trips in Napa or the Sierra Foothills. They have an extensive collection of small production California wines (from some wineries that don't even exist any more) that generally weren't available anywhere but from the tasting room or in restaurants. On my last few visits, I've been going through their wine cellar and pulling out wines that are ready to be enjoyed or nearing past-the-peak-ness to drink with our holiday fare. We've been drinking a lot of circa 1999 Cabernet Sauvignon.
These wines largely pre-date the advent of mass Parkerization, when California wine makers manipulated their wines to increase alcohol and concentration so as to appeal to the Wine Advocate's palate, a process that reached its peak in the early 2000s, when every new boutique winery strove for a 90+ to justify its existence to investors. As a result, these wines are lower in alcohol--13% or less, virtually unheard of in Cabernet from California in recent years--and showcase more lightly steeped tannins, better integrated cedar and spice aromatics, and actual blackberry fruit flavors instead of candy and cough syrup.
(And any asshole who tells you that California can't make lower alcohol wines because our climate is too good and warm and hot is full of shit. 1998 was still one of the hottest years on record and I've had Napa Cabs from that year that were 12.5% alcohol. Zins that were 13.5%.)
Are they great wines? No. They're wines that probably sold for the mid-to-high teens out of the tasting room. But they're largely estate-grown wines made in an honest, straight-forward way. No manipulation. Moderate oak. And while admitting that it lacked a certain heft that I've come to expect from my California red wines, after 10 years in the bottle, it had a level of balance and, well, pleasant-ness that I've never had in California Cabernet that was under $30 a bottle.
I found these wines to be in the same mode as the inexpensive imports from Spain, Portugal and Southern France that I enjoy routinely--the wines I buy for $15 a bottle at a good wine shop and drink with a simple evening meal. Medium to medium-full bodied, moderate tannins, acidity, and earthy characters to balance out the fruit. It's a style of wine I haven't encountered much from California in my 6 or so years of earnest, serious wine drinking, let alone at the price that these wines originally sold for.
So what happened? I'm not sure exactly, other than that we started manipulating wine instead of making it. The good news is, we still have excellent fruit and if we just picked good grapes and let good wine come into being, we can start producing something that's honest and interesting again in California.
Monday, November 29, 2010
HFF Quickie: Starry Kitchen, Los Angeles, Ca
Starry Kitchen is that age-old tale of "local underground illegal restaurateurs make good." Husband-wife team Nguyen and Thi Tran began running a sort of speakeasy-style restaurant out of their apartment, serving their guests modern pan-Asian comfort food gratis on their patio, but with a recommended $5 donation. Though several attempts were made to shut them down, they toed the legal line well enough to avoid censure. In the mean time, the owner of a struggling downtown sushi restaurant decided to revamp his concept and invited the Trans to essentially take over his business with no upfront capital investment.
Preparation meets opportunity, no?
So now, in a small restaurant store front on Bunker Hill, the Trans are serving their signature pan-Asian mindfuck cuisine to bankers and lawyers, offering a welcome respite from Panda Express and all the generic soup and sandwich shops on the hill.
Every day, Starry Kitchen offers your choice of proteins, usually the signature free-range lemongrass chicken, an additional chicken option, a beef or pork option and a vegetarian selection. Sometimes a seafood choice turns up. You can then get your selected protein served as either a wrap, a banh mi (Vietnamese sandwich on baguette with jalapenos, cilantro and slaw), "Thai" Cobb salad, chopped salad or as a lunch plate over rice. Everything comes with one selection from the rotating side dish offerings (the lunch plate comes with two side dishes). Starry Kitchen also typically offers at least one stand-alone dish--a seared tuna salad on my visits--and some additional a la carte sides and desserts. Dishes are always rotating through and when one comes off the menu it doesn't return for several months.
The kitchen has no oven or microwave, so everything is prepared in either the deep fryer or on the large precision cook tops (the same kind used at the French Laundry). In my three experiences with Starry Kitchen (twice in the restaurant, once at the food truck) the food has been impeccably prepared. The Krab Cake wrap was fresh and tasty, as was the pork belly banh mi and the Japanese Kara-ge banh mi. On the side dish front, the kim chee fried rice was a highlight, but the fresh cilantro-y glass noodles and crispy fried tofu balls were also hits. An unusually sweet and earthy steamed pandan flan was a great dessert and quelled the heat from the house pickled jalapenos. Seriously, those fuckers got me high, I think.
Starry Kitchen offers interesting, honest and uncompromising cuisine at a very fair price--everything is under $9. Some folks might be turned off by their no-substitutions menu of weirdness, but honestly if you can't get in to something on the Starry Kitchen's menu, you really should just give up on life. Luckily, Panda Express is around the corner should that eventuality arise.
Starry Kitchen is open weekdays for lunch from 11-3 and for dinner on Thursdays and Fridays from 6-9:30.
Starry Kitchen
350 S. Grand Ave. D-3
Los Angeles, Ca 90071
www.starrykitchen.com
Preparation meets opportunity, no?
So now, in a small restaurant store front on Bunker Hill, the Trans are serving their signature pan-Asian mindfuck cuisine to bankers and lawyers, offering a welcome respite from Panda Express and all the generic soup and sandwich shops on the hill.
Every day, Starry Kitchen offers your choice of proteins, usually the signature free-range lemongrass chicken, an additional chicken option, a beef or pork option and a vegetarian selection. Sometimes a seafood choice turns up. You can then get your selected protein served as either a wrap, a banh mi (Vietnamese sandwich on baguette with jalapenos, cilantro and slaw), "Thai" Cobb salad, chopped salad or as a lunch plate over rice. Everything comes with one selection from the rotating side dish offerings (the lunch plate comes with two side dishes). Starry Kitchen also typically offers at least one stand-alone dish--a seared tuna salad on my visits--and some additional a la carte sides and desserts. Dishes are always rotating through and when one comes off the menu it doesn't return for several months.
The kitchen has no oven or microwave, so everything is prepared in either the deep fryer or on the large precision cook tops (the same kind used at the French Laundry). In my three experiences with Starry Kitchen (twice in the restaurant, once at the food truck) the food has been impeccably prepared. The Krab Cake wrap was fresh and tasty, as was the pork belly banh mi and the Japanese Kara-ge banh mi. On the side dish front, the kim chee fried rice was a highlight, but the fresh cilantro-y glass noodles and crispy fried tofu balls were also hits. An unusually sweet and earthy steamed pandan flan was a great dessert and quelled the heat from the house pickled jalapenos. Seriously, those fuckers got me high, I think.
Starry Kitchen offers interesting, honest and uncompromising cuisine at a very fair price--everything is under $9. Some folks might be turned off by their no-substitutions menu of weirdness, but honestly if you can't get in to something on the Starry Kitchen's menu, you really should just give up on life. Luckily, Panda Express is around the corner should that eventuality arise.
Starry Kitchen is open weekdays for lunch from 11-3 and for dinner on Thursdays and Fridays from 6-9:30.
Starry Kitchen
350 S. Grand Ave. D-3
Los Angeles, Ca 90071
www.starrykitchen.com
Sunday, November 21, 2010
HFF On The Road: Washington, DC
From a food standpoint, Washington and Los Angeles are very similar. Both cities benefit from and are restricted by a customer base that is affluent but also incurious and unadventurous. They are cities where fine dining restaurants rely upon expense account lunches and show-off dinners to support their bottom lines.
