Vital Information wrote: While Michael Nagrant is a "Pro" in the sense that his work is in Chicago Mag, New City and his blog, he's still a lot closer to one of us (same with Hammond). Put it this way, the current restaurant critic of the NYTimes was a mediocre political reporter. Bruno's background is in housewares. I'm happy lining up behind Nagrant.

I'd also add that MJN is posting to the choir, so to speak...it's not like he went on the 10 o'clock news to make this rant. I dunno, I think food and food writing gripes and pet peeves are as valid a conversation as any other - and being a "pro" doesn't automatically assume you can't begin or partake in those kinds of discussions.

I mean, isn't part of the fun of this forum that "our own" includes the likes of David Hammond, MJN, and others? I don't think we should hold them to different standards...

Louisa Chu wrote:Has anyone here been to Vong Thai Kitchen? I couldn't find a thread. Maybe I missed it.

Once -- a few years ago when just visiting town. It was late and we didn't want a heavy dinner, so we just got a few appetizers (sushi rolls, as I recall; maybe something else). They were fine if not particularly memorable and the waitstaff whose honor is being defended upthread pretty much ignored us after it became clear that's all we'd be ordering.

Mhays wrote:I mean, isn't part of the fun of this forum that "our own" includes the likes of David Hammond, MJN, and others? I don't think we should hold them to different standards...

That's an interesting point. I never consciously planned to hold them to a higher standard, I just realized, at some point, that I do. It's probably not fair, but that's life.

Separately, as for the credibility or influence of the forum in general, I view myself as an amateur (not a pro) and an enthusiast (not a critic). I figure most people who read this forum probably see me as some sort of hyper-obsessed wack-job with little or no credibility whatsoever. And that's fine. The lower the expectations, the more fun it is for me. Now, if some people out there read my stuff, agree with my opinion and start using it to help make choices for themselves, I'm ok with that too, as long as they know where it's coming from.

I think we all have our people with whom we usually agree. And perhaps those folks have some influence on our dining decisions because we feel that we "know" their tastes and can trust them. But for someone to come here, read some random opinion and abide by it without any other consideration, that would be pretty crazy, IMO. I'm sure there are folks out there who are that malleable but I hope that they are few and far-between.

=R=

Louisa Chu wrote:Has anyone here been to Vong Thai Kitchen? I couldn't find a thread. Maybe I missed it.

I went shortly after it opened and found it to be pretty much as MJN described; overpriced middle of the road Ameri-Thai with some theatrics and really nice table ware.

Cathy - thanks so much for checking too.

Steve - did you go nine years ago in 1999 when they opened as Vong's? Or seven years ago in 2001 when they became VTK?

cilantro - are the same servers there now?

So has anyone been there recently for a full meal?

Hi,

Here are three posts that do refer to Vong albeit briefly:

http://www.lthforum.com/bb/viewtopic.ph ... 097#117097

http://www.lthforum.com/bb/viewtopic.php?p=21874#21874

http://www.lthforum.com/bb/viewtopic.php?p=6849#6849

I had searched earlier as Vong Thai forgetting about the earlier name as simply Vong.

Louisa Chu wrote:Has anyone here been to Vong Thai Kitchen? I couldn't find a thread. Maybe I missed it.

I have been to VTK recently. It is what it is which I think most would agree is not even a moderately reasonable facsimilie of anything close to authentically Thai...I read Bruno's piece today and did not get the sense that he was trying to make an apples to apples comparison with any restaurant that holds itself out as "authenticly" Thai. When I read the review I couldnt help but wonder why he would be interested in reviewing what is a really tired restaurant that has not changed at all since it was rebranded from Vong to VTK. I thought he had discovered something new and interesting going on over there that I had clearly missed. Maybe next week he will use his pulpit to awaken the masses to Panda Express

That having been said I found the cuisine at VTK to be completely forgetable, much as it has been on several other occasions when I have visited over the past decade or so.

Louisa Chu wrote:cilantro - are the same servers there now?

