day-after-xmas dinner in nyc

locanda verde / 377 greenwich st / nyc / (212) 925-3797 / dinner mon-sun, 5:30-11p; breakfast mon-fri, 8-11a, sat-sun, 8-10a; lunch 11:30a-3p / reservations recommended / dinner ~$50-60 per person (no wine) / 2 1/2 stars out of 4

it's not often that hyped restaurants live up to the hype. especially restaurants that are minorly owned by celebrities. in this case, locanda verde, part-owned by robert deniro (whose previous restaurant in the same space, ago, folded), lives up to the food hype, but falls short in other ways that prevent it from being the whole package.

i read up on the restaurant shortly before we walked over, and let me just say that a lot of the yelpers who reviewed this place are a little...well, let's be clear here: robert deniro may have invested in the restaurant, but he does not run this restaurant. when writing your review, should you feel a need to address a specific person, try the chef, the sous chef, the pastry chef, the manager, etc - not the investor who just wants a return on said investment. also, please employ correct spelling, and do not address anyone as your friend or "buddy" unless they are, indeed, your friend or buddy.

on to the food, which was quite good. it's slightly better than craigie, if i say so myself. there are not many good italian restaurants that are modern, and in any case, italian restaurants structure meals differently than the typical american meal. in any nouveau american restaurant, you're likely to do the traditional appetizer, entree, dessert sequence. in an italian restaurant, dinner is a longer affair, encompassing primi (appetizers), secondi (pastas), entrees, and dessert. when i went to babbo with shirley and lilly, we did the whole four courses: two appetizers, three pastas, two entrees, three desserts. not even a "full" four-course dinner for each of us and we were totally stuffed. so in that sense, it was a good idea not to do the full four courses at locanda verde - we still ordered enough food to be quite pleasantly full.

for appetizers, we shared the sheeps milk ricotta with grilled bread; marinated beets with goat cheese and gorgonzola; steak tartare with crispy guanciale; and lamb meatball sliders. the ricotta is almost worth the hype - you've certainly never had ricotta like this, and i'm not even sure what they did to it. it's silky, creamy, almost like mascarpone, with just a tad too much richness, actually. maybe they strained it, then whizzed it in a food processor? i wanted to believe that it was just made in a way that produced silky, creamy ricotta, but i know better. points off, too, for not providing the correct amount of bread for the amount of ricotta served. the marinated beets were good as well, especially with gorgonzola - not a combination i'd had before. the lamb meatball sliders were good, but not particularly memorable. however, the steak tartare was absolutely fantastic - perfect texture, perfect temperature, perfect seasoning, with a bit of tang from some scallion or cilantro or something like that. i like steak tartare and have had it in a few places, and this was the best of the bunch. it was completely unadorned - no cornichons, mustards, fig jams, etc - and it needed no adornments.

for entrees, i had the fennel glazed duck with tuscan kale, yukons, and concord grape conserve. this was nearly as fabulous as the steak tartare. it was perfectly cooked, but more importantly, the combination of flavors was stellar. the fennel was understated, coming through with bites of duck, while the duck jus saturated the kale. i was surprised by the concord grape conserve, though - you hear about these mythical ingredients that tie a dish together, but you rarely encounter them. this was one of those mythical ingredients, beyond tasting like someone had put a lot of love into it. i think it was cooked in some sort of red wine reduction, and it was deliciously juicy, a textural contrast to the solidity of the rest of the dish. i do wish there had been a few more potatoes - these days, restaurant potatoes are so deliciously potato-y in flavor, yet dwindling in number on the plate. i don't really understand this fear of starches, and i think everyone should just get over it - as long as you balance starches, proteins, veg, and fat, it's ok. really, put the starch back on the plate already.

my parents had the fire-roasted garlic chicken for two and i grabbed a bite of it before i was irrevocably stuffed. it was delicious - and somehow, so much more vivid than any chicken i've had recently at a restaurant. it wasn't boring, it wasn't mild - it was every bit as daring as any other entree at the restaurant. perhaps it lacked nuance of the duck, but its vibrancy made up for that - just depends on what you're in the mood for. my sister had the veal shank (a special that evening) and man, was that thing huge. you don't think of veal having such large shanks - but apparently they do.

my parents and i shared the maple budino with candied pecans, cranberry sorbetto for dessert. this was a bit of a letdown, actually - i love pot de creme, i love maple, and it should have been a home run, especially with the cranberry sorbet to cut the intensity of the maple. but somehow it wasn't - it was too sweet, too much of a confection.

all in all, the food was great - a little uneven, and nothing was a home run, but with flashes of actual brilliance. unfortunately, the service and decor were enough of a distraction that the overall dining experience rates lower than at restaurants like craigie, babbo, and alinea - all restaurants which i would go to first over locanda verde. notes on the negatives are below:

service: i am so tired of pretentious service. to all restaurants i may patronize in the future: i am not a rube about food and i am going to not only behave, but tip well. i am not an overly demanding or picky customer. so stop kicking my chair as you walk by, acting as if i know nothing about food, being inattentive, and pretending that we're hicks. please remember who ordered what, too - i would understand if the restaurant were totally in the weeds, but that was not the case when i was there. in short: don't be a jerk, because that's just going to make me want to be a jerk back.

on the decor - well, it's all oddly mismatched, and not in a good way. it's part pub, with piney wood paneling and lots of ugly mirrors, but has the arched plaster ceilings and chandeliers of a more ritzy restaurant. the back of the restaurant is a more family-style area with long tables, whereas the front is more slick and modern with shiny black tables and a bar. the height of the space is nice and airy, but i would have preferred an interior without the occasional broken mirror. further about these mirrors, which line the back and side walls of the room - they are obviously a relic of the previous restaurant's interior, which presumably had booths that matched the mirrors. now that those booths are gone, the mirrors seem out of place.

upstairs again; tomatoes at craigie; a new find

this year, upstairs on the square must have a new chef, because the food is a lot more exciting and adventurous than it usually is. it also appears to be suffering a bit business-wise, even though the food is better than it has ever been; so i'm doing my part towards the country's economic recovery by having had lunch twice at upstairs in the past two weeks. the first time wasn't particularly worth talking about - a clam chowder that tasted mostly of creme fraiche and a fish sandwich on too-thick bread - but the second time was really quite wonderful. i went with my mother and sister, and we had:

- chilled yellow tomato soup with a hint of scotch bonnet; crouton of wild salmon and avocado tartare

- antipasti of lourdes' mozzarella; peach and sweet summer pepper relish

- lemon tagliatelle; chiogga beets & greens, lobster knuckles, sauteed cod cheeks

- bbq pork piadina sandwich; giardiniera of farmer's market vegetables, crisp onion strings

- cheeseburger on a potato roll; gruyere, niman ranch bacon, cucumber pickles

- market fruit galette; candied almonds

- crema catalana; cinnamon & orange, pecan shortbread cookies

the tomato soup was absolutely delicious - i often find tomatoes to be too sweet, but these were sweet and plenty tart. the addition of the scotch bonnet is also quite wonderful - adding a crucial bit of warming heat to the cold soup. the avocado was delicious, but unnecessary.

i had the bbq pork sandwich as my main course - it was also quite good. it turns out that a piadina is a sort of italian flatbread, slightly thicker than a tortilla; this one was corn-based. the bbq pork was great - a lot of bbq flavor, a bit of char - and i think that it may have been cooking in the grill we saw right at the entrance to the restaurant, as the smoke from the grill matched the smoky flavor in the pork. the giardiniera, which is an actual name for an italian side dish that is a fancy name for pickled vegetables, was forgettable and a bit too vinegary for my tastes. the crisp onion strings were absolutely delicious - very lightly battered, razor-thin slices of onion - basically, ephemeral bits of onion essence.

i had a bite of my sister's lemon tagliatelle, which is fresh, house-made pasta. not as delicious as the lobster dish i had a few weeks ago, but still quite good. i also had a bite of my mother's burger, and i may have to amend my decision to name craigie's burger as the best burger around here. i've had the upstairs burger before, but long ago enough that craigie had replaced it in my esteem. however, now that i've had each burger within a week of each other, i can safely compare them. while it was worth the wait for the tomato in craigie's burger, the upstairs burger actually tasted beefier and more satisfying. the upstairs burger also earns some brownie points with its inclusion of homemade mayo for the burger or fries (mayo with my fries is one food-related affection that i've developed in my grown-up-adult phase of life). i also prefer upstairs' thick-cut fries over the shoestring fries at craigie, although this time, at least craigie had regular potato fries (i am not a fan of sweet potato fries). there is just no way to effectively eat shoestring fries; it robs you of both a high rate of potato consumption (a debatable loss), but more importantly, of the satisfaction of chewing a mouthful of potato. and that is definitely a crime.

unfortunately, although the first and second courses were delicious, dessert was disappointing. i generally caution against dessert at upstairs, unless you choose the butterscotch pudding, which is absolutely wonderful. both desserts were clunkers - the galette wasn't sweetened enough (and i'm pretty sensitive to overly sweet desserts), its crust was completely soggy, and it came topped with whipped cream that was whipped almost to the point of being butter. i really wanted to send it back, but i never know what the etiquette is for that type of thing. the crema catalana was better - it was basically a spiced creme brulee, and the shortbread cookies were good, but it was overall an average dessert.

as a side note, exciting news! i have now been to craigie enough times that i apparently am a trusted enough customer that they don't require me to secure my reservations with a credit card. i'm moderately flattered.