As a result, you have a collection of very good restaurants serving predictable food: steakhouses, trattorias, bistros and brasseries. You have a slew of high-end chain restaurants as well, places like Fogo do Chao and Morton's. They're destination restaurants where a clientele coming from all over the world can be indulged comfortably and not be challenged--you'll spend a lot of money but it'll be on a New York strip and a bottle of Cakebread, so it's okay. It's one of the main reasons, in my opinion, that Los Angeles lags behind cities like San Francisco, Chicago--even Portland--in being an innovative dining environment. Too much of the dining-out money wants to dine at boring, predictable places. I mean Morton's is simply TERRIBLE and how many of those are there in LA--and the DC area, for that matter?
(Five and five, respectively.)
But DC, like Los Angeles, has fantastic diversity and a lot of young professionals and there are neighborhood haunts to be found that are worthwhile. Some highlights from my recent trip to DC:
Meridian Pint: A very fun gastropub in the transition Columbia Heights neighborhood. Referred there by a friend, at first glance Meridian Pint looks much like a straightforward sports bar, loaded with flatscreen TVs. The menu, however, revealed a more adventurous culinary spirit with a mix of updates on sports bar classics (nachos topped with braised brisket) and modern New American entrees (grilled trout with fried polenta). If you come in without a reservation you can dine in the downstairs lounge which offers the full menu in a more casual seat-yourself bar environment. GREAT beer selection, focusing primarily on mid-Atlantic and New England microbrews.
www.meridianpint.com
Liberty Tavern: Across the river in downtown Arlington is Liberty Tavern, another New American gastropub. We went for brunch and opted for the buffet so I can't speak to the quality of the a la carte menu, but it's populated with an interesting array of New American dishes and wood oven pizzas. The Sunday brunch buffet was one of the best I've had in recent memory. The chafing dishes were being perpetually replaced and everything was quite fresh. Highlights were the fresh carved roast pork loin (one of at least a half-dozen pork dishes), baked trout, potato gratin, and fresh biscuits, ham and gravy. Come hungry and its an excellent value at under $20. The only thing lacking was my Bloody Mary, which was mixed in advance and very heavy on the cheap vodka and lacking in flavor beyond that.
www.theliberytavern.com
Spider Kelly's: Okay, so apparently we only ate at gastropubs. Sorry. The World Series was on. Located in Arlington, a door or two down from Liberty Tavern, Spider Kelly's was heavier on the "pub" and lighter on the "gastro," offering more straightforward pub grub with a few gourmet twists. I was looking forward to having a crab cake sandwich--I ordered that 99.99% of the time when I visited Virginia and Maryland as a kid. Spider Kelly's version surprised me as it consisted basically of a pile of lump crab on a bun--which was great in a way but I kinda missed the slutty mix of crab and breadcrumbs that makes for a good cheap crab cake sandwich. The food here was nothing worth returning for, but it was solid inexpensive bar food in a good environment to watch the game.
www.spiderkellys.com
I hope to get back to DC soon and when I have more time I intend to visit some of the city's flagship restaurants. I'm particularly curious about Jose Andres' projects in DC as well as Wolfgang Puck's The Source.
Any current or ex-DC area readers have other recommendations in the capital?
As a result, you have a collection of very good restaurants serving predictable food: steakhouses, trattorias, bistros and brasseries. You have a slew of high-end chain restaurants as well, places like Fogo do Chao and Morton's. They're destination restaurants where a clientele coming from all over the world can be indulged comfortably and not be challenged--you'll spend a lot of money but it'll be on a New York strip and a bottle of Cakebread, so it's okay. It's one of the main reasons, in my opinion, that Los Angeles lags behind cities like San Francisco, Chicago--even Portland--in being an innovative dining environment. Too much of the dining-out money wants to dine at boring, predictable places. I mean Morton's is simply TERRIBLE and how many of those are there in LA--and the DC area, for that matter?
(Five and five, respectively.)
But DC, like Los Angeles, has fantastic diversity and a lot of young professionals and there are neighborhood haunts to be found that are worthwhile. Some highlights from my recent trip to DC:
Meridian Pint: A very fun gastropub in the transition Columbia Heights neighborhood. Referred there by a friend, at first glance Meridian Pint looks much like a straightforward sports bar, loaded with flatscreen TVs. The menu, however, revealed a more adventurous culinary spirit with a mix of updates on sports bar classics (nachos topped with braised brisket) and modern New American entrees (grilled trout with fried polenta). If you come in without a reservation you can dine in the downstairs lounge which offers the full menu in a more casual seat-yourself bar environment. GREAT beer selection, focusing primarily on mid-Atlantic and New England microbrews.
www.meridianpint.com
Liberty Tavern: Across the river in downtown Arlington is Liberty Tavern, another New American gastropub. We went for brunch and opted for the buffet so I can't speak to the quality of the a la carte menu, but it's populated with an interesting array of New American dishes and wood oven pizzas. The Sunday brunch buffet was one of the best I've had in recent memory. The chafing dishes were being perpetually replaced and everything was quite fresh. Highlights were the fresh carved roast pork loin (one of at least a half-dozen pork dishes), baked trout, potato gratin, and fresh biscuits, ham and gravy. Come hungry and its an excellent value at under $20. The only thing lacking was my Bloody Mary, which was mixed in advance and very heavy on the cheap vodka and lacking in flavor beyond that.
www.theliberytavern.com
Spider Kelly's: Okay, so apparently we only ate at gastropubs. Sorry. The World Series was on. Located in Arlington, a door or two down from Liberty Tavern, Spider Kelly's was heavier on the "pub" and lighter on the "gastro," offering more straightforward pub grub with a few gourmet twists. I was looking forward to having a crab cake sandwich--I ordered that 99.99% of the time when I visited Virginia and Maryland as a kid. Spider Kelly's version surprised me as it consisted basically of a pile of lump crab on a bun--which was great in a way but I kinda missed the slutty mix of crab and breadcrumbs that makes for a good cheap crab cake sandwich. The food here was nothing worth returning for, but it was solid inexpensive bar food in a good environment to watch the game.
www.spiderkellys.com
I hope to get back to DC soon and when I have more time I intend to visit some of the city's flagship restaurants. I'm particularly curious about Jose Andres' projects in DC as well as Wolfgang Puck's The Source.
Any current or ex-DC area readers have other recommendations in the capital?
Sunday, November 07, 2010
HFF Quickie: Toddy G's, Los Angeles, Ca
After lamenting a dearth of good pizza in LA, I was pleased to discover Tomato Pie in Silver Lake a few months ago. Now, adding a second quality pizza establishment to LA's Eastside is Toddy G's in Downtown's Arts District. It's located next to Tony's on 7th at Santa Fe in what used to be an old Chinese restaurant. I'd heard a while back that Cedd Moses' 213 Group was involved in this project too, but I haven't found any corroborating evidence for that. Regardless, it's a welcome compliment to it's upscale dive bar neighbor.
It's more-or-less New York in style with big 18+" pies with a thin chewy crust. They offer eight or so regular standards like Margherita, Soppresata and Spinach pizzas with a few daily specials including homemade meatball and homemade Italian sausage pizzas.
I've tried several of the pizzas and the two standouts are the White Pizza and the Spinach pizza with feta, red onions and kalamata olives.
Pizza's available by the slice--either dine-in or from the pick-up window--and by the whole pie (currently dine-in or pick-up only, but delivery to the eastern half of Downtown coming soon).