That's an excellent question which bears further investigation, though I'm afraid it will not be undertaken by me. I'm much more interested in this promising new chain of bistros founded by Chef Pierre-François Chang.

Louisa Chu wrote:Steve - did you go nine years ago in 1999 when they opened as Vong's? Or seven years ago in 2001 when they became VTK?

I'm talking about the present incarnation of VTK.

Without getting into the merits/demerits of MJN's critique of Pat Bruno, I'd point out that Pauline Kael made her reputation with early reviews lambasting Bosley Crowther of The New York Times and Stanley Kauffman of The New Republic. When she went to work for The New Yorker, the decorous William Shawn insisted she lay off using other critics as punching bags to make her points, but before then, she did. And she produced some of her most vigorous and invigorating writing in that earlier period. You sensed it came not out of personal animus but out of passion for the movies she loved that weren't getting sufficient praise in the "mainstream media," and passionate hate for some of the movies that were. And also a passionate belief that people deserved to read better film criticism than they were getting.

Many of these reviews are compiled in her first collections, I Lost It At The Movies and Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. These put her on the map, establishing her as America's most interesting (and ultimately influential) movie critic. I never sensed there was anything manipulative or exploitive in her using other critics as foils, as in, "this will get me some attention, and on to better gigs"; rather, it was as if she couldn't help herself, she was just that angry. And just that in love with the movies as an art form in need of protection. Anyway, there's one example that goes to show (I would argue) that it's not always unseemly for professionals to critique other professionals.

To me, the one of the most interesting aspects of this thread is whether readers should have gotten a review of Spoon Thai, TAC, etc, rather than a so-called non-authentic, celebrity chef, downtown imitation of a Thai restaurant. (To be blunt.)

Wouldn't a better column have put VTK in the context of Chicago's Thai restaurants? VTK isn't trying to be Spoon Thai, and that isn't necessarily a bad thing. A more useful review, to me at least, would have tried to explain the difference.

A griping foodie complaining about a critic? That's fine in my book. But another pro? It just seems self-indulgent and self-serving to me. I figure that through skilled writing the reader ultimately finds the great writers. I certainly don't need a writer to help me decide who can and who cannot write.

Wow. I've seen and occasionally commented here and elsewhere against the faux argument that ONLY a chef/musician/artist/etc. is qualified to critique another chef's/musician's/artist's/etc.'s work; but to say that it's self indulgent for ANY pro to critique another pro's work is swinging the pendulum way too far in the other direction. That would wipe out some mighty fine critical stuff. An example is given above by riddlemay, but that could be multiplied considerably; keeping my focus on the journalism tribe ( a traditionally irascible and contrary bunch), let me add just one name to the counterargument: A.J. Liebling, one of the finest journalists of his time and the paramount critic of journalism in his day and perhaps the last century.

jbw wrote:

A griping foodie complaining about a critic? That's fine in my book. But another pro? It just seems self-indulgent and self-serving to me. I figure that through skilled writing the reader ultimately finds the great writers. I certainly don't need a writer to help me decide who can and who cannot write.

Wow. I've seen and occasionally commented here and elsewhere against the faux argument that ONLY a chef/musician/artist/etc. is qualified to critique another chef's/musician's/artist's/etc.'s work; but to say that it's self indulgent for ANY pro to critique another pro's work is swinging the pendulum way too far in the other direction. That would wipe out some mighty fine critical stuff. An example is given above by riddlemay, but that could be multiplied considerably; keeping my focus on the journalism tribe ( a traditionally irascible and contrary bunch), let me add just one name to the counterargument: A.J. Liebling, one of the finest journalists of his time and the paramount critic of journalism in his day and perhaps the last century.

Perhaps I should have added "in this context." But you're right in that Riddlemay does make some good points above. Still, I'm not arguing about right or wrong here. I'm just describing how the post/column made me feel. I hope the feedback I provided was valuable to MJN on some level, even if he ultimately decides to dismiss it entirely.

