Anybody have any thoughts about Richman's article?

Link, please.

I thought it was a fascinating article. Unfortunately I haven't eaten at any of his restaurants so I can't really comment on the accuracy. However, I can definitely imagine Richman being correct given the scope of Von's empire.

Richman seems to be a pro at throwing in the towel for great chefs. I think he has a lot of nerve. I know he's well respected as a food writer, but come on, he's a food writer.

It was a very interesting article, and as a former Jean-Georges fan who has tried many of the restaurants mentioned and has friends who work for the company, there was a lot in it I am in full agreement with. However, I also thought the article was journalistically typical in that it was almost entirely speculation and very little insight. In the end, it was just another "puff piece" that praised the chef even as it was simultaneously criticizing the product. Because I am privy to inside information, I was disappointed to see the article raised some very poignant questions about Jean-Georges' downfall, but then failed to offer any real answers or causes, which could easily have been obtained by interviewing those within the company. It seemed obvious the article was written to exploit Jean-Georges' name, but not to establish culpability.

There is a member here who is a former Maitre d' of Jean-Georges. I would be very interested to get her opinion; I'm sure she has much more insight.

Hest88, if you htought the article was fascinating, you would probably enjoy this, as well. Its resonance throughout Jean-Georges' compnay and the restaurant industry as a whole is very impressive.

hi Joanne212 !
well for all i know you could be talking about another "member" but i am just going to assume you mean me

i did finally get to read that article but i don't think i have any more "insight" than you, i think you pretty much hit that nail right on the head. and frankly haven't i said enough anyways what more could i possibly say

oh but maybe i do disagree with you on one thing:
you say the article did not want to establish culpability but i think they did a pretty good job of blaming jean-georges's "downfall" on the STAFF... y'know like the "pretty but icy and mute hostesses" and the cheezy "Vegas casino management" and the "line cooks" (and/or chefs-de-cuisine) who are "just smart enough to learn how to cook but are apparently too stupid to be taught brilliance."

interestingly enough the journalist failed to question how come such an exalted "brilliant genius" chef CAN'T MANAGE TO HIRE (or keep) ANYBODY GOOD for his company ?
i mean maybe i'm crazy but it seems to me he is trying to imply ALL establishments by "brilliant genius" chefs of the jean-georges caliber will eventually degrade in the same manner. because the staff consists of idiotic morons EVERYWHERE you go, right ?



sorry but there is no link. so i will just sum up the three pages in GQ for you:

"Question: Why do all Jean-Georges's restaurants suck now? Answer: Because now he's just too rich to give a shit about any of them."

This post has been edited by abbe: Dec 20 2004, 12:17 PM

Joanne212, I'll have to disagree with the "puff piece" and not establishing culpability. Also, I don't know how often you read GQ but Richman is a restaurant critic (no longer on staff but contributing) and writes restaurant reviews, not investigative pieces for the mag. (editorial point of view - an average magazine reader cares more whether a restaurant is good/bad, not WHY it's gotten bad. does a diner with no ties to the industry care about what happens behind the scenes? i don't think so. they care about the food/experience.)

Starting with the title -"Stick a Fork in JG" - where is the puffery??? Some quotes: "His empire is a culinary disappointment....His name will always mean something. It isn't right that his food no longer does." All the praise is in the past tense. JG WAS once an innovative, original, exciting chef and one of the most influential of his time (you say you used to be a fan, too) but--and i think this is Richman's point--he became a businessman, which is when the restaurants started to suffer.

Richman establishes culpability in the very first sentence: "Once the a chef leaves the kitchen, he leaves his greatness behind." He also says "Perhaps I could regard the new entreprenurial Vongerichten more favorably were he instilling his genius in chefs who work for him, but this is not taking place. The chefs running his kitchens on day-to-day basis are simply not in his league." (i think i said it before - many people expect the meal to be the same whether the name chef is in the kitchen or not but from my experience, this is rarely the case. reminds me of a big foodie - and spender - who will not go to JG or any other restaurant before calling the name chef personally to make sure he will be there. otherwise, he won't go.)

i don't see how Richman is exploiting a celebrity name. if anything, it's another wake-up call for JG but it probably comes too late... there is so much fat, the organization so large (15 restaurants on 3 continents) and, apparently successful -- as long as the restaurants are busy how is JG going to see what's wrong?

i don't understand in what way the piece is "speculative" - please explain

overall, i thought that in today's highly gushing media's coverage of "celebrity chefs," it was quite brave, refreshing and long overdue.

I had the pleasure of waving at JGV from across the dining room at Jean George's when I ate there in September.
The service and food were absolutely humming that night... everyone was clearly at the top of their game. I'm sure the fact that he was there that night had everything to do with it.
If only he could be at everyone of his restaurants on three continents at the same time, all problems would be solved.

This post has been edited by fiftydollars: Dec 20 2004, 02:25 PM

I haven't read the article, but I don't like Alan Richman's writing in general. For example, his wine article in this Jan's Bon Appetite seemed like he's a bit full of himself. Just my opinion...

Is there any indication that his flagship/namesake restaurant in NY, Jean Georges, has declined in quality, though?