***

also last week, i did restaurant week lunch with my sister at asana, which is in the mandarin oriental hotel on boylston. the entrance is unmarked as far as i could see, both from the street entrance and from the hotel entrance; much as it may denote high levels of cool, i am not a huge fan of such displays. luckily, the food was wonderful, and the decor is quite nice design-wise - simple, with accents of texture and volume.

per the restaurant week menu, we had the following (the simplicity of the way the menu is worded masks some of the preparation techniques):

- heirloom tomato and lemongrass soup; watermelon, flowers

- ahi tuna sashimi; wasabi greens, yuzu vinaigrette, squid cracker

- bento box; asian bbq beef, sticky rice, wakame salad, steamed pork dumplings

- atlantic salmon; mizuna, citrus, mint, basil, sake vinaigrette

- grand marnier parfait; marinated raspberries

- jivara chocolate tart; roasted banana ice cream

i was slightly underwhelmed by the tomato soup that i had, although this is more due to my cultural conception of what a tomato soup should be. this tomato soup was more of a tomato consomme, in which the tomato juice is extracted from pulped tomatoes. it wasn't like v8 tomato juice - rather, the consomme is to v8 as fresh orange juice is to oj from a carton. it has a wonderfully fresh, delicate flavor, but i think my liking for florals in my food is pretty limited, so i was less a fan of this soup. (the two notable floral concoctions i've had were the lemonade from cafe baraka, which has rosewater in it, and the floral scent-infused sea bass chowder i had at alinea.)

the tuna sashimi that my sister had was really delicious - a good balance of ingredients in addition to very good tuna. as usual, no ability here to taste yuzu.

main courses were really good - the salmon i had was seared on one side, skin-on on the other side. the sear was very well done technically - the salmon was perfectly cooked, the sear perfectly crispy. the salmon was unadorned, really, save for the grapefruit - grapefruit with seafood is a favorite combination. i can't remember what salmon is usually paired with at restaurants, but it seemed to me that mashed potatoes and salad were slightly out of the ordinary. it was a well-orchestrated trio - the mashed potatoes were similar to the salmon in richness, while the mix of arugula and mint acted as a refreshing foil to that richness. it's not often that one gets mint in a salad, instead of as a garnish or in a pesto, and i was somewhat surprised to find that it pairs so well with arugula - the peppery flavor of the arugula and the coolness of the mint are well-balanced. i did also have a dumpling and a bit of beef from my sister's bento box, which were good and excellent, respectively. the beef was very complex in flavor, the spices balancing out the sweetness of the sauce. you could also tell that the way the beef had been cooked in the sauce was a distinctively asian preparation, not unlike char siu pork - it wasn't beef in sauce, but rather, the sauce had been reduced and the beef seared and cooked in it for some time.

it seems rare to me that restaurants do both sweet and savory well, but the desserts here were really impressive. i find that it's more difficult to find good places for dessert in the boston area than for dinner, so it's great to find a place that does everything well. the parfait that i had came in four small cylinders laid on a plate like logs, their tops scattered with a smattering of raspberries that had a sheen of some kind of "marinade" (like a syrupy reduction of sugar or wine), and a traditional caramelized-sugar tuile. the cylinders were the "grand marnier parfait" and tasted like a semifreddo, but firmer - as if it had been firmed with whatever the molecular gastronomy types use to solidify frozen things. the end result was that throughout eating the dessert, it didn't melt, still tasted cold, and had the slightest bit of chew to what appeared to be a soft ice cream. well, it was delicious - just a very simple preparation to end an excellent lunch. my sister's dessert was equally good - the jivara, i believe, corresponds to a specific blend of valrhona chocolate; both tart (of the dense, flourless-chocolate-cake ilk) and the banana ice cream were great.

in addition to lunch, we had a couple of tonics - i can't quite remember what they had in them, but they are wonderful, simple yet complex concoctions. it's the sort of non-alcoholic tonic that makes you feel like you're just as appreciated as someone who's drinking an alcoholic cocktail (plus, it was lunch on a weekday).

the service here is also pretty good - inobstrusive, but attentive. it's the type of place that's the dressy, hostess-pulls-out-your-chair-for-you type place - the high-end type of place that is welcome but atypical for the casualness of life in boston. i'm pretty sure that the last place where my chair was pulled out for me was per se in new york. the dining room has well-lit high ceilings, and the high-end finishes of the decor and silverware really make you feel like you're in a luxurious setting. then again, the sumptuousness of a weekday three-course, two-hour lunch certainly contributed to its air of luxury, too... (for those of you who are always conscious of food portions, the portions here are generally spot on - not too much, not too little, erring on the side of slightly generous (especially for lunch).)

i remain somewhat amazed by the discovery of a new place that's so good - simple, adventurous, delicious. i'm pretty hard to impress, food-wise, but i was impressed; it's rare that a new place is so good. i often feel belittled at nice restaurants because i appear to be young or inexperienced in the realm of good food, but the service here is fairly unpretentious. it was pretty empty at lunch on a friday afternoon - about a third of the dining room was occupied - so the scene when it's busy might be off-putting, as it seems like it's an upscale/hip enough place to attract the correspondingly pretentious crowd. however, on this day - a beautiful sunny day - it was quiet and relaxing.

upstairs at upstairs

for a few weeks, carrie and i have been trying to partake of either the bpl's courtyard tea, or the special lobster-and-corn-themed menu at upstairs on the square. as luck would have it, the menu got extended a few days past its stated last day, so we took it as a sign and made a reservation.

i will say, just in passing, that it was much easier than i had expected to get a reservation - we called the night before and were able to get a table for four. then, the following day, when we couldn't find another deuce, we were able to change the reservation from four to two.

in all honesty, for years i've been pretty ambivalent about upstairs on the square - usually the menu is seasonal classics done well with respect to technique. it's one of those places where you would take a look at the menu, and be satisfied, but not particularly excited - a feeling that's a bit strange when considering the whimsical decor. that said, i haven't stayed away just for that reason - you won't find a better butterscotch pudding anywhere, nor can you find a more perfect burger with the right balance of euro (mayo with your fries) and american (...beef, and perfectly crisp bacon).

following this past visit, i can't help but feel that things are on an upswing. we started with an amuse bouche that was a sort of gougere, its interior not unpleasantly on the wet side, with a red wine reduction and a couple shards of parmesan. technically perfect, and the ho-hum nature of the gougere, popularized as an amuse bouche by thomas keller, was definitely upgraded by the red wine reduction. bread was ok, on the salty side, but thankfully no sign of sourdough, and the butter was the consistency of a thick mayo - ie, eminently spreadable.

for starters, i had the wellfleet oysters with asian pear slivers and yuzu ice; carrie had the "native corn three ways" (corn chowder, crispy polenta with a greek salad, sweet corn flan with candied bacon). i've had a bit of a thing for raw oysters ever since i had them for the first time at pearl oyster bar; these oysters were, as far as my slightly insensitive palate goes, quite good. i think they would have been a bit better had they been a little colder, but they tasted fabulous, and the asian pear was a great counterpart. i've never really been able to taste yuzu, but presumably it added some sort of exotic, elusive flavor. carrie's corn trio was quite good as well - the corn chowder could have been called "bacon chowder" instead, so strongly and deliciously did it taste of bacon, despite its complete textural absence. the crispy polenta outdoes pigalle's deep-fried poached egg for perfect crisping, but the centerpiece of this trio is really the flan. the corn sweetens the flan enough, but not too much, and really, as carrie commented, it tastes like a perfect quiche custard, made with the richest ingredients possible, and without any additives - broccoli, etc. and somebody in the kitchen must really love bacon, because the candied bacon was clearly handled with love - perfectly crisp-chewy, with just the right note of sweetness. overall, starters were maybe a 7.5/10?

i would say that entrees trumped starters, no contest. i had grilled lobster (a tail and a claw) with bok choy tempura, spiced butter, and coconut rice. the first time i realized that i liked lobster, as it happens, was also at pearl oyster bar, the same time as the oysters. my memory is like a sieve these days, so i only have the vaguest of memories: that the lobster roll i had was delicious, refreshing, cold, tender, and sweet. you know, all of those things that really good lobster is stereotypically supposed to be. i remember that lobster roll much more fondly than the lobster tail i had at per se; my also-vague memories of the lobster at per se recall concerns over the discernible toughness of the lobster, despite it being poached in butter.