=R=

This has turned in to a sweet thread.

First an interesting fact, I just found out Vong definitely won't be visiting VTK, because Jean-Georges apparently sold his piece back to Lettuce when they wanted to pursue more of a Big Bowl style concept....henceforth why the name also went from Vong's Thai Kitchen to VTK, as part of the exit package.

Now I may have missed that fact as Bruno did, since in my response to his review I assumed it was still "Vong", but I'm curious, doesn't the Sun Times have copy editors and fact checkers? You'd think they'd pick that up, or what are they spending all those millions on ?(Aside from Conrad Black's vacations)

I like the point about Pauline Kael, and I have to say that's truly where my heart was. I'm just rediculously passionate about food. This really isn't a job for me as much as it's a mission of sorts.

I don't know how people feel about Jim DeRogatis or Roger Ebert or John Kass, but my take is that in an industry and city which has increasingly silenced the individual voice of critics and writers in favor of a bland universal editorial voice, these guys are a bloody champagne supernova in the pitch-black sky. Knowledge, passion, a relentless pursuit for relevance and an individual voice persist in these guys. I just want that for food.

I think food coverage gets shortchanged, because, despite the rising interest about it, food is still not a pop cultural phenomenon, a revenue generator, or percieved as a public work that needs a serious watchdog in the the way music, sports, politics and movies are.

Sure there's the blip like Ratatouille, but of the millions who saw the movie, probably less than 10% know who Thomas Keller is or that he was the primary chef consultant on the movie. Half my friends, even those who love to cook and eat don't know who Mario Batali is...maybe two of them know who Michael Pollan is.

This second class citizen status makes it easy for those who believe the '50's housewife journalistic aesthetic of quick and easy meals or laundry list navel gazing decor deconstructing critical reviews espousing the "beauty of a glistening oyster" while ignoring cultural context, are still relevant approaches. Anton Ego, the uber-snotty monster reviewer protaganist in Ratatouille is actually pretty spot on regarding many critics.

No ones telling these folks they're wrong, partially because no one's reading. Executives and managers at the big dailies don't step in pressing for change, because the food sections are doing "good enough". Or, they're not doing well enough, so execs step in and slash budgets further hampering the rise of good food coverage.

I've said it before, how does the Trib justify paying millions to a slightly above average temperamental pitcher like Carlos Zambrano when it won't even pay a couple thousand to cover an anniversary dinner at Charlie Trotter's? They do it, because even with a sketchy Zambrano, the Cub's are making money hand over fist.

The way I see it, the hundred year old writings of MFK Fisher, because she regards food as a medium for examining not only the food chain, but also the sociological, anthropological, historical, and cultural aspects of life are probably more relevant than most of today's food journalism.

This is why I'm trying to be a watchdog.

I might temper my voice or be more focused on how I pursue this role because of some of things I've learned from this thread, but I still reserve the right to be wry where there's a whole lot of truth in the wryness.

There's definitely a line though. Anthony Bourdain may be loudmouthed and abrasive, but he has standards. He's generally not mean spirited or an ambush artist. If he were, public opinion would turn on him in the way it turned on Don Imus when he said what he said about that women's basketball team. Likewise, Bourdain goes after big targets folks like Rachael Ray, Food Network and Emeril because they can handle it. He doesn't usually rip on some diner owner living on razor thin margins in a small town.

I've been watching this thread partly-bewildered at some of the takes vis a vis what constitutes approved criticism. Your post immediately-above rocks; even moreso than the post that generated this whole shebang. Don't tone it down.

I enjoyed reading this thread. I thought there were great points made on both sides.

I can't help thinking of my experience with reading book reviews and literary discussions on the web. At first I was taken aback by how many bloggers-- whether outsiders or people with considerable inside credentials-- spent time picking apart things like the New York Times' book review policy, or indeed specific reviewers. Now it seems to me is if such criticism is really natural. Who follows the publishing world and isn't dissatisfied by the way attention is allocated in these powerful publications? Such dissatisfaction is probably a big part of the reason why some people blog and while it may sound negative, it leads to something very constructive.