Toddy G's
2019 East 7th St.
Los Angeles, Ca 90021
www.toddygs.com
213-627-1430
It's more-or-less New York in style with big 18+" pies with a thin chewy crust. They offer eight or so regular standards like Margherita, Soppresata and Spinach pizzas with a few daily specials including homemade meatball and homemade Italian sausage pizzas.
I've tried several of the pizzas and the two standouts are the White Pizza and the Spinach pizza with feta, red onions and kalamata olives.
Pizza's available by the slice--either dine-in or from the pick-up window--and by the whole pie (currently dine-in or pick-up only, but delivery to the eastern half of Downtown coming soon).
Toddy G's
2019 East 7th St.
Los Angeles, Ca 90021
www.toddygs.com
213-627-1430
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Crab Cakes!
Dear anonymous restaurant in Arlington, VA:
A pile of canned crab on a bun is not a crab cake sandwich. It's a pile of fucking crab on a bun. Here I was trying to relive a love of my childhood, the Mid-Atlantic crab cake sandwich, and you give me a pile of (admittedly lump) crab meat on a crappy role with some jarred tartare sauce on the side. Lame.
Your onion rings were good though.
Love,
D
A pile of canned crab on a bun is not a crab cake sandwich. It's a pile of fucking crab on a bun. Here I was trying to relive a love of my childhood, the Mid-Atlantic crab cake sandwich, and you give me a pile of (admittedly lump) crab meat on a crappy role with some jarred tartare sauce on the side. Lame.
Your onion rings were good though.
Love,
D
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
On Food Trucks: Starry Kitchen LA
Do we need dedicated food trucks? Meaning, that is, do we need a truck that is 100% devoted to one business and one concept?
Food trucks have a lot more overhead than you might initially think--a tricked out modern truck can cost will north of $100K, sometimes as much as $200K or more. Plus there's gas, insurance--not to mention the actual food cost itself. Permitting is a little bit easier than a restaurant, but that's about it.
And competition is steeper, not only because you're competing with dozens of other high-end trucks, you're competing against the myriad lonchero trucks and street corner food stands. With most high-end trucks serving food in the $7-$10 range, they're also competing with hole-in-the-wall restaurants offering a sit-down experience for the same price. You're better off saving a bit more money, picking a good spot and opening up a brick and mortar restaurant. The food truck bubble will burst and it will burst soon.
So what, then, is the appropriate role of high-end food trucks in our ever-changing food world?
I think the Mandoline Truck and Starry Kitchen are on to something. Starry Kitchen, the modern Vietnamese restaurant that started as an illegal underground restaurant and has now gone semi-legit on Bunker Hill in Downtown LA, is taking a "residency" in Mandoline's slick Vietnamese food wagon for a few weeks. They're cruising around LA, slinging their specialties and promoting the hell out of their business.
A brick and mortar restaurant using food trucks as a promotional tool is genius, I think. If the restaurant is in business then the truck just needs to break even and if it brings even one new diner to the restaurant, it's a success. There's money to be made in someone investing in a small fleet of food trucks that he or she then leases out to restaurants and/or pop-up chefs (think Ludo) for short or medium term leases. Bring the restaurant to the people, promote your business and gather new customers.
The Starry Kitchen has some rockstar food and its food truck model was excellent. Like most successful trucks, they offer limited options in a couple different combinations. At the truck you have the choice of pork belly, curry chicken or fried tofu balls served either in a banh mi (Vietnamese baguette sandwich) or over coconut rice. And unlike almost every other food truck, the food came up very quickly.
I had the pork belly banh mi. The meat was delicious, flavorful, sweet and spicy, and sliced thin. The vegetables were interesting: sauteed more fajita-like than the fresh veggies I've had on past sandwiches. The only hiccup was the baguette, which was a little stale. I was envious of the chicken curry banh mi eaters dipping their sandwiches in the curry sauce. I also had an a la carte side of tofu balls. They're on to something here-- the balls are formed pretty small and then fried so they're crispy all the way through, not soggy in the middle like larger pieces of fried tofu.
I enjoyed the food quite a bit and the vibe even better--the Starry Kitchen team has a lot of fun and doesn't take itself to seriously--and I'll make a point to check out the restaurant itself. I guess you'd call that food truck a success.
LA only needs about 20 non-lonchero food trucks and just let a couple hundred restaurants use them over the course of a year. Those that do well can keep leasing them, those that do really well can buy their own, and those that only do okay will at least have gained a little extra business.
Starry Kitchen
350 S. Grand Ave.
Los Angeles, Ca 90071
www.starrykitchen.com
Twitter: @StarryKitchen
Food trucks have a lot more overhead than you might initially think--a tricked out modern truck can cost will north of $100K, sometimes as much as $200K or more. Plus there's gas, insurance--not to mention the actual food cost itself. Permitting is a little bit easier than a restaurant, but that's about it.
And competition is steeper, not only because you're competing with dozens of other high-end trucks, you're competing against the myriad lonchero trucks and street corner food stands. With most high-end trucks serving food in the $7-$10 range, they're also competing with hole-in-the-wall restaurants offering a sit-down experience for the same price. You're better off saving a bit more money, picking a good spot and opening up a brick and mortar restaurant. The food truck bubble will burst and it will burst soon.
So what, then, is the appropriate role of high-end food trucks in our ever-changing food world?
I think the Mandoline Truck and Starry Kitchen are on to something. Starry Kitchen, the modern Vietnamese restaurant that started as an illegal underground restaurant and has now gone semi-legit on Bunker Hill in Downtown LA, is taking a "residency" in Mandoline's slick Vietnamese food wagon for a few weeks. They're cruising around LA, slinging their specialties and promoting the hell out of their business.
A brick and mortar restaurant using food trucks as a promotional tool is genius, I think. If the restaurant is in business then the truck just needs to break even and if it brings even one new diner to the restaurant, it's a success. There's money to be made in someone investing in a small fleet of food trucks that he or she then leases out to restaurants and/or pop-up chefs (think Ludo) for short or medium term leases. Bring the restaurant to the people, promote your business and gather new customers.
The Starry Kitchen has some rockstar food and its food truck model was excellent. Like most successful trucks, they offer limited options in a couple different combinations. At the truck you have the choice of pork belly, curry chicken or fried tofu balls served either in a banh mi (Vietnamese baguette sandwich) or over coconut rice. And unlike almost every other food truck, the food came up very quickly.
I had the pork belly banh mi. The meat was delicious, flavorful, sweet and spicy, and sliced thin. The vegetables were interesting: sauteed more fajita-like than the fresh veggies I've had on past sandwiches. The only hiccup was the baguette, which was a little stale. I was envious of the chicken curry banh mi eaters dipping their sandwiches in the curry sauce. I also had an a la carte side of tofu balls. They're on to something here-- the balls are formed pretty small and then fried so they're crispy all the way through, not soggy in the middle like larger pieces of fried tofu.
I enjoyed the food quite a bit and the vibe even better--the Starry Kitchen team has a lot of fun and doesn't take itself to seriously--and I'll make a point to check out the restaurant itself. I guess you'd call that food truck a success.
LA only needs about 20 non-lonchero food trucks and just let a couple hundred restaurants use them over the course of a year. Those that do well can keep leasing them, those that do really well can buy their own, and those that only do okay will at least have gained a little extra business.
Starry Kitchen
350 S. Grand Ave.
Los Angeles, Ca 90071
www.starrykitchen.com
Twitter: @StarryKitchen
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
HFF Quickie: LudoTruck
I had a rather lukewarm response to LudoBites' first pop-up at Breadbar a couple years ago, but I was intrigued by the many good reports on Ludovic Lefebvre's fried chicken truck.