but this is just a long-winded setup to tell you that this lobster dish is possibly the best lobster i've ever had. the lobster was tender without being mushy, and that is saying something. the ample amounts of lobster concealed rice that was savory and strongly imbued, somehow, with coconut flavor and subtle spicing. even the bok choy was better than i had expected - the really leafy bits tasted a bit like kale chips, and the body of the leaves contrasted nicely with the tempura batter. speaking of the batter, it had quite a bit of chew to it, in comparison to most tempura batters, which are soaked with frying oil and almost ephemeral flavor-wise. the crunchy bits of tempura that broke off the bok choy were delicious with the rice and lobster, providing a welcome bit of textural contrast. i'm not sure if that was the intent, but i like to think that it was - that whoever designed this dish thought about what would happen, physically, to the food as it was cut up and consumed.

in other news, carrie had a lobster salad - peppercress (from eva sommaripa's garden!), avocado, citrusy dressing with chunks of lobster. i tried just a bit, and the peppercress was really fabulous, and well taken care of - still crispy and springy. the salad was really the complete opposite of the grilled lobster - the crunchy birkenstock-wearing californian, as opposed to the cold-weather, comfort-food-craving new englander. all in all, quite delicious.

i was disappointed not to see the butterscotch pudding on the dessert menu; we settled on sharing the special dessert - corn ice cream atop a blueberry cobbler. the corn ice cream was really good - again, not too sweet, and it didn't taste of corn, per se. it tasted like somebody made corn sugar out of the corn, in some way that tasted of corn that happened to be sweet
(as opposed to the straight-out sugar sweetness of refined corn syrup). what it reminded me of most was this dessert i had at alinea that had tonka beans in it, really. the ice cream topped a shallow ramekin of blueberry cobbler, which appeared to have equal amounts of topping (with only a smack of oats) and blueberry. somehow this wasn't a problem, because of the shape and size of the serving dish. the shallowness of the dish ensures that there isn't too much blueberry for a given amount of topping, which was in larger crumbly bits than in a normal cobbler.

so, a delicious, relaxing dinner upstairs at upstairs on the square. i hadn't had dinner in the soiree room before, but it proved to be a relaxed respite to the bustle of the larger dining room downstairs. seemed like the downstairs also has more harder surfaces than the upstairs, because the sound echoes there a lot more. just checked the restaurant week menu, and it looks promising.

a paucity of vegetables

it's completely unremarakable that upon returning from taipei and also from palermo, i had dinner with my family.  what is rather odd is the dinner itself - chinese takeout after taipei, and as it happens, italian after palermo.  sadly for palermo, i rather think that the italian i had last weekend in somerville beats out anything i had in sicily.  the sole notable exception would be that breakfast buffet in trapani, specifically the prosciutto and the cornmeal poundcake; even the best dinner in palermo didn't really hold a candle to what you can get stateside.  i was out at pescatore, and we had a salad (arugula and sundry other greens, grapes, caramelized pine nuts, fennel), seared sea bass (sauteed asparagus, saffron risotto), and chicken marsala (mushrooms, butternut squash agnolotti).  there are not many fresh vegetables in either taipei and palermo, so i am fairly certain that i've been craving fresh vegetables and that this is why i so enjoyed pescatore's vegetables.  i will say that objectively, i was surprised by just how fine the vegetables were, especially for winter in boston, land of cranberry bogs.  the sea bass was especially delicious, with good contrast in textures (the asparagus was perfectly tender-crisp), and the saffron risotto was notably not too heavy.  pescatore has certainly upped its game since i was last there, maybe a year ago - before it used to focus more on quantities of seafood, but now the non-seafood entrees have been upgraded.  

if you do go to palermo, check out santandrea for dinner.  i did find the pasta to be a little thick for my tastes, but that could easily be chalked up to a cultural difference.  i don't know, readers; i'm pretty sure that every time i've made pasta or that my roommates have made it, it was better - the pasta was more supple, less coarse in texture, and more pleasurable to eat.  

craigie on main

restaurant openings in my neighborhood always cause me some pain along with the joy. i very much like craigie street bistrot, and am quite happy that now it's around the corner on main street. at the same time, i really am not that happy that craigie street is what moved in on main street, because its prices are so high that it's not affordable for the vast majority of the neighborhood. while i don't object that much to the influx of well-heeled yuppie/upper-middle-class strangers coming into the neighborhood - who are we kidding, i mind a whole lot - it's more that i think that restaurants that purport to be so neighborhoody should pay more attention to who lives in the neighborhood. it just doesn't seem ethically right that a restaurant should locate itself in a place where most of the diners are not natives (unless we're in new york). not even brunch is affordable! contrast craigie on main with tosci's - tosci's is a true neighborhood place where you can sit, linger, and brunch for not too much. i just feel that craigie is being a little insensitive.

ethical tension aside, craigie on main is pretty good in the food and service department. first, let's do a couple of notes about decor. overall, quite nice - easy to hear, nice colors, no clashing, etc. but the two-tops are spaced too close to each other. i mean, really - i'm not a huge person, and i had trouble getting in and out of my seat because it was back to back with the seat behind me. you know how you feel like the restaurant doesn't think you're going to be that profitable for them, and they give you the most rotten tables? that pretty much sums up how i felt about that table. and the table size is fine - all the plates fit - but the spacing is pretty much horrible. also, i kind of like having the kitchen out in the open (concerns with food odors saturating your clothing aside), but it leaves the entryway space feeling really cramped. i don't know who their designer was, but they did not do that great a job - good idea, middling execution. i wonder if the draft from the door affects temperatures in the kitchen, or if it's far enough away?

anyway, the food. we came because they had a restaurant stimulus menu - a $35 3-course prix fixe. it was relatively unexciting, though, and the first course was crispy smelts that i wasn't sure i would like, so mary and i ordered a la carte. usually craigie street has a $30 3-course prix fixe, so i'm curious to know if at craigie on main, it has been edited out. because i would certainly go more often if there was a more affordable option.

appetizers: i started with grilled octopus with chorizo cream, cipollini onions, and hearts of palm. i'm not a fan of hearts of palm - they just taste bland to me - but the rest was an excellent combination. i haven't had octopus that many times - i can probably count the number of times on one hand - and the last one i had was at babbo, and it was fantastic. this one was excellent as well; the chorizo cream was a particularly good pairing. i find the difference between the textures of squid and octopus to be really intriguing - you wouldn't expect such similar creatures to taste so different. mary had the cream of cauliflower soup with rabbit sausage and a bit of brussels sprouts. the soup was pretty delicate in flavor, but was fantastic in combination with the rabbit sausage; in turn the rabbit sausage was definitely the best preparation of rabbit that i've had - i don't typically like rabbit because i find it bland.

by the way, bread service: generally blah. the bread was fine, but i don't see why craigie street always insists on serving butter that's too cold to spread.

for main courses, i had the slow-cooked sea trout with frizzled ginger, rock shrimp, and mussels, all in a bit of serrano ham broth with almonds (hot ham water, anyone?). i assume that "slow-cooked" means "sous vide" and i'm coming to understand that i don't really like the texture of things that are cooked sous-vide. i think i prefer food, or at least meat, with texture and chew to it, rather than it being food for babies and people with dentures. however, the flavors of this dish were really excellent - better than the octopus, i would say. everything was very complementary, and the rock shrimp were almost as good as the ones i had at babbo (the last place i had rock shrimp). the trout didn't taste overly trout-y (as mackerel sometimes taste overly mackerel-y), and every time i have mussels, i increasingly realize that i really like them.

the surprise of the night was dessert - gingerbread pain perdu, and it was a knockout! I don't typically think of dessert being a strong suit for craigie street, but this was the best thing we had all night. it was two triangles of cake that had a lot of egg in it - enough for a very moist, almost custardy way, but custardy in a cooked in a hot water bath for a while, rather than a typical creme caramel custardy-ness. it's difficult to describe, and i'd be curious to know what the preparation was. whatever it was, the slight crunchiness of the very top layer was absolutely delectable, and it was fantastic with the ginger ice cream. it was kind of like a ginger-spiced version of sticky toffee pudding, minus the copious amounts of caramel sauce.

service was excellent - it seems like the restaurant is really trying to please diners so they come back, in these difficult economic times. well...i mean, my views on this are pretty clear. i wonder if it's just not economically feasible to lower prices, or if there's a certain level of produce quality that can't be trimmed in any way to make the restaurant more affordable. regardless, it's nice to have some seriously good food in the neighborhood - it's definitely better than everything else (with the exception, perhaps, of salts, a restaurant i haven't been to). let's just hope that someday the locals will be able to partake.

per se: on being jaded

i've just returned from a lovely, languorous lunch at per se. initially i had doubts that i even wanted to try to go to per se; after all, i've been to the french laundry, and it seems that the two are not particularly different (especially given thomas keller's extreme attention to detail). to me it has always seemed that per se is just the east coast outpost of the original. if i had to choose a place to go where it's hard to get reservations, it would probably be momofuku ko. (a note on reservations: did i just luck out when i called babbo to make a reservation? i mean, i guess it's a wednesday, but it's at a convenient time and everything. i suppose it was three weeks later than i had been thinking to make the reservation.)