MJN wrote: ...slightly above average temperamental pitcher ....even with a sketchy Zambrano, the Cub's are making money hand over fist..

ZAMBRANO W/L & ERA for the past 5 seasons

YEAR W L ERA
2003 13 11 3.11
2004 16 8 2.75
2005 14 6 3.26
2006 16 7 3.41
2007 18 13 3.95

Bad analogy--Although I agree Zambrana is tempermental

Michael - when's the last time you were at VTK? What did you have?

Michael wrote: "I've said it before, how does the Trib justify paying millions to a slightly above average temperamental pitcher like Carlos Zambrano when it won't even pay a couple thousand to cover an anniversary dinner at Charlie Trotter's? They do it, because even with a sketchy Zambrano, the Cub's are making money hand over fist."

True, the Tribune did not pay $5,000 for this meal at Trotter's, which was my meal. But they did pay the actual cost of the meal and I was ordered to pay in advance so the money was delivered before the meal. Admittedly, what we paid was far less than the ticket price but I I can tell you, wearing a tuxedo in 90-plus heat and humidity and busy texting on my cellphone at every course, I certainly felt like I was paying physically and mentally for the remainder.

Well I’m one of those guys who doesn’t believe stats matter unless they come in a clutch (or you’re Dan Marino), and Zambrano has yet to win a post-season game. Plus he’s clubhouse poison and turned on the fans last year. That being said, I still granted him above average status because as you point out, his regular season record justifies that.

Louisa, I ate there probably a year and a half ago…what I remember most vividly (notably as does Bruno) is the overcooked calamari. The reason I remember is that overcooked calamari is such a restaurant cliché, you’re blown away that it happens as often as it does. You’d think people would be more careful. Panang Curry had a run of the mill runny peanut buttery quality with a touch of spice, but nothing in comparison to my standard bearer, Nathan’s Noodles in Elmhurst, which bursts with basil and thai chilis at half the price. I was actually pleased by the Tom Yum soup which had a balanced citrus, fish sauce, chili pop.

I didn’t mean to imply in any way that the Trib did something unethical with the Trotter dinner, just that I think their priorities are a little out of whack in terms of budgets. Based on our conversations, Bill, I very much respect your take on ethics and think it’s one of the best stances in town.

Louisa Chu wrote:Michael - when's the last time you were at VTK? What did you have?

Louisa, I think that's somewhat beside the point. It's not so much if VTK is good or not; the question is, given the limited space the Sun Times has each week, why VTK instead of all the more special Thai places. Sure, there are arguments that can be made for reviewing VTK, not the least, it may be the place most likely visited by the Sun Time's readers. The flip side however is would not the Sun Times readers be more served by finding and reporting on the more interesting places. VTK can be a great place. I don't think that diminishes MJN's points.

No worries, Michael. I just wanted to make sure what happened was clear to anyone reading the thread. Thank you also for the good words. Much appreciated.
Best,
Bill

First an interesting fact, I just found out Vong definitely won't be visiting VTK, because Jean-Georges apparently sold his piece back to Lettuce when they wanted to pursue more of a Big Bowl style concept....henceforth why the name also went from Vong's Thai Kitchen to VTK, as part of the exit package.

Now I may have missed that fact as Bruno did, since in my response to his review I assumed it was still "Vong", but I'm curious, doesn't the Sun Times have copy editors and fact checkers? You'd think they'd pick that up, or what are they spending all those millions on ?(Aside from Conrad Black's vacations)

That's curious, in that on the LEYE website, Vong's Thai Kitchen is referred to as "Vong's Thai Kitchen." The only name change I'm aware of was some years ago, when they dropped the "Vong" name, as well as the prices, which were in the Arun's league.



And I'm sure Jean-Georges is still making a buck off this, too

stevez wrote:

Louisa Chu wrote:Has anyone here been to Vong Thai Kitchen? I couldn't find a thread. Maybe I missed it.

