You don't specifically mention the appetizers, which I have always felt were the highpoint of dinner at Arun's. Were they more appealing than the entrees?

It's funny because, thinking back on the appetizers, I have a hard time remembering what they were. This is a bit odd for me because I usually have really great food memory (for example, I could describe a particularly good plate of ceviche I had 8 years ago in the Virgen Islands, or a great eggplant dish I had in Italy 14 years ago). I think it's because the appetizers weren't at all memorable. One was a crab cake with a taro purse on it, again, lovely to look at but really disappointing for a crab cake. Another dish featured a single shrimp on a small bed of chow fun noodles--quite dramatic with plumes of fried noodles emerging from the sides but not very flavorful. So I'd have to say, I wouldn't call them a particular highpoint.

I think my first trip to Arun's was in the late 80s, and I remember it being amazingly good

My first meal there was about this time as well and I, too, remember having a great meal there. I was in my teens so I was probably a little more impressed by the decor and presentation given that I rarely got taken to nice restaurants around that time. But I grew up in Chicago with working parents--we did a lot of take-out from P.S. Bangkok, Opart Thai--restaurants which I still consider to be excellent Thai joints. So, at that time Arun's held up favorably against these places. I wouldn't say that it does now.

I have long puzzled about the sharp divide between the lack of love that LTH'ers give to Arun's and the strong support than Arun's has received from other diners. According to Zagat's 2007 Arun's is the 7th most highly rated restaurant in Chicago (a rating of 28 of 30), but it gets little love here. I can not think of any other restaurant where the chasm is so deep.

To be sure, there is some measure of learning that takes place as one experiences other Thai restaurants, and I have learned much from the tutelage of Erik M. and others to appreciate a wider range of Thai cuisine. So, to some extent the criticism may be a function of culinary sophistication. And it is probably true that Arun's is not quite what it once was (as is true for Charlie Trotter's and Frontera: staying fresh is hard). Yet, I found the experience at Arun's to be strikingly impressive and the appetizers and the desserts startling and creative (the main courses are well-done versions of neighborhood Thai dishes).

I wonder if part of the lack of love is that as culinary adverturers, gustatory archeologists, and lovers of the down-and-dirty, Arun's doesn't pass our sniff test for us proclaimed authenticitologists, who find it too comfortable by half, too slick by two-thirds, too expensive by much. It is true that it has been a few years since I have dined at Arun's (finding myself at Spoon, Sticky Rice, TAC), but I remember my meals at Arun's with real fondness.

For what it's worth, Gary, my trip to Arun's was shortly before I discovered LTH. I had not yet been to Spoon or TAC or any of the other beloved Thai joints, and even without that frame of reference, I left underwhelmed. At the time, I would have told you that it was okay, but I felt no compulsion to go back. Now, I just don't see the point. I wanted to like it, I expected to like it, but it just didn't happen.

Personally, I don't think it's a matter of sophistication. I don't think diners can't tell the difference. If you took Arun's dishes and TAC's or Spoon's dishes and served them side-by-side in people's kitchens, my hunch is that those who praise Arun's for Zagat wouldn't be fawning over their dishes absent the setting. Much like the gotcha wine tests, for most people, reputation, expectations and setting trump taste. People love Arun's because they believe, going in, that they will.

And I don't mean for this to come across as self-congratulatory smugness. As those famous wine tests demonstrate, we food and drink geeks are just as susceptible sometimes. It's just human nature.

GAF wrote:I have long puzzled about the sharp divide between the lack of love that LTH'ers give to Arun's and the strong support than Arun's has received from other diners. According to Zagat's 2007 Arun's is the 7th most highly rated restaurant in Chicago (a rating of 28 of 30), but it gets little love here. I can not think of any other restaurant where the chasm is so deep.

Gary,

In his Chicago Reader review of Arun's Mike Sula makes note of the schism between Reader raters and his review.

My last visit to Arun's was approximately 2-years ago, I left underwhelmed and overcharged with little or no desire to return. Yes, the murals are terrific, service is smooth and professional, wine pairings interesting, but overall I would much rather go to Spoon, Elephant Thai, Rosded, Siam's House, TAC than Arun's. As an aside, according to my quick calculation, two could eat well at all the aforementioned Thai restaurants for the price of a meal with wine pairings Arun's.