as fate would have it, one of jessica's friends managed to get a lunch reservation. then they had someone drop out of their party of four, and voila, suddenly i was going to go to lunch at per se. why the sudden change of heart? well, at the end of the day, i really was curious to see if per se is different from the french laundry. and i also wanted to hang out with jessica, since i hadn't seen her in a while. for those who are wondering how i can justify that much on one dinner, well, i really do enjoy eating food that is interesting and prepared with impeccable technique. much as i like to believe i'm a good cook, i'm really just a good home cook - i've got nothing on these four-star restaurants. and i know enough about food to know when the kitchen is doing something really spectacular, and with every posh dinner i've had (about once a year), it has been worth it. i think that what i'm getting out of the dinner is more than just food; it's the opportunity to see what someone else is thinking about food: what it is, what it should be, and how you should eat it. i love high-concept food when it delivers, when a chef is thinking about a certain problem and that a particular dish is the solution to that problem.

so, lunch. per se is rather nouveau riche with respect to interior design. it's as if the interior designer made a list of all of the different styles and objects that were of interest, and then just threw them all together in the restaurant without any restraint. there are all-glass tables, french-style blue doors, walls made of rough-hewn stone, a reception desk that's a chrome spiral, a glassed-in wine cellar...you name the style, per se has it. still, i do always love a restaurant with padded armchairs, as if you're in someone's very posh living room, or are going to spend a while at the restaurant (or all of the above) - it automatically makes me feel like lingering.

we all got the chef's tasting menu, and shared a bottle of navarro vineyards' gewürztraminer juice (yeah, it's nonalcoholic - it's made from the same grapes as the vineyard uses to make wine, but it's not fermented). so there you have the basics, and now i'll do my rambling recounting of lunch by course and random musing.

to start, we had the traditional thomas keller amuse bouche: gougeres and the marinated salmon cones. i could have sworn that the gougeres i had at the french laundry were hollow; the ones at per se had some sort of creamy, cheesy filling that had obviously just been piped into the gougeres. they were lovely, as usual, and the filling was really wonderful. the marinated salmon cones sparked copycats all over the country, but are always fun and tasty. the cone is a savory tuile that has black sesame seeds in it, and is filled with creme fraiche and topped with a small ball of marinated salmon ... paste? it's not exactly a paste or puree, since the salmon is raw; it's just...ground as if it had been ground by an ant-size meat grinder. this actually kind of grossed me out the first time i had it, because it's a familiar shape that causes me to expect a certain flavor - ie, sweet - to come with it when i eat it. it's also a little weird to be eating cured salmon as a puree. but this time i wasn't fazed at all, for some reason. it's interesting, too, to see the same ingredients in a dish at alinea, but with a preparation that's totally different - grant achatz does frozen creme fraiche topped with shaved frozen salmon, topped with a chive stem that you use to pick the whole thing up with. so it's the same ingredients, but the preparation totally changes the way they taste.

"oysters and pearls" (sabayon of pearl tapioca with island creek oysters and sterling white sturgeon caviar)
this first course is a gold standard of thomas keller's repertoire, and for good reason - it's consistently fantastic. the sabayon is creamy, the caviar is salty, and the oysters are divine. also, it's fun to eat with a caviar spoon. let's revisit those oysters - i still have had oysters just a handful of times, and have only recently come to like mussels. the oysters in this dish are poached in butter, and they're wonderfully tender, with the most fantastic flavor. if you aren't sure if you like oysters, these oysters will convert you. i get a slightly crazed smile on my face just thinking about them.

sauteed hudson valley moulard duck foie gras (tokyo turnips, tellicherry black pepper shortbread, watercress and mulberry "gastrique")/salad of marinated "topinambours" (glazed bing cherries, petite sorrel and sicilian pistachio butter)
two of us had the former, and two of us had the latter - i had the former, but tasted a bit of jessica's sunchoke salad. "topinambour," incidentally, is merely the french for "sunchoke." not really sure why the french is required here, other than to make the restaurant seem more posh. our waiter described it to us as a sunchoke salad, probably because he correctly assumed that there was no chance that we would know the french for sunchoke.

so at the french laundry, there was also a foie gras course, but it was the peach melba foie gras, where i believe the foie gras is poached rather than seared, as it was here. i've only had foie gras a couple of times, the first being at the french laundry, and the most recent before today being at o ya. i must say that while the texture of poached foie gras is wonderfully smooth, the joy of eating seared foie gras is pretty much always superior. when it's seared, the interior gets all melty but there's still a crust to the exterior, so it's like eating a chunk of really delicious fat pretending to be meat. there are people who don't like the idea of eating fat, but they obviously haven't had seared foie gras. the turnips and berry puree (i believe we had a huckleberry gastrique, not mulberry, but i could also have just misheard) were nice with the foie gras, especially the berry puree, but the foie gras was clearly in the spotlight. of no particular use to me was the black peppercorn shortbread - it was very buttery and given the fatty nature of the foie gras, i didn't feel a need for the added richness of the shortbread.

this course was a choice between the foie gras and the sunchoke salad, and i am always lucky when i eat with people who like to share tastes of differing courses. i'm not really for or against sunchokes, but they were fine here. of more interest was the cherry with pistachio butter - just the correct balance of sweet and salty. plus absolutely beautiful color on the cherry, contrasted with the green of the pistachio butter. the pistachio butter marks the first time i've really liked pistachios, and the texture of the butter was unrivaled: unctuous, silky, somehow very substantial on your tongue. just beautiful.

extra course: um...a tuna-like fish (texture-wise) with pickled ginger and radish. something like that. it was good. i don't really know why we were given this course, but i know that it was good. pan roasted fillet of gigha island halibut (violet artichokes, compressed lemon cucumber and grapefruit "ravigote") i am not really sure how the term "ravigote" applies to this dish, given the wikipedia entry for ravigote. we can dwell on that later, though, after i describe this to you. first of all, the colors were lovely, with the pink grapefruit and the orange-yellow seared crust of the halibut. the halibut was fantastic: perfectly cooked, but more impressive was the seared crust. this is why these restaurants are so impressive - when the food is cooked in such a way that i can't even figure out what technique they used. the halibut had no coating of any kind, yet the seared surface was crisp and caramelized. i mean, seriously crisp, almost as if just the very surface of the halibut had been deep fried. i have no idea how they did it - is it just a matter of searing the fish at the right, very high temperature for the right amount of time? i know that i can't cook like that. the grapefruit was a perfect pairing for the fish - i'm really liking grapefruit these days. the artichokes and lemon cucumber seemed a little superfluous to me, but maybe that's just because i liked the fish/grapefruit combo so much.

butter poached nova scotia lobster (caramelized mission fig, heirloom beets, and wilted butter lettuce with summer truffle emulsion)
i have also only recently started liking lobster; i flirted with liking it on and off, all throughout my childhood. now i'm very sure that i like it; the deal was sealed when i had a lobster roll at pearl oyster bar. in fact, that lobster roll still stands as the fondest memory i have of lobster: cool, lightly dressed, sweet, tender...gotta hit that place up again. back to per se: the shape of the lobster they used was just so pleasing to the eye, you have no idea. i just wanted to pick the hunk up with my fingers and cram it in my mouth, bite by bite. it was glossy with sauce, and in the shape of half a plump doughnut with no hole, and it was so beautiful. when i was eating it, it was a little difficult to cut, actually, and i don't know enough about lobster to be a particularly good judge of texture, but i thought it was slightly stringy. beautifully tender, but somehow still a little stringy; i know that lobster in general does have strands the way mammalian meat does, but it was still just a little bit disappointing. i really liked the butter lettuce and the summer truffle sauce - the butter lettuce had the absolute perfect amount of bite to it, and the summer truffle sauce was just delicious with the lobster.

cavendish farm's "caille en crepinette" (confit of young fennel, medjool dates and fennel root puree with quail jus)
wikipedia tells me that "crepinette" is a type of french sausage made of chicken, veal, pork, or lamb, wrapped in caul fat. crepinette does not describe this dish at all, unless the quail leg was wrapped in caul fat? it did seem to me that the quail leg was deboned and then rearranged around one slender leg bone, so perhaps it was wrapped in caul fat to keep everything together, like a ballotine. it reminds me of the chicken wing ballotine that i had at o ya - the chicken wing was deboned, and then stuffed with more chicken. that idea still blows me away, you know. back to our quail - the quail leg came with these tiny dates that clearly had been shaped from original medjool dates (which are quite large - these were the size of a smallish green grape), and were lovely and sticky and hard to cut. i like fennel, but it didn't seem particularly successful here, and i hate when chefs throw around the word "confit." why, exactly, is this a confit? i hear the word and i think of duck legs cooked in duck fat. anyway, this was fine, but not exactly mind-blowing. that chicken wing at o ya wins pretty handily.