I went shortly after it opened and found it to be pretty much as MJN described; overpriced middle of the road Ameri-Thai with some theatrics and really nice table ware.

We ate at VTK tonight because we didn't feel like driving to my wife's favorite Elephant Thai from Streeterville due to the miserable weather, and because Open Table surprisingly had an open slot at 7:00. Unfortunately, there's a reason. Our experience pretty much confirmed the image of VTK here as mediocre, overpriced Thai for people thinking they're eating on the edge. And in particular, the server lived up to the stereotype of the college grad doing their on-the-job audition for their patrons.

Our waitress started by theatrically summarizing the menu for us on autopilot, even after we told her we had been to the restaurant many times (most recently late last summer). She was enthusiastically telling us that the menu had changed significantly, which was wrong except for the four course chef's "tasting menu", which consisted entirely of items already listed on the menu like beef tenderloin with noodles! Hardly something that could be described as "special".

Having a hungry, cranky 10-year-old son in tow, we asked for our food to come out when ready, rather than holding an entire course til all three of our dishes were ready. Unfortunately, our waitress was too busy being proud of her thespian ability to listen: we had our appetizers and entrees delivered at a single time, 40 minutes later.

As to the food, I will say that my red curry pot stickers were spicy, but the heat overhelmed the thin chicken, water chestnut, and red pepper filling. It was impossible to tell the ingredients apart. My steak red curry was underwhelming compared to the same dish last summer: conversely offering little heat, but dominated by a bland coconut-based sauce floating a few rare pieces of nearly raw beef that was unseared and surrounded by a mountain of soggy white jasmine rice.

Meanwhile, my wife's chicken pad thai had virtually no vegetables, a few pieces of bite-sized chicken and an abundance of greasy noodles. A saving grace of dinner was that Ari (the 10-year-old) was satisfied with his chicken satay, and to be fair, my wife's shrimp tom yum was reported to be tasty (but could have used a few more mushrooms). It was almost enough to almost make us reconsider doing dessert except that we wanted to leave room for hitting Chinatown's bakeries for the Chinese New Year.

Except those saving graces were wiped from our minds by the waitress handing us a bill for the wrong party while we were waiting the 15 minutes for our vanilla been and green tropical teapots. It was only a mere $28 off, and gave us credit for four desserts (we wish!), but at least had the tea right. When my wife asked for the manager, she did come out, but went into the most scripted, robotic apology I've heard outside of airline call centers. It was literally "we're sorry, we made a mistake, we do make mistakes, we're sorry".

I will say that getting our appetizers comped was a tasteful act of good will, but having eaten at Elephant Thai, Manny's Thai, and Spoon in the last year, we could have gotten better service and more challenging food for a fraction of the time and the $60 (after a $12 comp) that we paid at VTK.

The moral of the story is that you should follow through on your first impulse. Now I have to preserve marital bliss and go tomorrow night to Elephant Thai

sundevilpeg wrote:

First an interesting fact, I just found out Vong definitely won't be visiting VTK, because Jean-Georges apparently sold his piece back to Lettuce when they wanted to pursue more of a Big Bowl style concept....henceforth why the name also went from Vong's Thai Kitchen to VTK, as part of the exit package.

Now I may have missed that fact as Bruno did, since in my response to his review I assumed it was still "Vong", but I'm curious, doesn't the Sun Times have copy editors and fact checkers? You'd think they'd pick that up, or what are they spending all those millions on ?(Aside from Conrad Black's vacations)

That's curious, in that on the LEYE website, Vong's Thai Kitchen is referred to as "Vong's Thai Kitchen." The only name change I'm aware of was some years ago, when they dropped the "Vong" name, as well as the prices, which were in the Arun's league.



And I'm sure Jean-Georges is still making a buck off this, too

even Jean-George's own website includes Vong's Thai Kitchen. MJN, are your copy editors and fact checkers sure about this claim that he's completely out of the deal?