From the article: "The grand Jean Georges is accomplished but purposeless, perhaps the most disappointing of all... The food served is expertly assembled, but the combinations do not hint at a virtuoso at work."

madziast, I admit I am not familiar with Richman's writing at all, and I didn't mean to criticize his form of journalism, per se. I guess what I am trying to say is that I am tired of the "editorial point of view" in general, the concept of a reader "caring only whether something is good/bad, not WHY it's bad" because I think it's simply not true (bestselling books like "Kitchen Confidential" and fast-rising popular sites like shamelessrestaurants.com prove this). The point I was trying to make is that magazines and newspapers tend to ignore what a reader really wants and instead force feeds us the same kind of PR/editor driven puff-piece time and time again.

As for the "puff-piece" part, I did think the article was cloying in the sense of "praise the chef, criticize the product." I think it was speculative in that it raised questions like "When I ask people in the business what went wrong... They say they do not know what drives him. They only know he cannot stop." This is almost laughable to me because I know for a fact that people witihin his company have the answer, and I know several people not within his compnay (but in the industry) also have a much better answer than "I don't know," because I personally have heard discussions on this very topic.

Overall, yes it was "refreshing," but I don't think it was particularly brave (especially since Graydon Carter already bashed Jean-Georges 2 years ago) because although it was scathingly critical in parts, it did still take great pains to massage Jean-George's ego.

This post has been edited by Joanne212: Dec 21 2004, 08:32 AM

Thanks. I know what I'm going to be doing this morning instead of working!

Joanne212 - ah, IF ONLY editors realized that! i might actually READ more pieces, not just scan them. lifestyle magazines generally write about subjects in a positive way, not much negative stuff. look at profiles of writers, designers, actors, etc. Have you seen any negative ones? Any articles on what talented people like Robert de Niro and Woody Allen have put out lately in comparison to their earlier accomplishments? mainstream magazines sell stuff - some have dispensed with any pretense of being something else, witness the rise of the shopping magazine (Lucky, etc.) even Bourdain, the most outspoken industry member (and thank him for that), did a harmless piece for Bon Appetit on cooking on a cruiseship. i would like to see him say more on the industry's underbelly but there are few mainstream outlets for him to do so.

the kind of article you'd like to see on JG and his empire might appear in a news or trade publication, but i suspect that a trade publication wouldn't want to slam him (hell, they still want and have to cover him). that's why i think it was pretty brave of richman/GQ to break the nicey-nice kissy-kissy treatment reserved for celebrities. i think that those interested in looking behind the scenes have to look to the web and books, and maybe some small independent publications, because glossies are not called that for nothing. Decline is not sexy or photogenic (except for Roman palazzos) and that's what magazines such as GQ deal in most of the time. The Vanity Fair piece, which focused on only one restaurant, was pretty much alone in its approach - and they needed a Brit writer to do it b/c I'm pretty sure there weren't many American food writers/reviewers willing to deliver such a scathing piece (esp. if rumors of Carter's revenge are true). AA Gill was the perfect man for the job - he has a very specific style, his reviews are about his wicked, mean but hilarious writing rather than actual food. (if American media can hardly criticize a chef, no wonder they didn't question the president for a long time - look at the popularity of The Daily Show as alternative source of information).

present culture approves of selling out, it has even become a goal to do so, while not so long ago it was frowned upon. wanting more money, more adoration, more fame, more power - few people see anything wrong with it

Joanne212, what is the answer - what DID go wrong? please share. i don't think many people in the industry would go on record - or maybe i'm wrong, maybe they just haven't had the opportunity

Any crticiism of an indiviudal staff member is a crticism of that member. A criticism of many staff members is a criticism of the person responsible for hiring, training and overseeing that staff. Thus I don't agree with your assessment. However, I haven't read the article in question and may be missing something. I was tempted to subscribe when Richman was on staff. Now that he's not even writing a regular column, it's unlikely I'll catch his articles except in a waiting room. I had dinner with him once. He's related to a close friend of a relative of mine. He was entertaining company.

I agree with you, I don't think many people would have the courage to go on record, which is why I am so supportive of this manuscript (LOL! I'm beginning to feel like her publicist!) which I think is the best possible answer you can obtain about Jean-Georges' company as well as many others, and the industry as a whole.

There isn't any possible way I could summarize and do it justice, because in the end, I think the "answer" is so blunt, it sounds ridiculously banal if one tries to condense it. But it is a fascinating read with real times, dates, names, places, and occurrences, which coupled with the corresponding editorials that ran in the press simultaneously, you can fully derive the "answer," which personally I found both fascinating and appalling.

I would love to see something like this gain more mainstream attention. I think if more people realized how transparent is the facade created by pubilcists and editors, then people might better learn to appreciate real quality, as opposed to what is rich, famous, and powerful, which can only serve to enrich all creative endeavors overall.

Hest88, enjoy!

