Phil Vettel, Kimchee Tacos (and thoughts on Courtright's)

Stars - Courtright’s Restaurant – Willow Springs, IL

The fundamental problem that Courtright’s faces can be summarized in two words: Phil Vettel. Courtright’s is a beautifully situated restaurant with an extremely lovely scenic background, located in Chicago’s southwest suburb, Willow Springs, a community not know for the quality of its culinary adventures.



Phil Vettel, in contrast, is the long-time restaurant critic of the Chicago Tribune. He has been at his tables since 1989, which should be punishment enough. He is not a bad critic, just a generous one. Phil Vettel is a man as promiscuous with his stars, as Tiger Woods is with his starlets. Indeed, if he would only lay off the caffeine while typing, taking most reviews down a notch or two, he is generally close to the mark.

On June 10, 2010, Vettel stunned culinary Chicagoland by awarding Courtright’s four stars, his highest rating. While Vettel has been generous with three stars, he has maintained some discipline with the quadra-fecta. Only six other restaurants in Chicago have received this notice in the past decade: Alinea, Everest, Spiaggia, L20, Avenues, and Les Nomades. A case can be made for all six (although I have some doubts about Les Nomades and L20). Courtright’s is in pretty exalted company. Among the restaurants that did not make the cut were Trotters, Tru, Blackbird, and Topolobampo.

Dishes at Courtright’s are described as dazzling and extraordinary. Such bubbly euphoria calls for some skepticism and for a visit. And so my wife and I made the hour-long drive to Willow Springs on a recent Friday, awaiting their special tasting menu. Courtright’s Friday tasting menu is an homage – although a somewhat wan one – to Iron Chef. Chef Jerome Bacle, formerly with Le Bec Fin – a favored restaurant of mine in Philadelphia – selects an ingredient and them constructs a three-course menu around it (with a few extras) for a mere $35 (the regular three course menu is $55, and there is a five-course tasting menu for $75). On the night we dined, the ingredient du jour was melon, but it has been apricot and jicama and kiwi.

Perhaps you can imagine the problem with this strategy. The special menu is a cross between a loss leader and the chef’s aesthetic vision. Which is it? At this price point, the dishes seemed far from luxe, and being served only once, the problems of the dish were never worked through. While the meal was not without its pleasures, the meal that I was served was not four-star quality, the interior décor is not stunning, and the service, as even Vettel admits, was more sincere than flawless.

So, what’s up? The answer, apparently, is deer (Vettel’s writerly theme du jour). Not venison, but Thumper. Vettel is taken by Courtright’s setting, seduced by the woods. I agree that the garden is splendid. But those of us who live within hailing distance of the forest preserves have our eight p.m. deer, and I believe with a critic’s eye that my wife’ cookery can give Chef Bacle a run for his money. Let me invite Phil to dinner, where not only can he watch our twilight deer, but as soon as Chicago’s gun ban is lifted, he can shoot it as well. Bambi on the barbie.

While the view out of the picture window is surely becoming, the view from within is rather ordinary. Vettel describes it as spotless, which is something less than inspiring, but is reasonably accurate. The service, as noted, is good-spirited. The staff seemed uncertain about when to remove our plates, I was served bread when my wife was away from the table and the server never returned until we requested, and the waitress stepped on my shoes once or twice. Vettel admits he can’t call it flawless (apparently wine was spilled on his tablecloth), but that should be a hint when the comparison is with the service pros.

Then there was the food. If the special menu is the height of perfection (Bacle’s “creative best”) it is a good-size prairie hillock. While I enjoyed the meal for the most part, I was never stunned. The photos reveal a chef who needs a greater attention to plating or a more modest critic. Of the dishes the most assured was the amuse: a combination of balsamic vinegar, fried leeks, edamame, and corn. It was a most pleasant summery mix.

The appetizer was a Watermelon, Crab, and Avocado Salad with Mango Dressing. The dollop of avocado was a happy mixture of mashed and pureed green. It was matched on the other side of the dish with a mix of crab and watermelon. This was a good watermelon, but not a watermelon at its amazing peak; good crab, but not great crab. The smear of mango didn’t add to the plate’s curb appeal.