Kennyz wrote:MJN, are your copy editors and fact checkers sure about this claim that he's completely out of the deal?

Part of what makes interactive, discursive media like this powerful, is that we all act as each other's fact checkers. I do hold traditional media to a higher standard of accuracy.

I'm not sure what the story is on ownership of VTK.

Aaron Deacon wrote:

Kennyz wrote:MJN, are your copy editors and fact checkers sure about this claim that he's completely out of the deal?

Part of what makes interactive, discursive media like this powerful, is that we all act as each other's fact checkers. I do hold traditional media to a higher standard of accuracy.

I'm not sure what the story is on ownership of VTK.

Well, there's no need to worry about the peripheral details like the facts when the opinions are so bold and spicy.

=R=

i've throughly enjoyed this thread and very much liked the OP's first rant post, the review of bruno's review.

what i think we're seeing here is indicative of the sort of "changing of the guard" that is happening wrt food journalism.

bruno, vittel and their ilk are very much old guard food writers. in the 20+ years that they've been writing about food in chicago, so much has changed. the average person is way more knowledgeable about food, the restaurant scene has broadened tremendously, and, of course, the internet and the rise of the "opinions are like assholes" review sites like yelp and metromix, and bloggers like the original poster.

as someone who works in the industry, and has had my share of restaurants i've worked at reviewed by the "big boys" at the trib, sun-times, and chicago magazine, i am convinced that bloggers like MJN are actually *more* knowledgable than guys like bruno.

it stems from passion. writing about food for 20+ years dulls one's passion for it. people that blog about food or are heavily participating in sites like this one are more passionate, and will dedicate more time and energy into doing research, making multiple visits, asking questions, trying other restaurants, etc. it's just that simple.

while i do believe that the original poster makes a good point, that big reviewers like bruno do influence people's opinions on a large scale, i'm not sure that their influence isn't fairly diminished from what it was maybe eight years ago.

there are just so many sources now, and more people have become savvy enough to take big reviewers opinions with a healthy dose of salt grains, that i think these guys are less and less relevant as the years pile up.

Time Out just did an issue discussing the various opinion sites and blogs and i think, out of any print publication, they're an excellent example of 'doing the work' and writing with passion. i also know that some posters here write for them.

it's a very interesting topic and i think that it points to the fact that we're at somewhat of a crossroads wrt to food writing/reviews at this moment in time.

thanks, MJN, for starting the topic that lead to such an interesting discussion, and keep writing in the style of your OP. i enjoyed it thoroughly and agreed.

elakin wrote:what i think we're seeing here is indicative of the sort of "changing of the guard" that is happening wrt food journalism.

as someone who works in the industry, and has had my share of restaurants i've worked at reviewed by the "big boys" at the trib, sun-times, and chicago magazine, i am convinced that bloggers like MJN are actually *more* knowledgable than guys like bruno.

it stems from passion. writing about food for 20+ years dulls one's passion for it. people that blog about food or are heavily participating in sites like this one are more passionate, and will dedicate more time and energy into doing research, making multiple visits, asking questions, trying other restaurants, etc. it's just that simple.

There's a lot of truth to what you say, but I believe I've detected a certain knee-jerk animosity toward "established" critics like Vettel et al. It's almost as though those of us to spend much time talking chow on the internet hold these older school critics in something like barely concealed contempt. Not that these critics don't deserve some criticism, but it sometimes seems that if you write for pulp paper-based media, you are, ipso facto, understood to be uninformed...or at least not nearly as informed as those of us who post electronically. As writers in a relatively "young" media, we may be displaying something akin to the arrogance of youth.

David "No spring chicken" Hammond

ronnie_suburban wrote:Well, there's no need to worry about the peripheral details like the facts when the opinions are so bold and spicy.

=R=

"Ronald Suburban, get in here this minute. Just who do you think you are, Mr. Know-It-All, with your fancy pants, smart-alecky words? If you can't say something nice...."

Mama Gypsy Boy
(whose influence on her own son was, apparently, somewhat less than decisive)