My ongoing complaint about food trucks is not that the lines to order are long (that happens) but it's that the food takes too long to prepare and you're then forced to wait in an amorphous blob that slowly bleeds back into the line that others are standing in to order for 15 minutes or more. LudoTruck fixes this problem by having a very small menu of three different chicken options (wings, strips, balls) either alone or in combination with cole slaw and fries (sides are also available a la carte). By sticking to just a few things, the food is always cooking and my order came up promptly--two or three minutes.
I ordered the Provencal chicken balls and they were delicious. The classiest chicken nuggets on the planet, they're made from thigh meat that has been marinated for several days in herbes de Provence, then rolled in seasoned breading and fried. They're perfectly moist and permeated with herbal flavor.
The accompanying "perfect" fries are quite good, crunchy on the outside and soft on the inside. I also liked the piquillo pepper sauce for the chicken. I wasn't crazy about the slaw, which was very vinegar-y and uneven with alternating cabbage-y blandness and jalapeno spiciness. Small complaint.
Avoid the truck at food truck festivals since the lines will no doubt be long. In fact, avoid food truck festivals in general, but seek LudoTurck out on its many one-off outings throughout Los Angeles.
The LudoTruck
www.twitter.com/LudoTruck
My ongoing complaint about food trucks is not that the lines to order are long (that happens) but it's that the food takes too long to prepare and you're then forced to wait in an amorphous blob that slowly bleeds back into the line that others are standing in to order for 15 minutes or more. LudoTruck fixes this problem by having a very small menu of three different chicken options (wings, strips, balls) either alone or in combination with cole slaw and fries (sides are also available a la carte). By sticking to just a few things, the food is always cooking and my order came up promptly--two or three minutes.
I ordered the Provencal chicken balls and they were delicious. The classiest chicken nuggets on the planet, they're made from thigh meat that has been marinated for several days in herbes de Provence, then rolled in seasoned breading and fried. They're perfectly moist and permeated with herbal flavor.
The accompanying "perfect" fries are quite good, crunchy on the outside and soft on the inside. I also liked the piquillo pepper sauce for the chicken. I wasn't crazy about the slaw, which was very vinegar-y and uneven with alternating cabbage-y blandness and jalapeno spiciness. Small complaint.
Avoid the truck at food truck festivals since the lines will no doubt be long. In fact, avoid food truck festivals in general, but seek LudoTurck out on its many one-off outings throughout Los Angeles.
The LudoTruck
www.twitter.com/LudoTruck
Sunday, October 03, 2010
A Really Good Tomato Sauce
Here's my recipe for a really good tomato sauce. It's something I make about once a month and it typically lasts me a week or so. Sometimes I'll freeze half of it for later. It's simple, easy and delicious. It's also way better than any store-bought tomato sauce you can get. The steps:
1. In a large pot (I use my Le Creuset French Oven) heat enough olive oil to cover the bottom.
2. While the oil heats, dice a medium onion. Add the diced onion to the pot and saute for a few minutes.
3. Chop 3 cloves of garlic and add to the pot. I cut corners here and use Dorsot frozen chopped garlic cubes from Trader Joe's. Authentic? Nah. But I'm not Italian and this is a lot easier and gives a good result.
4. Chop about two tablespoons of fresh basil. Add to the pot. Here I also use two cubes of Dorsot frozen chopped basil.
5. Add one pound Italian sausage (casing removed). Break it up with a wooden spoon. Eliminate this step for a vegetarian sauce.
6. Add a healthy dose of salt (about a tablespoon), about a tablespoon each of dried oregano and dried basil as well as several cranks of fresh ground pepper. For a spicy sauce, add a teaspoon or two of crushed red pepper. Stir the contents of the pot to coat the sausage with the herbs and oil.
7. Let simmer for 5-10 minutes.
8. Add a quarter cup of dry white wine, deglazing the pan if necessary. Let the wine simmer with the meat for another 5 minutes.
9. Add one large (28 oz) can of either tomato sauce, crushed tomatoes or diced tomatoes. Add two medium (14 oz) cans of ready-cut tomatoes. I like to do one can each of fire-roasted and "Italian-style". Add one can (6 oz) of tomato paste. Stir.
10. Let the sauce simmer for at least 30 minutes or as long as 90+ minutes. The longer the better. Taste before serving and adjust seasoning as necessary.
11. Optional additions: 1/4 cup chopped olives; 3-4 chopped anchovy fillets; 1 can cannellini beans; 1/4 cup chopped parsley.
The beauty of this sauce is that it's hearty enough to stand on its own with just a little pasta. It's also excellent with rice or quinoa or as an accompaniment to grilled chicken or pork. You're welcome.
1. In a large pot (I use my Le Creuset French Oven) heat enough olive oil to cover the bottom.
2. While the oil heats, dice a medium onion. Add the diced onion to the pot and saute for a few minutes.
3. Chop 3 cloves of garlic and add to the pot. I cut corners here and use Dorsot frozen chopped garlic cubes from Trader Joe's. Authentic? Nah. But I'm not Italian and this is a lot easier and gives a good result.
4. Chop about two tablespoons of fresh basil. Add to the pot. Here I also use two cubes of Dorsot frozen chopped basil.
5. Add one pound Italian sausage (casing removed). Break it up with a wooden spoon. Eliminate this step for a vegetarian sauce.
6. Add a healthy dose of salt (about a tablespoon), about a tablespoon each of dried oregano and dried basil as well as several cranks of fresh ground pepper. For a spicy sauce, add a teaspoon or two of crushed red pepper. Stir the contents of the pot to coat the sausage with the herbs and oil.
7. Let simmer for 5-10 minutes.
8. Add a quarter cup of dry white wine, deglazing the pan if necessary. Let the wine simmer with the meat for another 5 minutes.
9. Add one large (28 oz) can of either tomato sauce, crushed tomatoes or diced tomatoes. Add two medium (14 oz) cans of ready-cut tomatoes. I like to do one can each of fire-roasted and "Italian-style". Add one can (6 oz) of tomato paste. Stir.
10. Let the sauce simmer for at least 30 minutes or as long as 90+ minutes. The longer the better. Taste before serving and adjust seasoning as necessary.
11. Optional additions: 1/4 cup chopped olives; 3-4 chopped anchovy fillets; 1 can cannellini beans; 1/4 cup chopped parsley.
The beauty of this sauce is that it's hearty enough to stand on its own with just a little pasta. It's also excellent with rice or quinoa or as an accompaniment to grilled chicken or pork. You're welcome.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
HFF Quickie: Nick's Cafe - Los Angeles, Ca
Finally made it to the venerable cop-owned Northeast Downtown/Lincoln Heights institution, Nick's. The breakfast and lunch dive is right across North Spring St. from the Los Angeles State Historic Park ("The Cornfield") in the midst of poultry wholesale warehouses and light/medium manufacturing.
At Nick's, your seating options are either at the u-shaped counter or at one of the outside tables and since this was an oppressively hot day we opted for the slightly cooler inside counter option. The young, friendly staff is quick and attentive, going against my immediate presumptions based on Nick's superficial similarities to Westwood's The Apple Pan where, great burger aside, the staff is old and not particularly spry. But on to the food.
We only went for the breakfast options so a lunch discussion will have to wait. Most of the breakfast options are some combination of eggs and ham (their signature), bacon or chorizo along with a few different pancake and French toast combinations.
