Naha finally, for the first time, a few weeks ago. And an interesting experience it was. We went for a belated birthday celebration; we enjoyed the food, although we would have appreciated a somewhat quieter place and another server. We arrived a few minutes early for a 7 pm reservation and were immediately welcomed and ushered in next to the inevitable large group. Oh well. We were seated next to a window on Illinois (street that is). Interesting foot traffic.
Our server showed up promptly and was engaging and efficient, if a bit abrupt (by which I do not mean in bearing so much as time spent; he never spent a moment more than necessary and as soon as he accomplished what he was there for, he sped off as if exceptionally busy. He may have been later, as the section filled, but he certainly wasn't for the first hour or so. But more of him anon.) Bread was promptly delivered (a honey/cumin, a sweet fennel/white raisin, and ciabatta); all were noticeably fresh and none were even remotely warm.
I found nothing on the entree list that absolutely wowed me so ended up choosing three appetizers. In the event, it turns out that one of the apps used to be on the menu as an entree, so there I guess I was partly in synch with things. Both the Lovely Dining Companion and I opened with the same app (the former entree).
ScallopsSince it's listed in their online menu in a somewhat different version, I'll do my best (omitting the adjectives and quotation marks from what has to be the hand's-down worst offender among all Chicago menus: descriptions are so way over the top as to be parodies of themselves). Each plate had two beautifully seared scallops with a disc of coppa ham steeped in vanilla. There were little piles (sorry, I don't know the fancy word for "little piles") of candied orange peel and syrup, caramelized onion, and a couple slices of wonderfully poached pear. This was, for me, the stellar dish of the evening. Scallop usually matches beautifully with vanilla and with citrus and this was no exception. The disc of coppa ham atop the scallop was very heavily redolent of vanilla and also made cutting the scallop hard. Remove it, slice a piece off to accompany the rest, and all went well. The portion (thanks for asking) was perfect and it's hard to imagine anything whatsoever about this dish that could have been better. Meaty scallops, cornucopia of flavors perfectly matched, rich without overwhelming the palate. [Swoon]
Potato gnocchiTo follow, I asked for the following two appetizers in this order: first, potato gnocchi, a few slices of wild boar sausage, a generous helping on small cubes of Spanish dry-cured chorizo, all topped with shaved Montelerraina cheese. Oh, lest I forget, accompanied by caramelized broccoli and Marcona almonds. Then, for my virgin attempt at foie (it's taken many decades to get past Mom's liver and onions), the "Hudson Valley Foie Gras and a 'Tarte Tatin' of Poached Quince, Huckleberries and Rose Hips." The server suggested that he serve my foie at the same time the LDC got her entree, sturgeon with blue crab. As is the case with so much at Naha, it was a pretty busy plate. In addition to the sturgeon and the crab, there was "Butternut Squash with Celery Root "Mousseline", "Hen of the Woods" Mushrooms, Young Turnips, Granny Smith Apple Broth and Chervil." (I do devoutly wish that someone would explain to them the proper use of quotation marks and the fact that you need not describe in exquisite--and excruciating--detail every single item on the plate. No one says you can't use it all, but God knows the menu doesn't need to include it all. I swear: I half-expected a description to include, "Bathed briefly in 'Lake Michigan' water with a 'sprinkling' of Morton's 'Kosher' Salt then poached in a Mauviel 'copper' pan over a Viking 'stove' using 'Peoples Gas' natural 'gas.'")
Now then: to the foie. My first time. I feel like such an innocent. My previous experience of liver, with mighty few exceptions, was mom’s liver and onions. Beef liver, fried. For a long time. The onions were pretty good, caramelized and all. But they had this livery flavor from cohabiting with the liver for so long. That taste: not so much. And the liver was everything it should never be: dry, chalky, strongly mineral-ly. And so I suppose it’s no wonder that it took me about four (actually closer to five) decades to find my way back to this intriguing little (or not-so-little) organ. I knew that the foie would be seared in a hot fry pan. I knew that little else would be done to it. And I had my memories. Quince, now that’s a plus. Huckleberries, that’s fine. Rose hips? Who could object? But the star, front and center, would be LIVER.
Sturgeon The presentation was lovely. It’s hard to imagine a more inviting plate; whoever’s in charge of plating in that kitchen is quite talented. He or she could probably make a head on a pike look delicious. At some point, manners dictated that I begin. LDC was already working on the sturgeon and the crab. Her dish looked lovely and tempting and delicious. And by all accounts thereafter, it was. But then, hers was fish. Mine was
LIVER. But I forged on ahead. Took a “corner” piece from the foie, swiped up a little quince, took a deep breath, and popped the fork into my mouth. (The deep breath served the dual function of allowing me not to have to breathe for a moment and thus not to have to catch any whiff of a liverish scent.)