Enjoy,
Gary

G Wiv wrote:

GAF wrote:I have long puzzled about the sharp divide between the lack of love that LTH'ers give to Arun's and the strong support than Arun's has received from other diners. According to Zagat's 2007 Arun's is the 7th most highly rated restaurant in Chicago (a rating of 28 of 30), but it gets little love here. I can not think of any other restaurant where the chasm is so deep.

Gary,

In his Chicago Reader review of Arun's Mike Sula makes note of the schism between Reader raters and his review.

My last visit to Arun's was approximately 2-years ago, I left underwhelmed and overcharged with little or no desire to return. Yes, the murals are terrific, service is smooth and professional, wine pairings interesting, but overall I would much rather go to Spoon, Elephant Thai, Rosded, Siam's House, TAC than Arun's. As an aside, according to my quick calculation, two could eat well at all the aforementioned Thai restaurants for the price of a meal with wine pairings Arun's.

Enjoy,
Gary

I understand all this, the question that I was raising was why should this be. And it is not my intention to reargue the quality of Arun's: de gustibus non disputandum. This sharp division of opinion is almost unique and I find that fascinating.

GAF wrote:This sharp division of opinion is almost unique and I find that fascinating.

Fascinating, perhaps, but it's hardly unique. I don't have a Zagat subscription so I can't see the scores, but looking at their top 25 most popular list on the website, I see the following:

Wildfire
Maggiano's
Rosebud
Fogo de Chao
Francesca's <insert restaurant type or location here>
P.F. Chang's China Bistro
Cheesecake Factory
Cafe Ba-Ba-Reeba!

Those hardly strike me as bastions of LTH love. Unless I'm misreading the meaning of "most popular". The tendency of the survey to reward competence and reputation over excellence is precisely why I never read Zagat.

These are "favorite restaurants," not the most highly rated restaurants. So Maggioiano's rating is 20 of 30, not 28 of 30, like Arun's.

GAF wrote:These are "favorite restaurants," not the most highly rated restaurants. So Maggioiano's rating is 20 of 30, not 28 of 30, like Arun's.

Ah, I see -- most frequently rated rather than highest score?

Nnnnnnnnnevermind

(Though I stand by my feelings about Zagat in general)

There's all sorts of noise in Zagat ratings. I mean, asking people to rate a restaurant on a scale of 0 to 3 is just asking for all sorts of trouble. That being said, the top restaurants should be a reasonable accurate representation of Chicago's best restaurants. Based on Zagat's current ratings, the top restaurants in the Chicago metro area (food wise) are:

Carlos' (29)
Les Nomades (28)
Tru (28)
Alinea (28)
Tallgrass (28)
Arun's (28)
Topolobampo (27)
Charlie Trotter's (27)
Everest (27)
Vie (27)

An interesting list to say the least. A mix of "yeah, that's probably about right" to "seriously, wtf?".

Anyway, my first (and only) visit to Arun's was about 5 years ago. I thought it was fantastic, but at that point my exposure to Thai food was limited to mediocre pad thai and pad se eiw (I would suspect many Zagat raters are eating there with the same amount of experience and are rating accordingly). I had not yet "seen the light". Now that I've done some serious eating at TAC and Spoon and the like, I just have no desire to go back to Arun's. It might be good, it might not. But, I know I will be completely satisfied eating far more "interesting" dishes at an awesome local spot. In the end, the additional cost of Arun's just isn't worth it to me.

thaiobsessed wrote:
It's funny because, thinking back on the appetizers, I have a hard time remembering what they were. This is a bit odd for me because I usually have really great food memory

Agreed strongly.

I recall that I enjoyed the appetizers, the presentations were nice and the food was good but don't ask me to recall even one. I went to Trotters three years ago and can tell you about half of what I ate. My dinner at Avenues a year and a half ago? I can tell you every course. Arun's from eight months ago - not one.

I'm not a Thai expert, never been to TAC or any other variety of places people love here, but even compared to what they serve at AltThai in Arlington Heights, Arun's was not strikingly better in entree quality. The whole thing just wasn't memorable, which isn't a horrible thing, but for such a highly rated place I expect it.