I had the chorizo breakfast burrito which was enormous and delicious. Eggs, potatoes, jalapenos, and a load of chorizo stuffed into a giant tortilla. The whole burrito was quickly griddle before serving, a nice finishing touch. The eggs were of good quality, as was the chorizo. The jalapenos were a nice addition to the typical "egg-potato-meat" make-up of lesser breakfast burritos.
My companion had the French toast combination which was also quite good. Thick, hand-dipped slices of French toast with scrambled eggs and ham. The ham earns its reputation as the best cheap ham in town: thick-cut from whole ham steaks and crisped up nicely on the griddle.
Sure it's simple and cheap (our entire giant meal with coffee was $20) but virtually everything is hand made to order. No Sysco to be seen. It's the best diner dive breakfast I've had in LA period. Check it out.
Nick's Cafe
1300 N Spring St
Los Angeles, CA 90012
www.nickscafela.com
At Nick's, your seating options are either at the u-shaped counter or at one of the outside tables and since this was an oppressively hot day we opted for the slightly cooler inside counter option. The young, friendly staff is quick and attentive, going against my immediate presumptions based on Nick's superficial similarities to Westwood's The Apple Pan where, great burger aside, the staff is old and not particularly spry. But on to the food.
We only went for the breakfast options so a lunch discussion will have to wait. Most of the breakfast options are some combination of eggs and ham (their signature), bacon or chorizo along with a few different pancake and French toast combinations.
I had the chorizo breakfast burrito which was enormous and delicious. Eggs, potatoes, jalapenos, and a load of chorizo stuffed into a giant tortilla. The whole burrito was quickly griddle before serving, a nice finishing touch. The eggs were of good quality, as was the chorizo. The jalapenos were a nice addition to the typical "egg-potato-meat" make-up of lesser breakfast burritos.
My companion had the French toast combination which was also quite good. Thick, hand-dipped slices of French toast with scrambled eggs and ham. The ham earns its reputation as the best cheap ham in town: thick-cut from whole ham steaks and crisped up nicely on the griddle.
Sure it's simple and cheap (our entire giant meal with coffee was $20) but virtually everything is hand made to order. No Sysco to be seen. It's the best diner dive breakfast I've had in LA period. Check it out.
Nick's Cafe
1300 N Spring St
Los Angeles, CA 90012
www.nickscafela.com
Sunday, September 26, 2010
Can't we all just get along?
Our national wine dialogue is at a very adversarial stage right now. On one side, you have the "Natural Wine" et al faction that is staunchly advocating for wines produced as simply as possible with minimal human interference.
Because this styile is advocated by a young, hip set and because it stands directly opposed to the wine styles that have been popular in the major wine journals of the last decade, this has provoked something of a backlash from The Establishment.
Essentially we've pitted young wine geeks with black plastic eyeglasses and ironic pocket squares against overweight attorneys swilling Bordeaux from Riedel crystal while sitting behind a Commodore 64 running WordPerfect. Unfortunately, the conversation has ceased to be a discussion about quality wine making and has become a shouting match between two firmly entrenched sides.
This boiled over recently when Robert M. Parker, Jr. wrote this about his recent experience at a restaurant. The Twitter-sphere took umbrage to this particular part of his comments:
"Add the BYO and no corkage....and better yet...no precious sommelier trying to sell us some teeth enamel removing wine with acid levels close to toxic, made by some sheep farmer on the north side of his 4,000-foot foot elevation vineyard picked two months before ripeness, and made from a grape better fed to wild boar than the human species..."
I was not particularly shocked, as I already assumed Parker to be an out-of-touch ass when it comes to his understanding of the modern wine world, but the severity of his tone does reflect his frustration at the idiot level of wine hipsterism on the other side of the spectrum where, yes, some wines are selected purely for their absurd level of naturalism over all other criteria. Though I can't think of what real-life wine Parker could possibly be referring too.
My tastes do run toward the "natural," terroir-driven style of wine advocated by the wine Twitterati, but there can be excellent, well-made wines that do skew to the higher end of the alcohol spectrum. Also (d0n't shoot me) the presence of new French or (even) American oak in the right kind of wine can improve it. I promise it's true. Take, for instance, Ridge Zinfandels or the red wines from Paulo Laureano in Portugal.
It's not an all-or-nothing proposition and if you become so entrenched in your wine ideology that you're not going to even begin to entertain the validity of wines which exist outside of your vinous fiefdom you're going to miss out on a huge chunk of the world's wine and you'll miss the opportunity to try some gems.
(The only wines I would say to avoid on principal are giant production factory-farmed wines, the types of generic-labeled bottles on the bottom shelves at grocery stories and BevMo. These are character-less wines produced using destructive farming practices.)
And, really, what are the stakes in this game? You try a wine you might not like, have a few sips, and if you really don't like it then just move on to something else. That's it. Your world won't come crashing down, your balls won't retract into your abdomen and your wife won't leave you for her personal trainer. You just might have a mildly unpleasant taste in your mouth that'll go away quickly.
(And if you explain that calmly to your wife, maybe you'll stop arguing and find a new common ground in your marriage, too. I'd still recommend firing her trainer though.)
Because this styile is advocated by a young, hip set and because it stands directly opposed to the wine styles that have been popular in the major wine journals of the last decade, this has provoked something of a backlash from The Establishment.
Essentially we've pitted young wine geeks with black plastic eyeglasses and ironic pocket squares against overweight attorneys swilling Bordeaux from Riedel crystal while sitting behind a Commodore 64 running WordPerfect. Unfortunately, the conversation has ceased to be a discussion about quality wine making and has become a shouting match between two firmly entrenched sides.
This boiled over recently when Robert M. Parker, Jr. wrote this about his recent experience at a restaurant. The Twitter-sphere took umbrage to this particular part of his comments:
"Add the BYO and no corkage....and better yet...no precious sommelier trying to sell us some teeth enamel removing wine with acid levels close to toxic, made by some sheep farmer on the north side of his 4,000-foot foot elevation vineyard picked two months before ripeness, and made from a grape better fed to wild boar than the human species..."
I was not particularly shocked, as I already assumed Parker to be an out-of-touch ass when it comes to his understanding of the modern wine world, but the severity of his tone does reflect his frustration at the idiot level of wine hipsterism on the other side of the spectrum where, yes, some wines are selected purely for their absurd level of naturalism over all other criteria. Though I can't think of what real-life wine Parker could possibly be referring too.
My tastes do run toward the "natural," terroir-driven style of wine advocated by the wine Twitterati, but there can be excellent, well-made wines that do skew to the higher end of the alcohol spectrum. Also (d0n't shoot me) the presence of new French or (even) American oak in the right kind of wine can improve it. I promise it's true. Take, for instance, Ridge Zinfandels or the red wines from Paulo Laureano in Portugal.
It's not an all-or-nothing proposition and if you become so entrenched in your wine ideology that you're not going to even begin to entertain the validity of wines which exist outside of your vinous fiefdom you're going to miss out on a huge chunk of the world's wine and you'll miss the opportunity to try some gems.
(The only wines I would say to avoid on principal are giant production factory-farmed wines, the types of generic-labeled bottles on the bottom shelves at grocery stories and BevMo. These are character-less wines produced using destructive farming practices.)
And, really, what are the stakes in this game? You try a wine you might not like, have a few sips, and if you really don't like it then just move on to something else. That's it. Your world won't come crashing down, your balls won't retract into your abdomen and your wife won't leave you for her personal trainer. You just might have a mildly unpleasant taste in your mouth that'll go away quickly.