marcho farm's tenderloin of nature fed veal (greenmarket carrots, young pearl onions, and kendall farm's creme fraiche "pain perdu" with veal sauce)
let's talk a bit about veal. i have to say that i never really eat veal, because the thought of eating a baby animal that's been kept from moving to ensure the tenderness of its meat is kind of revolting. normally i have no qualms about this sort of thing, but i generally draw the line at veal. well, i definitely didn't read the menu carefully enough because i had no idea there was veal on it. i don't really like the flavor of veal, either; it's not a strong dislike, just more of a preference to eat something else. if i had noticed that there was veal on the menu, i would have asked them to substitute something else. but you know, it was there, so i ate it. i suppose i could have sent it back, but in terms of etiquette i felt that the window for that had shut quite some time ago. i think that for me, the best parts of this dish were the veal, the bits of veal...cheek? (it was braised, so it had more bite to it), and the pain perdu. the pain perdu seemed to be cubes of a soft, buttery bread - most likely brioche - that were soaked in creme fraiche and sauteed until golden. i'm not really sure how anything can really be soaked in creme fraiche, but that's my best guess. the fact that i didn't particularly feel a need to eat the veg (but i did) brings up the issue of unnecessary elements of a dish. i felt that these were a rather generic way to get some sort of vegetable into a meat dish. and i say this: if you want to have a dish that's all meat and no veg, because it simply doesn't need any, then go right ahead.

di bruno brothers' "burrata" (marinated jewel box tomatoes, arugula coulis, and nyons extra virgin olive oil)
the name of this dish annoys me in its use of quotation marks. of all of the things i hate about thomas keller (and this list is very short), i hate his use of quotation marks. we know that the menu is an interpretation of the techniques that are listed; i do not need quotation marks to tell me when you are being more playful with a technique. that's why i'm eating the food: to find out what your interpretation is. even more annoying is this quotation mark situation: the word burrata does not need quotation marks because the dish genuinely included a slice of real burrata. there's no interpretation there: it. just. is. was there something fake about the burrata? something not genuine? seemed pretty much like a burrata to me. i'd never had burrata, actually, so this was a treat for me - the interior creamy part is pretty awesome. cool, creamy, just slightly mozzarella-flavored...i could definitely eat this all day. let me also say that this dish came with two tiny little toast points that were perfectly crispy, and that the tomatoes were the best tomatoes i have had in about a year, easily. the last time i had good tomatoes was when i had heirloom tomatoes in a tosci's blt, when they were taste-testing them and gave us samples. you know you've got a good tomato when you can taste that it has spent oodles of time in the sun. and did you know - the tomatoes were peeled! who peels tomatoes?! in this case it was totally warranted, because it allowed you to just taste tomato without having to chew through the skin of the tomato.

plum sorbet (santa rosa plums, ginger pudding, plum consomme and gingerbread crisp)
this was quite nice, and i love sorbets (this was a creamy sorbet, so really more like ice cream) and plums. plums and ginger are always a fantastic combination - i've done a gingered plum shortcake in the past - and this was no exception. there was a bottom layer of something gingery - it could have been a poached slice of ginger - that i wasn't a huge fan of. the ginger pudding was an english-style pudding, though, which more than made up for said strange slice of stuff.

"peanut butter and milk" (bitter chocolate mousse with salted peanut cream and reduced milk ice cream)
this was almost a showstopper! i mean, it was great, and i thought it was perfectly executed; i just wanted it to somehow be slightly more exciting. the peanut butter was fantastic - roasted, salty, absolutely beautiful perfect texture: unctuous, buttery, but still somehow substantial. the reduced milk ice cream was also quite wonderful - it tasted very simple and familiar and was the perfect accompaniment to the peanut butter and chocolate. the chocolate was probably the weak point for me - there was a mousse and also a chunk of chocolaty stuff that was almost ganache. the mousse was good but forgettable, while the chocolate chunk was a little too dense. but flavorwise, this delivered pretty well.

"mignardises"
thomas keller, you punctuation maniac, there you go with the extra quotation marks. please stop. if you want to broadcast that this word is french and not english, just put it in italics like the rest of the world - no need to be fancy (and...wrong). the mignardises at the french laundry back in 2006 were not quite as spectacular as they were this afternoon, which seems somehow wrong since we're more in a recession now than we were then. the mignardises are kind of like the end of a fireworks show: the crew is done with all of the carefully orchestrated stuff, and now it's just time to bombard the crowd with all of the leftover fireworks. so first, they brought us mini creme brulees and pots de creme. then, coffee and tea. then, chocolate truffles on a silver platter, flavors pointed out by our server with a very tastefully shiny brown card instead of her finger (i had grapefruit and fennel, which were really good). then, a bowl of chocolate covered, cocoa dusted hazelnuts, and a bowl of tiny, striped, house-made sugar candies wrapped in twists of cellophane. then, a silver tiered dish containing caramels in the top, cherry nougat in the middle, and more truffles (coconut, dark chocolate, caramel) in the bottom. i'm pretty sure we sat there for an extra hour just talking and stuffing our faces with sweets.

the scene
a word about the all-important scene: i am always interested to see who exactly waltzes into these posh establishments. even the group i was with was rather unorthodox: four grad students. i mean, where do grad students get the kind of money to pay for a lunch like this, on the stereotypical grad student's budget? i don't know. i mean, i do: thank you, us government, for my stimulus check. i am always surprised, though, when i find fellow students who are interested in food at this level, because it's an expensive habit.

about other people: i love to see how people dress for places like this - people break out their sunday best. there was a woman with the most inappropriate black velvet sack-shaped purse (in my opinion, even lunch at per se does not require that kind of fake formality), a woman in a super-trendy draped sweater dress (awesome), a girl in a chiffon-type polka-dotted summer dress (very pretty but somehow out of place). the woman who takes the cake, though, was the one sitting at the table next over from us. first of all, i do think that bra straps should stay hidden at nice restaurants, and that any exposed lingerie should at least be very pretty; i also think that see-through dresses are a faux pas at nice restaurants. this woman struck out on both counts. i didn't really want to know exactly what kind of thong she was wearing, but i do know. and the lighting in the restaurant was dim; i would hate to know what happens in broad daylight. let's just not go there.

was it worth it?
i guess you really have to qualify "worth it" when you answer this question. i don't actually think the food was worth it - i remember the food being more interesting at the french laundry, to be honest. but i do think it was really wonderful to relax away from the bustle of new york with people who were great to talk to. it was also really wonderful to be able to hang out with scientists, because it's nice to get a break from architecture now and then. so in terms of company, and as an experience, it was worth it, but the food fell short. the food just seemed too conventional for new york, and i found myself wishing it was more creative. i really wanted to like per se, but i don't think i'll be back.

top tens (again)

it's that time again: time for a random updating of my top ten favorite restaurants in boston/cambridge. these lists are always a little suspect because, well, what do i mean by top ten? i think that in this case, it's a best-hits type of thing, where memory - and the longevity of memory - are a key factor. this is an interesting question to me, because i know that if i really, really enjoyed the restaurant, i will remember the meal i had there despite the inevitable fading of my memory. take alinea, for example: i ate there two years ago, but i still remember specific dishes: how they tasted and how we ate them. or the taste of the honey ice cream at aujourd'hui, also two or three years ago. memory is also pretty fickle: i have no way of knowing what i would think of a dish i had two years ago. my food memory isn't that good. and it's a legitimate question, at least to me: as your palate changes and develops, from eating more different kinds of foods (or perhaps just getting older), you have no way of knowing that your foundation of food knowledge is still the same. are the best chefs just that detail-oriented and gifted with respect to long-term memory?

ten favorite restaurants in the boston/cambridge area, 2008
1. craigie street bistrot. we did a chef's whim dinner back in the spring and while not everything was a hit, everything was pretty exciting. seared beef with smoked beef tongue and beef marrow blobs? yeah. exactly. i'm just a little bit thrilled that craigie street is moving into a space around the corner from me.
2. pomodoro. if you're looking for a friendly neighborhood restaurant that manages to be hip but not pretentious, this is it.
3. upstairs on the square. i went here for lunch with c, and just had a cheeseburger. it was the best cheeseburger i've ever had. it'll put you back a well-spent $14. and then get the butterscotch pudding.
4. o ya. if you're not afraid to spend, this is the place to do it.
5. restaurant pava. still memorable for its bread selection.
6. rendezvous. the last time i was there, i had this blood orange ceviche with scallops that was absolutely divine. every time i think about it, i want it again.
7. central kitchen. if you're looking for a friendly neighborhood restaurant that's actually in your neighborhood, this is the place to be.
8. sound bites. best brunch, but oh so far away.
9. pigalle. always a solid standby.
10. mariposa bakery. service has brightened considerably upon the return of my favorite sandwich-maker. best sandwiches and scones in the city. don't forget to get a chocolate chocolate chip cookie on your way out. oh, and expect to wait for your sandwich.