The service, while okay, I didn't think was up to the pricetag - few things were explained well, the bathroom was a mess, family style entrees just seems wrong, and I'm really not picky about this sort of thing, but the people sitting at the end of the table I was at were constantly being reached over in an unnecessary way - what was really odd is (I believe) the manager grabbed one of the staff to tell him not to do the reaching thing and he seemed to do it MORE than he was before after the reprimand. All small things that I would normally not even mention except when a check for six people comes up at over $1000.

Is it good? Sure. Would you have a fine meal? I'd say so. But, to answer the question "Is it worth it?" No way.

Yes, the murals are terrific, service is smooth and professional, wine pairings interesting, but overall I would much rather go to Spoon, Elephant Thai, Rosded, Siam's House, TAC than Arun's.

Me, too. But do any of these other restaurants that you mention even have wine pairings? If you look at the other top ten rated Zagat restaurants, they all have a few things in common; they're all gonna cost around $100/person and up, they all have (I believe) respectable wine lists, and, with the exception of Vie, they've all been around for quite awhile. That alone should tell you something about the preferences of the average contributor to Zagat's survey. The expectations for "best" just seem to be different from the expectations at LTH, and, frankly, not that it deserves one, but if I were forced to bet on which one of the above mentioned restaurants had any shot at all at a Michelin star, it would have to be Arun's.

jbw wrote:

Yes, the murals are terrific, service is smooth and professional, wine pairings interesting, but overall I would much rather go to Spoon, Elephant Thai, Rosded, Siam's House, TAC than Arun's.

Me, too. But do any of these other restaurants that you mention even have wine pairings? If you look at the other top ten rated Zagat restaurants, they all have a few things in common; they're all gonna cost around $100/person and up, they all have (I believe) respectable wine lists, and, with the exception of Vie, they've all been around for quite awhile. That alone should tell you something about the preferences of the average contributor to Zagat's survey. The expectations for "best" just seem to be different from the expectations at LTH, and, frankly, not that it deserves one, but if I were forced to bet on which one of the above mentioned restaurants had any shot at all at a Michelin star, it would have to be Arun's.

All of that may be true, but I think what bothers most people here is that if you focus only on the food the higher prices at Arun's simply aren't worth it. It's a tricky issue because of the fact that we're talking about Thai food and there is so much really outstanding Thai food to be had at other neighborhood-type restaurant.

I mean, I can't walk down to the corner and get a food experience that's equivalent to Alinea or Carlos' at about 1/4 the price. I can do that with Arun's, and that's the problem.

I think this boils down to 3 issues:

1. Taken on its own merits, is Arun's a great or even good restaurant (speaking strictly in terms of food...is the cooking well executed? are high quality ingredients being used? etc)?
2. Is the food any better than what can be had at the TACs and Spoons of the world?
2. If the food is good/great, do the additional trappings (decor, service, wine program) justify the higher prices?

jesteinf wrote:I mean, I can't walk down to the corner and get a food experience that's equivalent to Alinea or Carlos' at about 1/4 the price. I can do that with Arun's, and that's the problem.

In another thread, there's a discussion about how Chicago doesn't have any seriously high-end Chinese restaurants except Shanghai Terrace. This is why. If Shanghai Terrace cost the same as Chinatown restaurants, people would probably think the food was outstanding.

I'm not sure if everyone's making the same argument, but I think it's an important point whether the argument is, "High-priced Thai food isn't worth it because cheap Thai food is so good," or "The expensive food at Arun's is actually inferior to the cheaper food at TAC, Spoon, etc." (I haven't eaten at Arun's so I don't have a personal opinion, by the way.)

I think LTHers are often stereotyped as believing the former-- making a virtue of cheapness, reverse snobbery-- when what they really believe is the latter. To take another cuisine, I don't think admiring how good a cheap pizza or Italian sub can be means we (generally) would find it impossible to justify the prices at Spiaggia, Follia, Riccardo; I think most of us have no problem understanding how artisanal ingredients, the conception of the dishes, etc., means every plate of pasta shouldn't have a maximum price of $7.95 and that $25 can be justified by the result. But the result does have to justify it. The issue with Arun's is that I don't think many people see that degree of care going into the dishes; maybe into the other accoutrements of the experience, but nobody seems to suggest that pad thai at Arun's is a finer, more carefully crafted, more creative thing than at Spoon, in fact the reverse.