(And if you explain that calmly to your wife, maybe you'll stop arguing and find a new common ground in your marriage, too. I'd still recommend firing her trainer though.)
Thursday, September 16, 2010
HFF Quickie: Daikokuya Ramen - Los Angeles, Ca
Perhaps my greatest personal flaw is my contempt for groupthink. When I drive past a restaurant and I see a big line outside, my first thought is "look at those suckers, standing in line for THAT! Come on!" My internal monologue sounds like GOB from Arrested Development.
For unknown reasons, I do make exceptions for Japanese restaurants, which is how I ended up in a (rather short) line for Daikokuya Ramen in Little Tokyo for lunch on a Monday afternoon.
I fell in love with real ramen on my trip to Japan several years ago. It's simple, quick and delicious for an easy lunch and it's the absolute best at three in the morning after a weird and wild night at a Tokyo dance club. I'd heard from reputable sources that Daikokuya was among the best in Little Tokyo, so I checked it out with a friend from out of town.
The restaurant itself was exactly like most storefront ramen houses I went to in Japan: long and narrow with a long row of barstools bordering the kitchen and a row of small booths against the wall. The staff is quick and attentive and food is served promptly.
It was fucking delicious. The broth is made fresh daily from Kurobuta pork and is dense and redolent without being too salty. The thin-sliced pork strips melt apart in the broth, the egg is perfectly just-barely hard boiled and the noodles are firm and fresh while still being just Top Ramen-y enough to be charming.
Since it was a hot day, I opted for the tsuke-men deconstructed ramen where the noodles are served cold with the hot broth and accompaniments (pork, egg, bean sprouts, green onion) on the side and you dip the ingredients in the broth. (My dish was actually the kichi-men, which added shredded seaweed on top of the noodles and had a spicier broth.) As soon as the slices of fatty Kurobuta pork touched the broth they disintegrated into the soup. It was awesome.
My friend had the classic ramen and, based on his tasteful slurping and periodic moans, loved it. He also ordered the tsukemono pickles, which were tasty but largely ignored in our voracious attacks on the noodles and broth.
Prices are reasonable (about $9 for a big bowl) and on a Monday around 1PM the wait for two was less than 10 minutes. Well worth a visit.
The menu is fairly extensive with quite a few other soup, rice and appetizer options to be tried, but get the classic ramen on your first visit for the best introduction to real ramen I've had this side of Honolulu.
Daikokuya - Little Tokyo
327 East 1st St.
Los Angeles, Ca 90012
www.daikokuya-ten.com
(Other locations in Costa Mesa, Monterey Park & Hacienda Heights)
For unknown reasons, I do make exceptions for Japanese restaurants, which is how I ended up in a (rather short) line for Daikokuya Ramen in Little Tokyo for lunch on a Monday afternoon.
I fell in love with real ramen on my trip to Japan several years ago. It's simple, quick and delicious for an easy lunch and it's the absolute best at three in the morning after a weird and wild night at a Tokyo dance club. I'd heard from reputable sources that Daikokuya was among the best in Little Tokyo, so I checked it out with a friend from out of town.
The restaurant itself was exactly like most storefront ramen houses I went to in Japan: long and narrow with a long row of barstools bordering the kitchen and a row of small booths against the wall. The staff is quick and attentive and food is served promptly.
It was fucking delicious. The broth is made fresh daily from Kurobuta pork and is dense and redolent without being too salty. The thin-sliced pork strips melt apart in the broth, the egg is perfectly just-barely hard boiled and the noodles are firm and fresh while still being just Top Ramen-y enough to be charming.
Since it was a hot day, I opted for the tsuke-men deconstructed ramen where the noodles are served cold with the hot broth and accompaniments (pork, egg, bean sprouts, green onion) on the side and you dip the ingredients in the broth. (My dish was actually the kichi-men, which added shredded seaweed on top of the noodles and had a spicier broth.) As soon as the slices of fatty Kurobuta pork touched the broth they disintegrated into the soup. It was awesome.
My friend had the classic ramen and, based on his tasteful slurping and periodic moans, loved it. He also ordered the tsukemono pickles, which were tasty but largely ignored in our voracious attacks on the noodles and broth.
Prices are reasonable (about $9 for a big bowl) and on a Monday around 1PM the wait for two was less than 10 minutes. Well worth a visit.
The menu is fairly extensive with quite a few other soup, rice and appetizer options to be tried, but get the classic ramen on your first visit for the best introduction to real ramen I've had this side of Honolulu.
Daikokuya - Little Tokyo
327 East 1st St.
Los Angeles, Ca 90012
www.daikokuya-ten.com
(Other locations in Costa Mesa, Monterey Park & Hacienda Heights)
Wednesday, September 08, 2010
Fogo de Chão - Beverly Hills, Ca
I'm not an opponent of chain restaurants in theory, merely in practice. Actually that's not entirely true: I'm mostly ambivalent toward inexpensive chain restaurants as they have a clear-cut valuable role in providing consistent cheap meals. I've also spoken mild praises of certain higher-end chains like Fleming's Steakhouse.
My only particular contempt is for the upscale casual chain restaurants like Cheesecake Factory or Buca di Beppo, where you get a very poor product in a faux-chic atmosphere for prices only marginally less than going to a solid neighborhood restaurant. They have no purpose in this world and should quietly tumble into the sea.
But this post isn't to report on an upscale casual chain restaurant that succeeds but rather to praise another fine-dining chain that does it right and does it well.
Fogo de Chão is a Brazil-based international chain of churrascarias, a type of steakhouse where roasted meats are served tableside, hand-carved to order from large skewers. This being my first trip to a churrascaria, chain or otherwise, I can't personally speak to its authenticity, though my Latin dining companion said it was fairly authentic.
For one flat price (around $40 for lunch and $60 for dinner) you have access to an excellent salad bar with selections ranging from mixed greans, Caesar salad and grilled asparagus to smoked salmon, potato salad and thin-sliced ham. At the table, you're given hot side dishes of mashed potatoes, cheese rolls, rice, sauteed bananas and fried polenta. Only the mashed potatoes were mediocre, with the grainy texture of instant.
Each diner has a small disk with a green side or a red side. Much like at a stoplight party in college, the color on the card indicates how much meat you're ready to take. Green side up means the passadores dressed like Brazilian cowboys will come to your table with any one of about a dozen different cuts of meat on spears and carve strips off on to your side plate. Flip your card over to the red side when you've had your fill (at least for the moment).
Like any good Latin American steakhouse, beef was king. In particular, the bottom round was excellently prepared as was the picanha. The sausages and chicken wings were only so-so and the leg of lamb was gamey and dry. The pork ribs were quite good, however. I didn't try the lamb chops or the pork tenderloin.
The wine list is well-selected and reasonably priced, and not just by Beverly Hills Restaurant Row standards. They could have more Portuguese and Latin American wines on the list, however, so as to be more authentic to the cuisine.
Desserts (not included in the price), with the flan and the tres leches both being excellent takes on those classics.
Overall, Fogo de Chão is a bit too intense of an experience both on the wallet and the colon to make a frequent habit, more so if you're a light-to-moderate meat eater like myself, but it's an excellent spot for a nice meal out, especially with a group of friends. It is somewhat vegetarian-friendly as Fogo de Chão offers a salad bar-only option for significantly less than the regular all-you-can-eat price.