ten favorite restaurants in the boston/cambridge area, 2007
1. craigie street bistrot (interesting updating of classical french food; impeccable technique)
2. pomodoro (best italian food i've ever had; best, and friendliest, service)
3. pigalle (really excellent french country food, excellent service)
4. restaurant pava (most interesting and successful flavor combinations; best bread)
5. sel de la terre (excellent french food)
6. rendezvous (more adventurous new american that occasionally misses its mark)
7. upstairs on the square (slightly overpriced, but really excellent new american)
8. central kitchen (close-to-home, unpretentious new american)
9. aujourd'hui (excellent, sophisticated upscale french)
10. miracle of science (best burger)

ten favorite restaurants in the boston/cambridge area, 2006
1. craigie street bistrot
2. pigalle
3. caffe umbra
4. sel de la terre
5. upstairs on the square
6. central kitchen
7. aujourd'hui
8. picco
9. rangzen
10. addis red sea

review: annisa, or, on being overcritical

annisa / 13 barrow street, new york / 212-741-6699 / m-sat 5:30-10:30, sun 5:30-9:30 / appetizers $9-18, entrees $27-33

when i was in chicago, i always felt awkward having dinner by myself - i always have that problem, when not in cambridge, where i can't find people who share my predilection for eating out at nice restaurants. luckily i have (a) grown out of this phase; (b) know a couple of people who will go with me on occasion; and (c) feel more comfortable eating out by myself in new york than in most cities. it's also true that i'm a student and can't afford a whole lot of nice dinners, but this summer i'm in new york and i want to make the most of it. this is partly why i currently have three jobs (yeah, don't ask...i just have trouble saying no).

most of the time, though, i do prefer to eat out with other people. yesterday's partner in crime: j, who lives in brooklyn and is also interning this summer. we went to annisa, which is actually just a few blocks from my apartment. additional sidebar: i feel really weird when i come and go from my apartment since it's right in the middle of a busy, trendy area - all of these people have come to the neighborhood to go out, and i'm going up to my apartment to stay in because i don't feel like going out when everybody else is out too. yes, i am living in new york despite my aversion to large crowds of people. i'm avoiding times square like the plague.

dinner at annisa brought up an interesting question: what do you value more, the company you have at dinner, or the food itself, and how does that affect how you perceive the dining experience you had? for me, it's a little complicated. i usually pick a place because there's something interesting about the food - chez henri, for example, has french-cuban food that i have yet to try - but i also want to have good company when i'm at the restaurant. so i do want both, but there is a significance to the order of operations. and once i'm at the restaurant, good company goes a long way towards covering for subpar food. sometimes, the food is really that good - like when we went to o ya - and sometimes, just the act of going out and relaxing at dinner with someone makes you ignore any shortcomings until later.

reflecting on this a couple of days later, i think annisa falls in the latter category for me, because i found myself being really critical of the dinner itself. part of this, surely, is due to my expectations being higher for new york restaurants because of its vaunted reputation as one of the best restaurant cities in the country. i suspect that the strength of new york's food scene is more about the range of food, though. because i have been to the vast majority of restaurants worth going to in boston, and i can tell you that we eat pretty well there.

back to annisa. i had been grumpy all week, so it was really great to go to a nice restaurant that wasn't cramped and didn't rush you. with respect to service and decor, annisa does quite well. it's nothing to knock you out, but it acquits itself well notwithstanding. and we were there for over three hours, and they only rushed us once or twice at the end.

so now you've been reading for a while and you're wondering about the food, especially after this ridiculously long exposition. well, we started with an amuse bouche: a tiny little fluted cup that had chicken liver puree piped into it, topped with a couple of currants. the cup was edible - it seemed to be some sort of savory tuile, and i assume it was at least made with that technique, where the batter thins out while it bakes and then you mold it right when it comes out of the oven. i suppose it could also have been made by brushing the batter into a mold and baking it, but the batter would have to be the perfect consistency and the oven a very precise temperature in order for the batter not to pool before setting up. this was very nice, if not particularly original; it had a fantastic contrast in texture, with the crunch of the cup. and you can't argue with an amuse bouche that actually triggers an entire conversation about the joys of eating liver.

i'll mention the bread here too, since i harped on that in my review of banq. the bread is uninspired here - i prefer an amuse bouche to bread. i've thought a bit more about this and here's my position on bread at restaurants: unless it's something interesting, or particularly good quality, i don't really want it. to restaurants everywhere: i hope you're trying to impress me with your bread, because i'm paying attention. i don't need it to be spectacular, i just want it to make sense. i'll even give you an example: bringing around a roll is a ploy used at pigalle to pace your meal, so you have something to do while you wait between appetizer and main course. in general, i'm just not a big bread eater: i'm used to starting a meal with soup, an amuse bouche, salad, etc. i also prefer to eat my bread with butter, and sprinkled with sugar, and usually you don't get a sugar bowl at restaurants with the bread. i'm just not a fan of a cold roll with a hard crust to start off a dinner. exceptions to this rule: if the bread is interesting or just plain good (a la restaurant pava, or even just the soft foccacia-like bread they serve at central kitchen with hummus); if it's served with interesting accompaniments like antipasto or really good butter; if i've ordered a bowl of soup and want to pretend i'm french and wipe the bowl with the bread; if the bread is toasted; if i'm really, amazingly hungry and can't wait until the food starts arriving. that's how i feel about bread: now you know.

at annisa, they do the nondescript roll thing. not only do they come by once, they come by about every 20-30 minutes. this is nice for the people who have ordered something that they want bread with - a very saucy dish, etc - and it recognizes that your preference may change within the course of the meal. but it's also kind of annoying, in all reality, because the bread's not even that great. i can't really be mad, because i do actually appreciate that people who may feel awkward or greedy asking for more bread are accommodated. i think i'm projected my dislike of the bread itself onto the practice with which it was distributed. i mean, seriously, annisa: you can do better than this. kudos for butter being at the correct temperature, though! and it was really lovely - those shell-shaped curls of butter with gorgeous luster. you know i ate some bread just to eat it with that butter.

first course: we split an appetizer - the soup dumplings with foie gras. you know, i heard good things about these, and i was a little disappointed. first of all, the dumpling skin was the wrong one for soup dumplings - it wasn't very pliable, and it was more like a thickish wonton wrapper. i'm not an expert on soup dumplings, but i do know that the skins are stretchier and softer than these were. if they were handmade, and i hope they were, the dough was kneaded too much or the skins were undercooked. the basic preparation, before you get totally confused, was this: a square plate drizzled with some sort of soy reduction, four half-moon shaped dumplings placed on the reduction, a piece of foie gras placed on each dumpling. if you're reading "half moon shaped" and thinking "soup dumpling?" you're correct: no soup dumpling i ever ate in china or chinatown was missing its distinctive flower/fluted top. the soup dumpling technique is one i haven't tried and know would be relatively difficult to master, what with the complicated folding. so yeah, the technique, or lack thereof, annoyed me. and one of the dumplings had a hole in it already! would thomas keller have let the dish go out like that? i don't think so.

after all was said and done, though, these tasted pretty good. they needed a little bit more soup to really warrant the name soup dumpling, but the pork inside was excellent. i really fail to see the necessity of the foie gras, but it was nice anyway. i think it should have been crispier on the outside, for more textural contrast. in case you haven't noticed, i'm a big believer in contrast, be it textural or flavorwise. i think a little bit of something acidic or sweet would have balanced the dish better - a bit of pickled ginger, or a little bit of rice vinegar. and in fact, soup dumplings are served with pickled veg and vinegar.

the main course that i got was chicken with a white truffle sauce, asparagus, and pig's foot. in all reality, there were more interesting things on the menu with respect to flavor combinations, but i saw pig's foot and my decision was made for me. you know i love any kind of pork product. j had roasted lamb tenderloin with szechuan peppercorns and some other accompaniments. i thought the chicken was quite good - certainly it was roasted very deftly, with the requisite crackly skin and tender interior, though not too tender. it turned out that the pigs foot was diced - both gelatinous tendon and meat - and the chicken was resting on top of it. it was pretty good, but i thought it was a little unadventurous for the merits of pig's feet. i know that most chicken dishes on restaurant menus are for the unadventurous, but i always hope the chicken is good anyway. and this was good - above average, really - but i felt a little like it was just very good bistro fare. j's lamb tenderloin was great, though - perfectly cooked and really interesting spices.

ok, dessert: j didn't feel like dessert, but i do like to have dessert anytime i go out - i've got a sweet tooth just like everyone else. desserts looked pretty standard, but i got the poppyseed bread and butter pudding with lemon curd. i've made a lot of bread puddings and eaten a lot of them at restaurants, and the best one used to be a tie between a chocolate bread pudding i make and a white chocolate-blueberry bread pudding i had once at central kitchen. this one has joined the top ranks - it had a crispy top layer of bread cubes, and a bottom layer that was saturated with egg and had perfect custard consistency. the lemon curd was a nice touch, too - this is not a new flavor combination, but its use in a bread pudding was great. and to go back to textural contrast, having the crunchier top and mooshy bottom was pretty awesome.

after the table had been cleared, we got one last course of mignardises, like at the french laundry. or the tiny cookies that perilla gives you...with the bill. i'd advise you to skip the ones here. we had a mango popsicle, crystallized ginger, and a mint chocolate truffle (two of each). all three were too sweet - i think the mango should have been more like a frozen sherbert, though the crystallized ginger was definitely the best i've had, with quite a kick to it. i found the truffle to be too sweet as well, which is just a waste of good chocolate.

overall, i enjoyed my dinner at annisa because of the good company, and great ambiance on the restaurant's part. but if we're talking food, i can think of a lot of restaurants in boston that are better. the menu here is supposed to be asian-inspired, but it's a bit lackadaisical in its inspirations. although i'm sure this isn't the case, it felt to me like the chef has a rather one-dimensional perspective on asian flavors, because they really are kind of staid. i don't know if i'll be back - perilla is a lot more honest with itself about what it is, and how far it's reaching - but it was, despite everything, a lovely evening.