I'd like to believe that Chinese food can hit those heights, too, but the fact is, the meal where it does has proven elusive for me. This was a nice meal, but it wasn't that much nicer than going to Ed's Potsticker House. It wasn't better than going to Katy's five times, that's for sure. So while I believe in the theoretical possibility of the fine dining meal in an Asian restaurant (not counting Japanese) that blows my preconceptions away, so far in my real life, all the preconception-blowing has been done at low price points, not high ones.

LAZ wrote:In another thread, there's a discussion about how Chicago doesn't have any seriously high-end Chinese restaurants except Shanghai Terrace. This is why. If Shanghai Terrace cost the same as Chinatown restaurants, people would probably think the food was outstanding.

Mike G wrote:I'd like to believe that Chinese food can hit those heights, too, but the fact is, the meal where it does has proven elusive for me.

LAZ, I disagree. This is not necessarily the case. Granted, I've yet to experience Chinese food in the States on a level that would justify Arun's prices, but I've had meals at upscale places in Hong Kong and Shenzhen that I consider easily worth that, and more (which is a good thing because some of them cost as much as Arun's... and more). If places like those existed in Chicago, I've no doubt that LTH would enthusiastically embrace them. You're right, Mike. It's out there. I just haven't had it in this country yet (though I've not been to Shanghai Terrace). The same may be the case for Thai, I don't know. But I know Arun's isn't it.

OK. I have been to Arun's and to Shanghai Terrace. I have been to Hong Kong. I have been to Lai Wah Heen in Toronto. I have been to any number of inexpensive Thai and Chinese restaurants in Chicago.

What I'm saying is that the difference between Arun's and Shanghai Terrace vs. the inexpensive restaurants is largely what jesteinf called "trappings" -- there's nothing wrong with the food, but for those prices people expect to have a transcendental experience and no amount of napery and service and decor justifies the additional cost. The food is carefully crafted and tasty, as good as or better than most other Asian restaurants, but it's not orders of magnitude better.

I thought the food at Arun's when I was there (some years ago) was excellent, and it included things I had not seen elsewhere, but I chafed under the tasting-menu format and while the other accouterments were nice, they didn't justify the higher price to me. Had I been served the same food at a no-frills spot at a quarter the price, I would have enjoyed it more.

Le Colonial, at a less expensive price point, justifies itself more readily in terms of decor, service and real estate, in its increases over Uptown, and the food does start with higher-end ingredients, such as beef tenderloin in the pho.

I was not the person paying when I went to Shanghai Terrace. I found the food equivalent to meals I had in Hong Kong and the best of what Chinatown offers, with a few frills (such as the tea program), that helped to justify the price -- but not enough to be worth it to me.

Lai Wah Heen in Toronto was better than anything I've had in Chicago or Hong Kong, mainly in terms of the delicacy of presentation, but I was there for only for dim sum.

Oddly, the Asian food I've had in Chicago that most closely duplicated what I've eaten in Hong Kong has been at Lettuce Entertain You restaurants: At the high end, Ben Pao, when it first opened (it was shortly thereafter changed considerably to meet local expectations), and, at a lower price, Big Bowl. In the rejuvenated version since Lettuce bought Big Bowl back from Brinker, much of the food there is more freshly and carefully made from better ingredients than most Chinatown equivalents.

Let me pose a question: If you could have a meal exactly like one you can get at Lao Sze Chuan, but served with all the fine china, linen, formality and pomp you get at Charlie Trotter's, what would you be willing to pay for it?

LAZ wrote:What I'm saying is that the difference between Arun's and Shanghai Terrace vs. the inexpensive restaurants is largely what jesteinf called "trappings" -- there's nothing wrong with the food, but for those prices people expect to have a transcendental experience and no amount of napery and service and decor justifies the additional cost. The food is carefully crafted and tasty, as good as or better than most other Asian restaurants, but it's not orders of magnitude better.

...

I found the food equivalent to meals I had in Hong Kong and the best of what Chinatown offers, with a few frills (such as the tea program), that helped to justify the price -- but not enough to be worth it to me.

...