Foie grasI waited. How long, I wondered briefly to myself, before the gag reflex kicks in? What will the texture of this thing be like? What will that very first taste of liver actually…? And amid the millions of questions swarming around in my mind, a thought intruded: Hey! This isn’t bad. Why, there may be something to this foie thing after all! It’s rich. It’s creamy. It…it…it doesn’t taste like
LIVER at all! (Well, maybe a teeny, tiny, bit….) And so I enjoyed it. The quince worked wonderfully with it. I enjoyed the texture. For the most part. The flavor was delicate and the only time I found myself less than happy was in the deeper recesses of the lobe, the places where the liver was (necessarily) less well-cooked. Raw even. There the mouth feel became a bit more challenging (remember: I'm a foie virgin) and brought childhood back into the picture. But still, I enjoyed the dish. In fact, as I think about it, I might even have to try it again some time.
Gateau BasqueAnd then there was dessert. I ordered the “gateau Basque” although why a custard cake is peculiarly Basque eludes me. The “cake” was essentially a cupcake with a custard interior; my subsequent research suggests that it often has a fruit accompaniment, sometimes inside. In this case, the fruit accompanied on the outside. Pears and a ball of ginger ice cream atop a very creamy polenta. (Those are pomegranate seeds in the picture.) In the event, the dish was enjoyable: no revelations, no repeat likely, but enjoyable.
Concord Grape "Delice"The LDC inquired about the Concord Grape “delice.” This was a new noun to us; I gather that the meaning was intended to be literal: “a delight.” (Googling the words “delice” and “Naha,” I now discover that the restaurant has employed the word on occasion to just this purpose.) The heart of the dessert was described by our server as resembling cheesecake. In fact, we both found it far more akin to panna cotta in lightness. It was very grape-y, a plus in LDC’s book and since was the one ordering it, she was very happy. (The "coins" are sliced green grapes and tiny discs of yogurt and the straws are sugar.)
A note on the service. Before ordering, I asked the server whether there would be any problem ordering three apps instead of an app and an entrée. He responded without hesitation: no problem whatsoever. And so I ordered the three apps noted above. The first was served at the same time that LDC received hers. Obviously no issue. The second was served about five to ten minutes following the first. Again, no issue. And then we waited. And waited. And waited. After thirty minutes or so, I flagged down the server. He said that LDC’s entrée and my third app would be out in two or three minutes. Five minutes later he came over and said that he understood that I was upset. He then launched into a lengthy explanation that because I had ordered three apps, the third of which was supposed to coincide with LDC’s entrée, our order moved to the back of the line behind all other orders. (I still don’t understand what that means.) And thus, apparently, I should have expected this delay. How the second app could have been served so promptly given that “system," he didn’t explain. He also made abundantly clear that the whole issue wasn't his fault in any event since the servers are at the mercy of the kitchen (his almost exact words).
I was unhappy but I got over it. Yes, the servers
are at the “mercy” of the kitchen (though I still find it odd that he would bring that up unless he was afraid I’d take it out on him via his tip). But the second app came on time. So I’m confused. I
was unhappy but I didn’t want my annoyance to ruin a celebration dinner and, besides, there was nothing I could do about it. But what irks me is his behavior
after all of this. I managed to get over it but he apparently did not. The remainder of his visits to our table were extremely brief—even briefer than before, if possible. In addition, his descriptions, comments, and answers were directed almost exclusively to LDC. I felt invisible. If he was worried about his tip being in jeopardy before the explanation, his behavior afterwards just begged for a little “correction.” (FWIW, in the end, I tipped a shade under 20%.) He seemed put out that he had to continue to serve us after I had had the temerity to be impatient.
Is 30-40 minutes between courses a long time? Yeah, I think it is. But even if the answer to that is, “no, it isn’t,” then why was my second app served so promptly? My third app was the foie gras and LDC’s entrée was the sturgeon. These are not time-consuming dishes to prepare or plate. (And for the curious, the dining room was mostly, but not completely, full.) More to the point, if this was a risk that I was running, why not avoid any potential unhappiness and explain this to me at the very beginning when I ordered? What am I not understanding here?
Bottom line: we liked the food, in some cases quite a lot. We both absolutely loved the scallops. LDC really enjoyed her sturgeon and her dessert. Although I liked the gnocchi, the plate seemed a little busy. Given the basic ingredient in the gnocchi (potatoes), I was a little surprised not to see more of them. But taste won out and it
was a very tasty dish. The foie, well, I enjoyed it as much as I think I’m capable of doing. I’m certainly not going to hold them responsible for my mingled feelings about it. I mean, after all, it's not their fault that it's
liver. With absolutely no basis for saying so, I suspect that I won’t likely encounter too many versions that I will like more. The liver was absolutely unctuous and it married beautifully with the quince. Still, as happens in situations like this, the service “issue” stays with me as much as the food. I can’t imagine not returning, given how much we enjoyed the food and the minimal likelihood of having the same server.
Gypsy Boy
"I am not a glutton--I am an explorer of food." (Erma Bombeck)