Check it out, especially for lunch, when the lower price presents a significant value.
Fogo de Chão
133 N. La Cienega Blvd.
Beverly Hills, Ca 90211
310-289-7755
www.fogodechao.com
My only particular contempt is for the upscale casual chain restaurants like Cheesecake Factory or Buca di Beppo, where you get a very poor product in a faux-chic atmosphere for prices only marginally less than going to a solid neighborhood restaurant. They have no purpose in this world and should quietly tumble into the sea.
But this post isn't to report on an upscale casual chain restaurant that succeeds but rather to praise another fine-dining chain that does it right and does it well.
Fogo de Chão is a Brazil-based international chain of churrascarias, a type of steakhouse where roasted meats are served tableside, hand-carved to order from large skewers. This being my first trip to a churrascaria, chain or otherwise, I can't personally speak to its authenticity, though my Latin dining companion said it was fairly authentic.
For one flat price (around $40 for lunch and $60 for dinner) you have access to an excellent salad bar with selections ranging from mixed greans, Caesar salad and grilled asparagus to smoked salmon, potato salad and thin-sliced ham. At the table, you're given hot side dishes of mashed potatoes, cheese rolls, rice, sauteed bananas and fried polenta. Only the mashed potatoes were mediocre, with the grainy texture of instant.
Each diner has a small disk with a green side or a red side. Much like at a stoplight party in college, the color on the card indicates how much meat you're ready to take. Green side up means the passadores dressed like Brazilian cowboys will come to your table with any one of about a dozen different cuts of meat on spears and carve strips off on to your side plate. Flip your card over to the red side when you've had your fill (at least for the moment).
Like any good Latin American steakhouse, beef was king. In particular, the bottom round was excellently prepared as was the picanha. The sausages and chicken wings were only so-so and the leg of lamb was gamey and dry. The pork ribs were quite good, however. I didn't try the lamb chops or the pork tenderloin.
The wine list is well-selected and reasonably priced, and not just by Beverly Hills Restaurant Row standards. They could have more Portuguese and Latin American wines on the list, however, so as to be more authentic to the cuisine.
Desserts (not included in the price), with the flan and the tres leches both being excellent takes on those classics.
Overall, Fogo de Chão is a bit too intense of an experience both on the wallet and the colon to make a frequent habit, more so if you're a light-to-moderate meat eater like myself, but it's an excellent spot for a nice meal out, especially with a group of friends. It is somewhat vegetarian-friendly as Fogo de Chão offers a salad bar-only option for significantly less than the regular all-you-can-eat price.
Check it out, especially for lunch, when the lower price presents a significant value.
Fogo de Chão
133 N. La Cienega Blvd.
Beverly Hills, Ca 90211
310-289-7755
www.fogodechao.com
Monday, August 23, 2010
Why Mainstream Wine Criticism Will Soon Be Obsolete
I'm continuing to ponder why it is I despise most mainstream wine journalism so much. The scores, ratings and articles loaded with misinformation and manufactured controversy do a disservice to, well, pretty much everybody.
When I say "mainstream wine writing," I refer to the major national magazines (Wine Spectator, Wine Advocate, Wine Enthusiast, Decanter and Wine & Spirits) and, to a lesser extent, the wine writing in major national newspapers like the New York Times and Wall Street Journal. I also get annoyed at the LA Times, but only because I have to read it regularly and it appears to be staffed by writers whose critical thinking skills are marginally better than a baby entranced by peekaboo but worse than a Tea Partier who knows Obama's a Muslim "just 'cause." I do not, however, consider the LA Times to be of particular national wine importance, not least because of their continued insistence on publishing writing by W. Blake Gray. I also group in major independent wine writers, however I view their influence as being largely insular (i.e. limited to professionals, collectors, and wine geeks) and even more on the wane than that of national media.
The San Francisco Chronicle does have the best food and wine section in the country and is, in my opinion, the only newspaper worth reading on that topic. They even stopped doing star ratings in their wine reviews. Progressive!
So why do I hate it? I like wine. I like reading. I like writing, but 90% of national wine writing is either duller than your mom in bed or so poorly conceived that it makes me want to gouge my eyes out with a Vinturi.
Most importantly, it fundamentally misunderstands the 21st century wine market.
I think it's because wine writing has remained largely unchanged for the last 30 years, back when Wine Advocate and Wine Spectator came on the scene and moved wine writing from the cerebral-abstract world of the British writers who dominated at the time toward the more visceral American style of criticism.
In 1980 the wine world was a very different place. Most American consumers of high-end (i.e. not jug) wine were a small, well-to-do elite. Wines on offer, both domestic and imported, were a fraction of what is available today and the sales of which were dependent almost entirely upon the reputation of the producer. The whole wine world was more easily navigable then and its audience largely homogeneous: upper middle class white professionals, drinking wine largely from California, France and Italy.
But in 2010 the wine world is an incredibly diverse place, with the number of wines and wine regions available in the United States having expanded exponentially. Premium wine is also consumed by a much more diverse cross-section of the population, including a sizable younger demographic that prefers to make its own decisions or make decisions based on personal recommendations rather than deferring to any institutional authority on matters of taste.
The idea that a national publication can attempt to effectively report on the real wine world is absurd. It reminds me of when my family first got AOL in 1996 and they actually sent an "internet yellow pages" with the software. It was a printed phone book listing several hundred URLs. I'm sure even at the time it was an absurdly quaint idea but now it looks absolutely ridiculous. A monolithic media entity for something as diverse as wine is equally ridiculous.
It's also incredibly limiting. An editor at one of the aforementioned magazines once told me that they generally don't write about wines if they aren't distributed in at least 30 states. The problem with that is that very few of the wines of true uniqueness or distinction are available in that many states. That's because unless it is one of a handful of ultra-rare expensive wines from wineries that only allocate a few dozen cases to each state, most wines, in order to be profitable in that big of a chunk of the country, needs to have a production run in the thousands of cases. There are many great wineries that produce fewer than 5,000 total cases, let alone of a single wine. They'll never make it onto the radar of the national wine media and therefore that wine will never be exposed to wine consumers who don't already know the winery locally. These magazines are akin to a food and restaurant magazine that only reviews restaurants with locations in multiple states. Those are the wines that these magazines review, the Morton's Steakhouses and Cheesecake Factories of wine.
(It's particularly troublesome given how easy it is to obtain wine now. Maybe twenty years ago it made sense to only review well-distributed wines because how else could the average reader get the wine if it wasn't reliably available in most of the country? But now, as long as the reader lives in one of the 35-odd states that allow for wine delivery, any wine that's written about can be obtained in a few mouse clicks.)
So what does that mean? It means the national wine media of 2010 is exactly the same as the national wine media of 1980 and it's still writing largely to that same audience: the casual, adventure-phobic wine connoisseur who wants to consume a score, not a wine. They want wines they can reliably find at their local big box wine shop and that they can open for their other wine-loving friends who will immediately know the brand, the reputation and the perceived quality: ironically the very behaviors in wine selection that the Wine Advocate originally helped dispel with its then-revolutionary 100-point rating scale.
Because this demographic, despite aging rapidly, still represents (for now) a significant chunk of the wine buying power they still have a massive economic effect on the wine industry. As the wine consumer has become more diverse, the wine critic remains largely middle-aged, male and white. Ipso facto, the mainstream wine media has ceased to be relevant to the vast majority of wine drinkers, while maintaining its relevance to the older minority who spend the most money. It makes perfect immediate economic sense but it's a recipe for obsolescence in a matter of, oh let's say five years or so.