This post has been edited by Joanne212: Dec 22 2004, 08:28 AM

i was hoping you would spell it out! i read the book, too, but had formed my opinion of JG's growing empire long before that, some time between JG the restaurant slipping and before Jo Jo's makeover. probably around the time he was on 60 minutes. i like my chefs in the kitchen at least some of the time - keeps problems in other areas down, too

there is an interesting JG interview in Restaurant Report that seems to have taken place shortly after JG the restaurant opened.

"RR: Have you become officially bored with the never-ending interviews?
JGV: Never. I appreciate the media, and I enjoy the attention. It's an important part of my business."

the whole interview may be read here:
http://www.restaurantreport.com/features/f...ngerichten.html

I'm interested to hear if anyone can answer Jason's question. Jay Cheshes in the December Gourmet certainly would say that there is not: Jean-Georges Vongerichten is the city's torchbearer for truly refined avant-garde cuisine, ... with dishes simple yet soaring, on the edge yet reined in....

I will add that my only trip there, now a year or so ago so not quite recent, was a remarkable experience: outstanding food, an incredible wine flight for (no joke) $25, and fantastic service. It was easily one of my most wonderful dining experiences. What's more, as I peered into the kitchen, someone asked if I was in the business (I'm not and absolutely loved the question as a result) and if I wanted to see the kitchen. We were running late so I couldn't but... well, suffice it to say that I haven't been invited into any other haute kitchens in my time.

last visit in late 2001, i think. or early 2002? second mediocre experience in the row, there wasn't much reason to go back. first dinner in the dining room was not transporting but good enough to go back a few times for lunch and dinner.

the last visit was a spur of the moment dinner at Nougatine. no reservations but they had a table without much wait. visibly rushed and distracted assistant sommelier just heard that we were not interested in a bottle, we requested pairings instead. he sent a waiter to ask which wines by the glass we wanted. never saw the sommelier again. well, we did but he was busy with other tables. quite a while after we made our selections, the waiter came by to say that one of the dishes was not available but didn't bring the menu to chose something else. he didn't look like it was his first day but maybe JG was making them nervous or something. he crossed the floor many times that night, his beautiful tan standing out among the sea of pasty diners.

i don't remember what we ate, most likely fish and vegetable dishes. food was ok, not actively bad but not particularly exciting either.

we went to the renovated Jo Jo's after that and it was fine except a bit of a zoo. the decor surprised us, it was so different from the original and it felt more cramped. food was pretty good and service decent but it took a really long time to get a check.

i don't know that i would rely on Jay Cheshes' opinion

I finally got around to reading the article and it sure is pretty scathing, huh?
I've always been a fan of Richman's writing and can't really believe he has an axe to grind.
Hopefully, if ANY of this is accurate, JGV will fix the holes in his empire.

actually you are totally agreeing with my assessment because i was kind of being sarcastic.

but i guess you wouldn't know this because you SURE ARE "missing something" all right you're missing a whole mess of stuff.
[if you care to find it, this is the place to look.]



very interesting you should say this though: "A criticism of many staff members is a criticism of the person responsible for hiring, training and overseeing that staff."




wow
after reading this interview the only thing i can say is: ahha hahaa hahah ahahahaaa. ugh christ


This post has been edited by abbe: Dec 28 2004, 10:38 AM

Missed it, or just lucky enough not to have stepped in it. That JG hired "a struggling New York commercial-artist/fashion-designer" to moonlight as a maitre d' is perhaps indictment enough about his attention to detail when running a restaurant supposedly aimed at food stars and not pop stars.

Bux, I think you're being presumptuous. Obviously, you never read the book, if you could even make such a callous statement.

However, I'm sure Abbe can handle herself. LOL! I can't wait!

Have you seen this blurb from Gawker today yet?

Just wondering whom JG is supposed to hire as Maitre d'? Most of the staff in NY's top restaurants are struggling actor/dancer/fashion designer/teacher/writer types and many (but certainly not all) of them great at their restaurant jobs. In fact, a well-dressed designer girl who is clearly sharp and witty is just the kind of person I would want at my front door when given that the large pool of applicants for this job are lacking in every area of competence required to perform the very demanding responsibilities of managing the door at a high end restaurant; the pickings for professional maitre d' with a passion for the position are few and far between.

oh wow
gee Bux, if i were to like...say... fax you my resume or something, would that make you any less hostile, y'think ?

oh but maybe never mind. because i mean like for example-- Spice-Market has some young pretty-boy maitre-d who's got about ohhh 19 years LESS experience in the F&B industry than i, and SOMEHOW they managed to garner THREE stars from the New York Times, so i guess whatever point you're trying to make is totally moot anyways.

no one is trying to shove enlightenment down your throat here, Bux. call it "lucky" if you want, but personally i'd label it: "ignorant."
i mean. do you REALLY think when "JG" opened all his restaurants, he had NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER in attracting so-called "pop stars" and he ONLY opened them to get "food stars"
???

really.




hahahaa oh that's CLASSIC




oh yeah ? so umm
what'd ya think of it
i mean, no pressure or anything.




HOW MUCH ARE YOU PAYING ???
just kidding. OBVIOUSLY it was never about the MONEY

[i'm very flattered you would use one of your handful of posts on li'l ole me. thank you. ]