Our main course was Grilled Shrimp with Wrapped Prosciutto, Honeydew and Ricotta, Roasted Pineapple, Basmati Rice, and Coconut Basil Sauce. I endorse the coconut basil sauce and the shrimp were fine, but the ricotta cut the tang of the honeydew. It was an unfortunate match that perhaps would have been altered on a second night. The presentation on the plate was far less interesting than the rocks and flowers. The touches that one expects in haute dining are missing at this sturdy local spot.



Dessert was quite tasty with the mix of cantaloupe and port wine in a summer pudding. Again the chef is somewhat done in by his plating. No amount of dots and spots can make up for a brown glob at the center of the plate, however enjoyable that glob might be.



It is surely true that had it not been for the Tribune’s review I would not have trekked to Willow Springs. But had I been inveighed to visit through other means, I would not have been attempting to justify the stars.

Ultimately Courtright’s is a fine suburban restaurant with a most comforting view. It deserves patronage, and Chef Bacle is to be commended for working within the constraints of stressed customer budgets. With any restaurant, expectations are key, and it does no good to imagine that this can match the suburban trio of Tallgrass, Vie, and Carlos. So, Chef Bacle, you deserve praise, but remember that your enthusiastic friends can be as dangerous as those who turn their backs.

Courtright’s Restaurant
8989 Archer Avenue
Willow Springs, IL 60480
708-839-8000
http://www.courtrights.com

Vealcheeks

It needed to be done and you did it very well.



Thank you for taking one for the team.

You paint a convincing picture of a place that I, like just about everyone else, had a hard time accepting as deserving of four stars (even though I, like just about everyone else, had never been there). I will say this: many of Vettel's four-star places (specifically Alinea, Spiggia, Everest) are very predictably placed in this echelon: I find Vettel's elevation of this place to be intriguing and now want to try it for myself.

Like Comrade Gebert, I'm grateful for this write-up; thx GAF.

I just looked to see when, if ever, Vettel had reviewed Vie and what he gave it, since I'm firmly of the opinion that if there would ever be a 4-star in a suburb starting with W and ending with Springs, Vie would be it.

He gave it three stars.

In August 2005.

Which was probably right then. But that gives you some idea of what we're talking about here with the opinions of the one critic of the one paper covering the city of 8 million-- a restaurant whose menu changes as often as weekly through the seasons is saddled with a review which is approximately 500 Green City Markets old.

Where Courtright's will enjoy its four-star status well into the second or third decade of the 21st century, I'm sure.

GAF,

This was a really fun read. I cannot wait for your comments on June.

I now go to bed with visions of Bambi on the barbie.

Regards,

So there are stars, and then there are Stars; the former are used casually on Yelp and Tripadvisor and Google Video, and the latter occupy some rarefied category I don't regularly heed. Interestingly, just as the internet seems headed towards a simple binary "like/dislike" system, and while I myself crave narratives and details (which is what LTH is all about), certain publications are cleaving to the Star idea all the more strongly, and using their narratives as much to justify the rating as to convey the relevant experience. So I never travel with Michelin in hand and routinely roll my eyes at the Trib. I think this review of the local dining situation on Maui is about as useful and simply incisive as I'll need for my return visit (my thanks to Jeff).

What I can tell you is that the concepts of The Three Star Restaurant (Michelin) and The Four Star Restaurant (Vettel and ilk) operate as a strong reminder that there are lots of people who pick up on service, tableware, zip code, setting, wines, and ambiance to a degree that does not enter my framework for enjoying a meal. I acknowledge those elements; they sometimes frustrate or delight me, but I can't build a fully communicable experience out of them.

Trying to put myself in the mindset of the Star reviewers, I do not believe Vie approaches the requisite mystic box of The Four Star; if on my own two visits the service was clearly Amateur Hour - I don't imagine bored teenage hostesses literally filing their nails at the front desk of a Michelin Three Star - it is no surprise that those that rate in Stars wouldn't have it at the pinnacle. But I do love the food and think you should go there.

By the same token, from both Phil and GAF's reviews, I can conceive of Courtright's doing these other elements exactly right amid a world of increasingly good and innovative mid-tier dining that doesn't pay so much attention anymore. In exactly the right mood and occasion, I will find my way to Courtright's. In the meantime, I will relish Vie while being seated late, and Moto for the circuses as much as the bread, and Mado with my t-shirt-clad server excitedly poking my terrine [not code], and several tall glasses of sweet tea at CJ's, and not worry about the Stars.