Let me pose a question: If you could have a meal exactly like one you can get at Lao Sze Chuan, but served with all the fine china, linen, formality and pomp you get at Charlie Trotter's, what would you be willing to pay for it?

No, no, I understand. The point I was making is that I disagree with the contention that this is why there are so few upscale Chinese places, because I disagree with the assertion that the best Chinatown has to offer is anywhere near the upscale stuff in China. It isn't just the trappings. As much as I adore Lao Sze Chuan, there's a vast gap in the actual quality of the dishes between the very best meal I've ever eaten at Lao Sze Chuan and many, many of the meals I've had at some upscale restaurants in China. And if such places existed in Chicago, I would absolutely pay that premium.

I don't consider Arun's a poor value because the only difference between Spoon and upscale Thai is the trappings, I consider Arun's a poor value because the only difference between Spoon and Arun's is the trappings. Whether it's possible to have substantially better Thai food at a higher price point, I don't know. I've never had it. I'm just saying that, with Chinese at least, it is possible to have substantially better* food at a higher price point, because I've had it, and if I took three or four of the best upscale places I've been to in Hong Kong and Shenzhen and transplanted them to Chicago, I've no doubt that the LTH community would feel very differently about them than they do about Arun's. That's where we appear to disagree.

* - Not better -- that's not what I mean -- just different. Some of the amazing dishes I've had in China aren't inherently better than the humble bowl of noodles, just unattainable at a Chinatown price point, executed at a vastly different level and worth every penny.

Let me pose a question: If you could have a meal exactly like one you can get at Lao Sze Chuan, but served with all the fine china, linen, formality and pomp you get at Charlie Trotter's, what would you be willing to pay for it?

But I'd want something other than cubed chicken in a sweet-spicy coating. Chicken crack is a wonderful dish but I don't eat at a fancy place to eat chicken. (Okay, maybe poulet bresse.) Part of what I expect at such places is not only finesse but high-end, unusual ingredients or dishes-- fish I never heard of, elaborate preparations, a noted chef's creativity, whatever. So it's not just a matter of, what would the same dish be worth on nicer china, because I wouldn't order that dish there, any more than I'd order pepperoni thin crust at Spiaggia.

To me, and given that this thread is not exactly tabula rasa, I have said before, the difference or the the ceiling I suppose with so much "ethnic" food is the quality of raw ingredients. A few weeks ago, I cooked the most amazing, sweet baby bok choy from Farmer Vicki's Genesis Growers. I've never had baby bok choy close to that in a Chicago Asian restaurant. Moreover, where's the Thai place making their pork neck laab from Guntrhop Farm pork, and the quality of the seafood, well...I know the reasons why the poor quality exists in ethnic restaurants, but it does not mean it has to stay that way.

The other thing, the other obvious thing, is that there is a real model out there, he just happens to be in NYC right now, and that's David Chang.

Dmnkly wrote:I disagree with the assertion that the best Chinatown has to offer is anywhere near the upscale stuff in China.

I'm not asserting that it is. We're more or less agreeing that food as good or slightly better than cheap eats plus fine-dining trappings isn't enough to make anyone here seek such places.

You're probably right that a high-quality, high-end Asian restaurant would appeal to LTHers, for a few dinners, at least. But it would probably vanish just as quickly as Matsumoto and the other kaiseki spots in Chicago have.

Chinese Restaurants Move Downmarket ponders this question, too.

Vital Information wrote:A few weeks ago, I cooked the most amazing, sweet baby bok choy from Farmer Vicki's Genesis Growers. I've never had baby bok choy close to that in a Chicago Asian restaurant. Moreover, where's the Thai place making their pork neck laab from Guntrhop Farm pork

Big Bowl is serving Klug Farms asparagus this spring, along with other locally grown produce. And Midwestern heritage pork from Niman Ranch, as well as antibiotic-free chicken from family farms.

But many LTHers refuse to go there because it's part of a chain.

Actually, I've made the observation before that if you want Chinese food made with higher quality ingredients, go to Big Bowl, P.F. Chang's, Stir Crazy, etc. The problem is, you know what else you'll get-- too much sugar-- and not get-- the authentic funk.