--

side note: i'm going to per se tomorrow for lunch! i'm excited, because i'm curious to know how it compares to the french laundry. i know this is an expensive way to find out, especially with the increases in food prices, but it's now or never - turns out jessica is visiting this weekend and there was an open spot in her reservation. awesome. i wish i could bring myself to take photos, but i just can't be that annoying girl.

review: banq, thank you for trying

banq / 1375 washington street, boston / 617-451-0077 / m-sat 5:30pm-1am, sun 5:30pm-11pm / appetizers $8-12, entrees $19-26

did that title sound a little snide? too snide? yeah, it's a little snide. this is a review of banq, the new-ish restaurant on washington street, next to union bar & grille. it's located in a newly renovated building, with an interior by nader tehrani.

a few words about the interior: it's pretty cool, but here's me not really understanding the relationship of the booths, which are walled in an exotic-looking wood veneer, to the interior ceiling/landscape, which is created by cnc-routed sections of plywood that are spaced evenly to create a 3d reverse landscape. my beef with the booths: they detract from the plywood dealio, rather than enhancing your experience of it. i have to wonder if nader did just the plywood, or also the booths. i have to say that i prefer ltl's tides restaurant to banq, which seems a little too hip to me. also, these restaurant interiors always bring up the issue of how they're supposed to age. in the case of stuff like this, which is very showy and trendy, and sometimes very cool, i can't imagine that it will still be as showy and cool in ten years.

so, the food. let me start with a note about the bread. um....mini naan with a remoulade (specifically, one with sundried tomatoes that was more like an aioli) is kind of a strange bread choice, but i was willing to buy it if it was good. it wasn't. who wants to start a meal with such a doughy, heavy bread product? i assume that indian people eat naan with other things (ie rice and a main course) for a reason: thousands of years of civilization prove this point to be true. and i have had odd bread choices that have been rather unusual, most memorably at restaurant pava in newton (search this blog, you'll find my rapturous bread review), which served a very wonderful french baguette, a crispy potato thing, and a chewy roll. even sel de la terre's overrated breadbasket is better than the one at banq. and the mini naan weren't even good naan - i've had good naan, and it certainly isn't as doughy and...solid...as this was. it was served in an asian bamboo steamer basket, to boot. time to shape up, banq, or ship out: the bread makes a huge difference in how people perceive their dinner. at least address the problem of the bread and its accompaniment: the warmth of the naan melts the remoulade, making it seem even more like a buttery mayonnaise than something you'd actually want to eat. now, i know this may seem nitpicky, but first impressions go for a lot in a restaurant. while we're on the matter of first impressions: banq, please drop the stupid notes on your menu: "main course/"cosmopolitan palate"," "appetizers/"yin and yang for the soul"," etc. they're stupid and even the drunk hipsters aren't buying it.

on to the main event: we started with the coffee tossed baby back ribs (puffed rice and bamboo salad) and the lemongrass scented steamed mussels (with white wine and holy basil). both were pretty good, more so the baby back ribs, i think. the baby back ribs had just enough sauce and just enough coffee, but not too much, and while i thought the puffed rice was kind of negligible (this is one of those textural things that grant achatz must be able to do much better than banq), the bamboo salad was quite nice. not the best baby back ribs i've ever had, but quite pleasant. the mussels were ok; i thought they were lacking in lemongrass flavor/"scent." i also dislike the practice of extracting the meat from the shell, chopping it up, and stuffing it back in, having mixed it with other stuff. this practice is just a way to make us think we've gotten more than we're actually getting, and i'm telling you right now, banq, to stop it. the mussels were slightly overcooked, and while the accompanying tomato/onion relish-y thing was nice, it wasn't doing the mussels that great a favor.

the main courses fared much better: i had the fire-charred sirloin (with smoked cha choy, cilantro, and taro pave, caramelized lotus seed, creamy chanterelle sauce). to my server: do not assume that because i am a girl, i like my steak medium-rare. asshole. i like my steak rare, just like any sane person would. so, to summarize: don't assume, just ask, and avoid offending your clients. back to the steak: it was pretty good. the cha choy/cilantro/taro pave: too starchy. the caramelized lotus seed: well, kind of nice...but i'm still wondering why. the creamy chanterelle sauce: i guess i have a different conception of creamy; this was more jus-like than creamy, and was a touch too salty, but overall it was quite nice. the sirloin, however, was great with respect to flavor. i think my server only pretended to have it done rare, as it was somewhere between rare and medium rare, but i'll forgive the lapse because the flavor was so good. and there you have it, people: the bright point of the night - a steak with good flavor is always a pleasure, and harder to find than you might think.

but let's wait for banq to get a little less pretentious and scene-y before recommending it to other people. banq gets brownie points for trying interesting flavor combinations, but loses some of them (ok, most of them) for not actually pulling it off. and for obnoxious service, although the non-server (ie busboy) service was excellent. it's too bad that the restaurant doesn't do a better job on the food, given the non-traditional interior.

review: o ya, and further education of my palate

o ya / 9 east street, boston / 617-654-9900 / tu-th 5-10pm, f-sat 5-11pm / $100-150 tasting menu, a la carte small plates range from $8-$45

i can identify significant points in the development of my palate: the fresh ricotta from chez panisse, the moment at which i began to like cilantro, the year in which i began to like lobster permanently, the one when i started to like mussels (ok, that hasn't quite happened yet but i'm getting there). there is the moment when you realize that as a child, you were this petulant being with picky eating habits. the greatest error of my childhood may have been the ketchup i used to douse things with: rice, pancakes, dumplings, you name it - my motto was "everything is better with ketchup." yeah, folks, that's right: pancakes. it's actually still kind of good, although now i realize that there are many better things to do with rice than mix it with ketchup. ok, now i'm kind of grossed out. yeah.

i look back upon significant meals that i've had, and my knowledge of different flavors has changed so much between them that i often wonder what it would be like to have a long-past meal in the present. would it taste different? better, worse? would i be able to recognize more flavors, more complexity?

for me, gourmet japanese food is about subtlety, which requires a somewhat discerning palate that i may or may not have. accordingly i worry that i may not be able to detect this subtlety, that i'm missing the point of a certain dish. especially in contrast to american food, even like the french laundry, the flavors are much more "out there" than they are with japanese food. i think that this is probably the case for some of what i had this past friday evening at o ya, but for the most part i do think my palate is educated enough to recognize wonder when it comes along.

so first, a rundown of what i had at o ya! i ordered a la carte, while the other four in my party ordered the tasting menu (14 courses). i will say that the menu is somewhat overwhelming: there are so many different things that you're looking at it and you're not sure where to look for a good solid five minutes. ok, more than five minutes. i think i was unable to comprehend the entirety of the menu for the whole dinner. what i ended up ordering was a combination of things i had read about in frank bruni's review and the boston globe review, and things i thought looked interesting.

i had:
scarlet sea scallop (white soy yuzu sauce, yuzu tobiko)
fried kumamoto oyster (yuzu kosho aioli, squid ink bubbles)
house smoked moullard duck tataki (foie gras kabayaki, arima sansho)
onsen egg (dashi sauce, truffle salt, homemade pickled garlic)
okinawan style braised pork (boston baked heirloom rice beans, homemade kimchee, soy maple sauce, kinome)
yuzu brined ballotine of chicken wing (napa cabbage & shiitake stuffing, homemade kimchee)
seared petit strip loin (2 oz, bone marrow chiwan mushi, toasted garlic sake soy sauce)
grilled sashimi of chanterelle & shiitake mushrooms (rosemary garlic oil, sesame froth, homemade soy)
foie gras (balsamic chocolate kabayaki, raisin cocoa pulp, sip of aged sake)

notes on service
we had a pretty good waiter, and service was generally impeccable. there were a few moments when our waiter was occupied with another table and a different waiter brought out our dishes, and they didn't get explained or they were brought to the wrong people; this oversight did actually diminish the experience a little bit. but overall, service was great and our waiter gave just the right amount of detail when describing the dishes. brownie points for being able to coordinate my a la carte menu with those who got the tasting menu - it's almost always the case that if one person gets the tasting, everyone has to get it because it just gets so complicated. this kitchen is pretty awesome for putting up with us.