I enjoyed GAF's post too, though it reinforces how useless star ratings are. Remove the effete comparisons of Courtright's to some foregone idea about what "4 Stars" mean, and you're left with a post that describes a very good restaurant. You're also left with a reminder about how being a food blogger or serious LTH poster can make it hard to enjoy dinner.

GAF wrote:If the special menu is the height of perfection (Bacle’s “creative best”) it is a good-size prairie hillock.

GAF wrote:Courtright’s Friday tasting menu ...for a mere $35 (the regular three course menu is $55, and there is a five-course tasting menu for $75)

Why would one think that the $35 3-course special, which is clearly designed to help Courtright's appeal to a set of people who might not otherwise dine there, is the chef's "creative best"? Did the server or the menu describe it that way? If so, we have another example of lending false credence to ratings and opinions that discerning people should plainly see as meaningless. If not, I wonder why the term was used in quotation marks.

What I can tell you is that the concepts of The Three Star Restaurant (Michelin) and The Four Star Restaurant (Vettel and ilk) operate as a strong reminder that there are lots of people who pick up on service, tableware, zip code, setting, wines, and ambiance to a degree that does not enter my framework for enjoying a meal. I acknowledge those elements; they sometimes frustrate or delight me, but I can't build a fully communicable experience out of them.

If the four-star has to be a certain type of place with a certain prescribed set of amenities (Michelin restaurants know that adding a heliport will help them get that crucial third star on a three-star system; I'm fairly certain that the presence of a heliport has never enhanced my dinner, ever) then yes, Vie is not a four-star, by choice (as Son of Blackbird) and by the reality of the likely workforce in a burb. But at a certain point, if there's a checklist, then Vettel's list of four stars becomes the six places he approves of out of the eight places trying to be that kind of place. In any case, it certainly has little enough to do with what I like or value, either.

Mike, who had brisket at L.C.'s in Kansas City Friday before last for lunch, and brisket at the Ritz-Carlton in St. Louis for dinner, and is in no doubt about which one was four star

Kennyz wrote:Why would one think that the $35 3-course special, which is clearly designed to help Courtright's appeal to a set of people who might not otherwise dine there, is the chef's "creative best"? Did the server or the menu describe it that way? If so, we have another example of lending false credence to ratings and opinions that discerning people should plainly see as meaningless. If not, I wonder why the term was used in quotation marks.

The quotation comes from Vettel, who writes: "Paradoxically, the least-expensive prix fixe might be the way to experience Bacle at his creative best. Each Friday, Bacle fashions a three-course menu around a single ingredient for $35. It's like a solitaire version of "Iron Chef," often with extraordinary results."

While the restaurant did not describe the prix fixe as the chef's creative best, the fact that it is grounded on the Iron Chef with the creativity that this implies, suggests that it is more that the cheapest items on the menu, but rather a set of linked dishes that the chef prepared specially. It should be evident from my review that I am unable to judge the "regular" dishes that might be extraordinary - or not. Since my wife and I both ordered the special menu, I am limited to judging the few dishes that we tasted, but it is my hope that collectively we will produce an adequate review of Courtright's, even if one review does not to it justice.

it's been 2or 3 years sence i been here .
but did enjoy it all .
will have to go again

GAF wrote:Only six other restaurants in Chicago have received this notice in the past decade: Alinea, Everest, Spiaggia, L20, Avenues, and Les Nomades. A case can be made for all six (although I have some doubts about Les Nomades and L20). Courtright’s is in pretty exalted company. Among the restaurants that did not make the cut were Trotters, Tru, Blackbird, and Topolobampo.

I originally read this and presumed these four were reviewed and given fewer than four stars. I misunderstood. Trotters and Tru were not reviewed at all in the last decade, but received four stars in their most recent reviews:

Charlie Trotter four star review from 2000.

Tru four star review from 1999.

Blackbird three star review from 1998.

I can't find Vettel's review of Topolobampo, but I understand it was 3.5 stars.

Anyways, thanks for the review, GAF.