I used to eat Big Bowl a fair amount when it was an easy takeout option at my dot-com job a decade ago, which might have been pre-Brinker, and though I was no doubt less sophisticated then, I was no Chinatown rube and generally liked it; but I really soured on Big Bowl one time when we were at a mall in the burbs and I ordered something calling itself "Thai coconut shrimp" which had obviously never passed within 15 feet of a bottle of fish sauce, but was way sugared up and basically tasted like Pina Colada pez. A seriously, seriously shitty dish, which not even a Thai neophyte could like because it was just gross even on its own terms, let alone as a slander on the name of Thai food.

Mike G wrote:Actually, I've made the observation before that if you want Chinese food made with higher quality ingredients, go to Big Bowl, P.F. Chang's, Stir Crazy, etc. The problem is, you know what else you'll get-- too much sugar-- and not get-- the authentic funk.

I used to eat Big Bowl a fair amount when it was an easy takeout option at my dot-com job a decade ago, which might have been pre-Brinker, and though I was no doubt less sophisticated then, I was no Chinatown rube and generally liked it; but I really soured on Big Bowl one time when we were at a mall in the burbs and I ordered something calling itself "Thai coconut shrimp"

I wouldn't put Big Bowl in anything like the same category as PF Chang and Stir Crazy.

There's no dish like the one you describe on the menu now; I doubt there has been since it was de-Brinkerized. You've apparently missed that in the decade since you've been there -- as mentioned above and in a few other places on this site -- Big Bowl has become basically a different restaurant. Lettuce Entertain You reclaimed it from Brinker International about two years ago and has revamped it considerably since then.

Red-braised short ribs with Chinese radish that I had there as a winter special a few months ago seemed authentically funky to me. And the spicy dishes are seriously spicy.

I admit that they're unlikely to serve pig ear or beef tendon, but I have not tasted better hot and sour soup anywhere.

I wouldn't put Big Bowl in anything like the same category as PF Chang and Stir Crazy.

Really? What's the categorical distinction, as opposed to the quality one that puts them (you say) at the top of the (safe midscale mall pan-Asian concept) category?

Actually, the godawful dish was considerably more recent, because my kids were old enough to be big on noodle dishes. Maybe it's better now. Maybe I should be impressed by LEYE running it again. But if it wasn't lousy when they founded it, they sold it to the people who made it lousy, so I don't see a lot of reason to hurry back again and reward them, even for improving it again. I suspect a large check from Brinker was reward enough....

LAZ,

Had you not noted it here, I never would have suspected Big Bowl of making a commitment to source local foods. The Big Bowl website has a very nice letter "From The Chef" about this very subject, and I am now anxious to get there and re-try the place.

Thanks!
Kennyz

Just remember that even industrial foods are local SOMEWHERE.

GAF wrote:Just remember that even industrial foods are local SOMEWHERE.

For a couple of reasons, I'm not sure I'll take you up on this advice.

For one thing, I don't think it's relevant to the Big Bowl menu changes. LAZ's descriptions and the more-genuine-sounding-than-most letter on the Big Bowl website make me pretty sure that the chef is committed to something more than a hollow marketing gimmick. I'm a notorious cynic, but my gut tells me this doesn't warrant my cynicism. I'll go to Big Bowl soon and see for myself.

My second reason has to do with a more tangential opinion that the term you used - "industrial foods" - is somewhat oxymoronic.

My remark was not about Big Bowl at all, but simply to note that local food does not inherently mean good food. Poor quality food is produced somewhere, just as excellent food is. (Although admitted, in some cases, transport time may affect quality - I realize that in principle).

GAF wrote:...local food does not inherently mean good food.

Some of the Illinois wines I tried last night would serve as good examples of this point. Yuck.

At one point this thread was about Arun's, so - back to that: I walked by yesterday and saw Ed Koch entering with a small entourage. Proof that NYers know squat about thai food.

Just a quick question for the discussion -

One of the reason's I have been eager to dine at Arun's is that I have heard consistently that the tasting menu is readily adapted to the vegetarian, where I am not quite so comfortable with these other great Thai restaurants adeptly adapting to not using fish sauce, etc.? Any comments on this regard?

Yeah, don't eat Thai food if you're a strict v'ian, because Thai food without fish sauce is just stir-fried vegetables.