i will say this, though: as a young diner, i have had the experience so many times where the waitstaff underestimates how much i know about food, and i end up feeling like i'm being condescended to. this happened most notably at hammersley's bistro, and is the reason why i would never go back to hammersley's. i would just like to put this out there for waitstaff at fine restaurants everywhere: please assume that know a lot about food, food science, current cutting edge food preparation techniques, etc, and i will ask you when i want to know more. this will make me feel better about myself and more likely to have a good dining experience, and thus provide a better tip. just because i'm only 25 doesn't mean that i don't know about food. i do, and in many cases, dear waitstaff, i know more than you. so stop condescending to me and everyone will be the happier for it.

ok, rant aside, let's get back to the food and a course-by-course roundup. while i'm at it, i'll do a rating (out of 10) for each course. and a note about eating: i attempted to deconstruct each course when there was more than one piece, so that i could taste each thing individually, then taste it all together. for dishes so complex, it seemed only right that this would be the modus operandi of the dining experience. when you eat at an experimental place like this, there is so much curiosity about how the food is made that this is the way to eat.

scarlet sea scallop (7)
this was the first dish and i thought it was pretty good. the scallop is scarlet because it's dipped in beet juice. i don't think it really did that much for me, but the scallop itself was sweet, and tender unlike any scallop i'd ever had before. i love scallops, which are so finicky in cooking because they get tough so fast; so it was a joy to have a raw scallop with such a fine texture. oh, and tobiko is always welcome in my house, ever since i tasted it for the first time at my freshman advising seminar professor's house at dinner. it's so fun to crunch these between your teeth and get the ensuing rush of flavor. yuzu: too sophisticated for my palate, still.

fried kumamoto oyster (9.5)
god, this was good. the oyster was perfectly fried, just the right amount of breading, perfectly golden, crunchy, anything you could possibly want in a fried food. i wish i had gotten the raw kumamoto oyster for comparison - everyone else did, and i was lucky enough to get tastes of everything i didn't order myself, except for the raw oyster. raw oysters, as you can imagine, are hard to share because you're concentrating on slurping the whole thing in your mouth at once. ok, back to the oyster: it's surprising how well fried tempura-like stuff goes with rice. and the aioli was fantastic: mayo-based sauces go so well with fried food that it's almost a crime. i tasted the squid ink before eating the thing and couldn't really detect that much in the flavor, another testament, i think, to the shortcomings in my palate. but this was just a wonder of textures: soft, slightly toothsome rice, crispy oyster, melt-away squid ink foam, creamy/oily/unctuous aioli. i would happily eat this every day.

house smoked moullard duck tataki (6)
this was so-so, and only moderately memorable. the smoked-ness was entirely present and much appreciated; but it did seem a little out of place in this restaurant. it's interesting because most flavors are so delicate that having duck - a very strongly flavored, earthy type of meat - was a definite counterpoint to all the fish. i found the duck to be just slightly stringy, but overall this was good.

onsen egg (10)
jesus this was good. the egg is poached sous vide at 66 degrees fahrenheit for a while, until somehow the yolk is creamy and just slightly past runny (runny being the consistency of sunny side up eggs), with a texture that could only be described as gorgeously unctuous. while the yolk is busy being unctuous, the white is like this ephemeral substance that has physical form when you put it in your mouth, but then immediately melts away into delicious nothingness. the egg comes in a broth of scallion-soy sauce, which is a delightful foil to the egg, and provides just the note to cut through the richness of the yolk. to top it all off, you eat it with a spoon - and you all know how much i love eating things with a spoon. possibly the only drawback was the fact that the bowl was made with a matte glaze so that your spoon made an uncomfortable sensation in your bones when you scraped the bowl with the spoon. you know, o ya seems to be on truffle overload - there was truffle oil on so many things (note to restaurant: STOP before it's too late!) - but the truffle salt was great in this dish, just piquant enough yet rich at the same time. and the pickled garlic - i am not usually a fan of chunks of garlic, cooked, raw, or pickled, but this was gorgeous. it must have been young garlic - it had that kind of texture and flavor, like the young, fresh garlic we had at eva's garden.

okinawan style braised pork (8)
this was the nod to the restaurant's location, and it was pretty good. it was also served with a spoon, in case i wanted to scoop up the juices, according to our waiter. the pork was nice and tender, but i think it was the overall flavor combination that made this dish, and again, the texture combination of soft (the pork) and crunchy (the kimchee). the juices were quite good, and i ate a good amount of it after finishing the pork, although it did become overly sweet after a while - due, i think, to the maple syrup in the sauce. but this was a dish where the delicacy of flavors was all too apparent, and i can only hope that i fully appreciated this complexity. i didn't think the beans did much for me, though.

yuzu brined ballotine of chicken wing (9)
ok, just the conception of this dish was amazing: it's a deboned chicken wing (a chicken wing!!) that's stuffed with more chicken. seems like a greek epicurean feast item, doesn't it? well, this was just fantastic: it came to the table piping hot and perfectly crispy on the outside, and the inside stuffing was chicken-y and had great texture. let me just add some more brownie points for the concept of this dish: a ballotine is hard enough in the first place, and then a ballotine of a freaking chicken wing?! genius. pure genius. again, a disconnect in my palate because i don't think i was able to detect so much of the yuzu brining, but it was amazing all the same. this dish was so good that after a tiny taste, my dining companions thought about ordering their own, a la carte.

seared petit strip loin (9)
i saw the photograph on the website of a wagyu beef dish, and the photograph made the beef look just so amazing, with this otherworldly sheen that you just couldn't imagine beef having. i've heard so much about wagyu - which has become rather trendy - that i felt that i had to try it, despite a price tag that was really hard to swallow. i could have gotten short ribs ($24) but was convinced by one of my dining companions to get the real deal (2 ounces, $45) to get a better sense of texture and flavor. and that photo on the website: just go look at it. you'll see what i mean. so the dish: it was four slices of wagyu, glistening, and a marrow bone full of marrow cooked in some mystery way. the wagyu? great. it came with some herbs and thin slices of garlic. i would say that it was fantastic, but i don't know that wagyu is really as amazing as it's purported to be. then again, it could be another shortcoming of my palate: i don't know. and god, the marrow, well...i've had marrow once before, at craigie street, where it came in the form of little blobs of fat rolling around slices of roasted flank steak. at o ya, it came almost in the form of a custard, providing even more richness to the wagyu. it all tasted so beefy that you can't imagine that a mcdonald's patty was ever beef.

grilled sashimi of chanterelle & shiitake mushrooms (7)
you know, frank bruni named this dish as his favorite, but i'm not so convinced. not to say that it isn't good, it just didn't knock my socks off. perhaps my expectations were too high? it's true that the mushrooms were fabulous, sliced, sauteed, with a legitimate sesame foam, and some texture contrast in the form of tiny bits of sesame brittle. it just wasn't the edifying experience i wanted it to be. the most impressive aspect of the dish was the study in textures - the mushrooms being perfectly cooked, they provided just enough bite but not too much, and the sesame brittle was a great foil to the softness of the mushrooms.

foie gras (10)
this is the dish that frank bruni describes as being so good, he ordered a second round after finishing the first. and it lives up to the hype. i haven't had that much foie gras, and the previous time i had it (at the french laundry) it was more like pate in texture than at o ya. at o ya, it's seared on the outside for a bit of crunch, but on the inside it's totally like a burst of amazingly flavored fat. yeah, fat, i went ahead and said it: i really enjoyed eating fat. the slight crunch of the exterior, the bit of wasabi hidden between rice and foie, the balsamic glaze: all of these things made this course work so well. also, the aged sake was quite nice with the heavy/high-flavored foie, since it was on the dry side and worked well with our food flavors.

one more gripe: eating at o ya is a little bit of work! i had to keep on referring back to the menu (which our waiter had kindly left us copies of) to check and see all of the things i was eating! this is not an ideal situation, but was very educational as i was able to really think about what i was eating. then again, for the purists out there, having to refer to a menu constantly would be a huge bother and detraction from the dining experience. oh, and full disclosure: i wanted to take photos but the lighting was too low for it! also, the presentation was pretty good, but not nearly as beautiful as alinea's plating, which was always a tour de force of presentation.

overall commentary: i love experimental food, and i loved o ya. i don't think i'll be returning for a while, but this more a circumstance of my bank account and less of an issue with the restaurant itself. it's a pleasant place to eat, with the courses spaced for you so that you don't get everything at once, and everything is perfectly paced for you. it's a completely relaxing space, due to the lighting and off-the-beaten-path existence.