The misunderstanding was mine (or the Trib's). I didn't check to see when the last reviews of Trotters and Tru were. I just relied on the Trib saying that only 6 other restaurants had received four stars in the last decade. It would seem that major restaurants should be reviewed once a decade. With Rick Tramonto leaving Tru, it would be important to see what is happening there (although four stars might have been half-a-star too generous even in 1999).

I'm not a fan of Vettel (he pales compared to his peers in New York or L.A.) as I find his writing merely discriptive and lacking any passion for the topic. While he's parsimonious in awarding four stars, he gives two or three stars to just about every other restaurant in town. Frankly, a lot of the places that he's awarded two stars should get one star and a some three star places are only worthy of two. I've only seen him give a one star rating once or twice and has never given a no-star review in recent memory. The New York Times' reviewers apparently use one-star as the starting point, while Vettel seems to use three stars as his.

ld111134 wrote:I'm not a fan of Vettel (he pales compared to his peers in New York or L.A.) as I find his writing merely discriptive and lacking any passion for the topic. While he's parsimonious in awarding four stars, he gives two or three stars to just about every other restaurant in town. Frankly, a lot of the places that he's awarded two stars should get one star and a some three star places are only worthy of two. I've only seen him give a one star rating once or twice and has never given a no-star review in recent memory. The New York Times' reviewers apparently use one-star as the starting point, while Vettel seems to use three stars as his.

While I agree Vettel is generous in many of his reviews, is he truly that far off the mark? Who is he trying to appeal to? There are the 5% hardcore foodies out there who seek absolute perfection and will voice their opinion about anything less. Then there is the majority of food lovers/diners who are looking for a nice evening out and to be able to enjoy a great meal. Have I visited his newest 4 star restaurant, no. Would I enjoy it as much as Vettel? Maybe. We on this forum are the extreme food lovers and are probably in the minority when it comes to Mr. Vettel's readers.

Then again I could be wrong

HungryZ wrote:While I agree Vettel is generous in many of his reviews, is he truly that far off the mark? Who is he trying to appeal to? There are the 5% hardcore foodies out there who seek absolute perfection and will voice their opinion about anything less. Then there is the majority of food lovers/diners who are looking for a nice evening out and to be able to enjoy a great meal. Have I visited his newest 4 star restaurant, no. Would I enjoy it as much as Vettel? Maybe. We on this forum are the extreme food lovers and are probably in the minority when it comes to Mr. Vettel's readers.

Then again I could be wrong

I don't think it's simply a matter of Vettel catering to a middlebrow, non-foodie audience. Vettel is bad when compared other restaurant critics in Chicago (Heather Shouse and David Tamarkin at Time Out Chicago, Dennis Ray Wheaton and Jeff Ruby of Chicago magazine, David Hammond at the Chicago Reader and even Vettel's colleague at the Tribune Kevin Pang). Furthermore, the quality of other criticism elsewhere in the Tribune in quite high (Michael Phillips on film, Chris Jones on Theatre, Blair Kamin on architecture, Greg Kot on pop music, John van Rhein on classical music, Howard Reich on jazz - whether you agree with them or not, they are all knowledgeable and passionate about their subjects, qualities that Vettel sorely lacks).

ld111134 wrote:

HungryZ wrote:While I agree Vettel is generous in many of his reviews, is he truly that far off the mark? Who is he trying to appeal to? There are the 5% hardcore foodies out there who seek absolute perfection and will voice their opinion about anything less. Then there is the majority of food lovers/diners who are looking for a nice evening out and to be able to enjoy a great meal. Have I visited his newest 4 star restaurant, no. Would I enjoy it as much as Vettel? Maybe. We on this forum are the extreme food lovers and are probably in the minority when it comes to Mr. Vettel's readers.

Then again I could be wrong

I don't think it's simply a matter of Vettel catering to a middlebrow, non-foodie audience. Vettel is bad when compared other restaurant critics in Chicago (Heather Shouse and David Tamarkin at Time Out Chicago, Dennis Ray Wheaton and Jeff Ruby of Chicago magazine, David Hammond at the Chicago Reader and even Vettel's colleague at the Tribune Kevin Pang). Furthermore, the quality of other criticism elsewhere in the Tribune in quite high (Michael Phillips on film, Chris Jones on Theatre, Blair Kamin on architecture, Greg Kot on pop music, John van Rhein on classical music, Howard Reich on jazz - whether you agree with them or not, they are all knowledgeable and passionate about their subjects, qualities that Vettel sorely lacks).