I've grown up my entire wine-drinking life completely outside of the 100-point wine world. I worked at a wine shop that didn't give a flying fuck about scores (even if we did have a handful of perennial favorites on our shelves). When I worked as a wine shop clerk and as a waiter I never once had a guest who asked about wine scores. Did it help that I worked in Berkeley, perhaps the most progressive wine market in the country? Sure. But even in Los Angeles, with a few notable Westside exceptions, most reputable wine shops don't care about scores and don't use them to sell wine. These shops are quite successful. I mean sure they actually have to do their jobs and hand sell their wine to customers instead of relying on shelf-talkers and magazines to do their selling for them, but if you really love wine you wouldn't want it any other way. These are the places that will be in business for the next thirty years. The new consumer is adventurous, value-oriented and makes his purchasing decisions based upon personal recommendations, not from the authority of a distant group of stodgy white men--and yes, I consider Karen MacNeill a stodgy white man.
And so that's what it is: mainstream wine media is boring middle-aged white people writing for boring middle-aged white people and that's why it sucks. It's a holdover from an era when the WASP was the only American culture that mattered for selling high-end goods and they're still desperately clinging to that illusion.
As we move forward, the wine consumer who makes his decision based upon the recommendations of the wine media will continue to miss out on a majority of the world's unique wines and the wine shops that make the majority of their buying decisions based upon 90+ point scores will continue to lose market share and alienate the younger wine buyer.
Keep up the good work.
When I say "mainstream wine writing," I refer to the major national magazines (Wine Spectator, Wine Advocate, Wine Enthusiast, Decanter and Wine & Spirits) and, to a lesser extent, the wine writing in major national newspapers like the New York Times and Wall Street Journal. I also get annoyed at the LA Times, but only because I have to read it regularly and it appears to be staffed by writers whose critical thinking skills are marginally better than a baby entranced by peekaboo but worse than a Tea Partier who knows Obama's a Muslim "just 'cause." I do not, however, consider the LA Times to be of particular national wine importance, not least because of their continued insistence on publishing writing by W. Blake Gray. I also group in major independent wine writers, however I view their influence as being largely insular (i.e. limited to professionals, collectors, and wine geeks) and even more on the wane than that of national media.
The San Francisco Chronicle does have the best food and wine section in the country and is, in my opinion, the only newspaper worth reading on that topic. They even stopped doing star ratings in their wine reviews. Progressive!
So why do I hate it? I like wine. I like reading. I like writing, but 90% of national wine writing is either duller than your mom in bed or so poorly conceived that it makes me want to gouge my eyes out with a Vinturi.
Most importantly, it fundamentally misunderstands the 21st century wine market.
I think it's because wine writing has remained largely unchanged for the last 30 years, back when Wine Advocate and Wine Spectator came on the scene and moved wine writing from the cerebral-abstract world of the British writers who dominated at the time toward the more visceral American style of criticism.
In 1980 the wine world was a very different place. Most American consumers of high-end (i.e. not jug) wine were a small, well-to-do elite. Wines on offer, both domestic and imported, were a fraction of what is available today and the sales of which were dependent almost entirely upon the reputation of the producer. The whole wine world was more easily navigable then and its audience largely homogeneous: upper middle class white professionals, drinking wine largely from California, France and Italy.
But in 2010 the wine world is an incredibly diverse place, with the number of wines and wine regions available in the United States having expanded exponentially. Premium wine is also consumed by a much more diverse cross-section of the population, including a sizable younger demographic that prefers to make its own decisions or make decisions based on personal recommendations rather than deferring to any institutional authority on matters of taste.
The idea that a national publication can attempt to effectively report on the real wine world is absurd. It reminds me of when my family first got AOL in 1996 and they actually sent an "internet yellow pages" with the software. It was a printed phone book listing several hundred URLs. I'm sure even at the time it was an absurdly quaint idea but now it looks absolutely ridiculous. A monolithic media entity for something as diverse as wine is equally ridiculous.
It's also incredibly limiting. An editor at one of the aforementioned magazines once told me that they generally don't write about wines if they aren't distributed in at least 30 states. The problem with that is that very few of the wines of true uniqueness or distinction are available in that many states. That's because unless it is one of a handful of ultra-rare expensive wines from wineries that only allocate a few dozen cases to each state, most wines, in order to be profitable in that big of a chunk of the country, needs to have a production run in the thousands of cases. There are many great wineries that produce fewer than 5,000 total cases, let alone of a single wine. They'll never make it onto the radar of the national wine media and therefore that wine will never be exposed to wine consumers who don't already know the winery locally. These magazines are akin to a food and restaurant magazine that only reviews restaurants with locations in multiple states. Those are the wines that these magazines review, the Morton's Steakhouses and Cheesecake Factories of wine.
(It's particularly troublesome given how easy it is to obtain wine now. Maybe twenty years ago it made sense to only review well-distributed wines because how else could the average reader get the wine if it wasn't reliably available in most of the country? But now, as long as the reader lives in one of the 35-odd states that allow for wine delivery, any wine that's written about can be obtained in a few mouse clicks.)
So what does that mean? It means the national wine media of 2010 is exactly the same as the national wine media of 1980 and it's still writing largely to that same audience: the casual, adventure-phobic wine connoisseur who wants to consume a score, not a wine. They want wines they can reliably find at their local big box wine shop and that they can open for their other wine-loving friends who will immediately know the brand, the reputation and the perceived quality: ironically the very behaviors in wine selection that the Wine Advocate originally helped dispel with its then-revolutionary 100-point rating scale.
Because this demographic, despite aging rapidly, still represents (for now) a significant chunk of the wine buying power they still have a massive economic effect on the wine industry. As the wine consumer has become more diverse, the wine critic remains largely middle-aged, male and white. Ipso facto, the mainstream wine media has ceased to be relevant to the vast majority of wine drinkers, while maintaining its relevance to the older minority who spend the most money. It makes perfect immediate economic sense but it's a recipe for obsolescence in a matter of, oh let's say five years or so.
I've grown up my entire wine-drinking life completely outside of the 100-point wine world. I worked at a wine shop that didn't give a flying fuck about scores (even if we did have a handful of perennial favorites on our shelves). When I worked as a wine shop clerk and as a waiter I never once had a guest who asked about wine scores. Did it help that I worked in Berkeley, perhaps the most progressive wine market in the country? Sure. But even in Los Angeles, with a few notable Westside exceptions, most reputable wine shops don't care about scores and don't use them to sell wine. These shops are quite successful. I mean sure they actually have to do their jobs and hand sell their wine to customers instead of relying on shelf-talkers and magazines to do their selling for them, but if you really love wine you wouldn't want it any other way. These are the places that will be in business for the next thirty years. The new consumer is adventurous, value-oriented and makes his purchasing decisions based upon personal recommendations, not from the authority of a distant group of stodgy white men--and yes, I consider Karen MacNeill a stodgy white man.
And so that's what it is: mainstream wine media is boring middle-aged white people writing for boring middle-aged white people and that's why it sucks. It's a holdover from an era when the WASP was the only American culture that mattered for selling high-end goods and they're still desperately clinging to that illusion.
As we move forward, the wine consumer who makes his decision based upon the recommendations of the wine media will continue to miss out on a majority of the world's unique wines and the wine shops that make the majority of their buying decisions based upon 90+ point scores will continue to lose market share and alienate the younger wine buyer.
Keep up the good work.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)