I fundamentally disagree with the assertion that Phil Vettel lacks knowledge. I don't always love or agree with his reviews but the guy is inarguably knowledgeable.

Also, no slight to anyone listed in your missive but you failed to mention the very best food writer/critic in Chicago: Mike Sula at The Reader.

Sorry, for the digression.

=R=

ronnie_suburban wrote:

ld111134 wrote:

HungryZ wrote:While I agree Vettel is generous in many of his reviews, is he truly that far off the mark? Who is he trying to appeal to? There are the 5% hardcore foodies out there who seek absolute perfection and will voice their opinion about anything less. Then there is the majority of food lovers/diners who are looking for a nice evening out and to be able to enjoy a great meal. Have I visited his newest 4 star restaurant, no. Would I enjoy it as much as Vettel? Maybe. We on this forum are the extreme food lovers and are probably in the minority when it comes to Mr. Vettel's readers.

Then again I could be wrong

I don't think it's simply a matter of Vettel catering to a middlebrow, non-foodie audience. Vettel is bad when compared other restaurant critics in Chicago (Heather Shouse and David Tamarkin at Time Out Chicago, Dennis Ray Wheaton and Jeff Ruby of Chicago magazine, David Hammond at the Chicago Reader and even Vettel's colleague at the Tribune Kevin Pang). Furthermore, the quality of other criticism elsewhere in the Tribune in quite high (Michael Phillips on film, Chris Jones on Theatre, Blair Kamin on architecture, Greg Kot on pop music, John van Rhein on classical music, Howard Reich on jazz - whether you agree with them or not, they are all knowledgeable and passionate about their subjects, qualities that Vettel sorely lacks).

I fundamentally disagree with the assertion that Phil Vettel lacks knowledge. I don't always love or agree with his reviews but the guy is inarguably knowledgeable.

Also, no slight to anyone listed in your missive but you failed to mention the very best food writer/critic in Chicago: Mike Sula at The Reader.

Sorry, for the digression.

=R=

I agree with your point on Sula. On Vettel's knowledge, we'll have to agree to disagree.

ld111134 wrote:On Vettel's knowledge, we'll have to agree to disagree.

Perhaps you could provide some specific examples from Vettel's reviews. What does he write that you don't like, or what should he have written in place of what he actually wrote? I'm not saying he's the greatest food writer around (frankly, I can't remember the last time I actually referred to one of his reviews), but simply saying he doesn't know very much without providing any specific examples, data, etc. isn't really that informative.

Darren72 wrote:

ld111134 wrote:On Vettel's knowledge, we'll have to agree to disagree.

Perhaps you could provide some specific examples from Vettel's reviews. What does he write that you don't like, or what should he have written in place of what he actually wrote? I'm ...

Here you go.

Perhaps we can start a Vettel thread, and leave the Courtright's thread to focus on that restaurant.

My verdict: Phil Vettel - not bad - ** (but *** on the Vettel scale).

There's a Courtright's thread?

Or a thread that critics other critics, of course it will be unlike other critics critiking , it will be unbiased.
Also no critic will get more than one star, or less and it will be all in Esperanto.

So, what’s up? The answer, apparently, is deer (Vettel’s writerly theme du jour). Not venison, but Thumper.

Am I missing something here? Thumper's a bunny rabbit, right?

(The reason I know this is not because I'm a Bambi fan, but because, many years ago, after I finished a meal of hare pate and venison steak [at Carlos' no less], my wife, who then was not fond of gamier viands, informed me that I had just dined on Thumper and Bambi.)

Oh, heck. I will just leave it up as a warning not to trust any critic.

But then, who was it, Mike Sula or Dave Hammond, or both, who were all over the kimchee taco in Evanston a while ago ... not like you couldn't make that at home ... so, everyone bows to their own little gods. How does Vettel compare in skill to other critics in other papers from other parts of the country that I don't get and don't care to get (I'm talking the papers there, not those parts of the country)? I don't know. I'm not so sold on who's the reliable source here in Chicagoland yet.

But I know I never heard of Courtright's before, and whether it deserved 4 or 3 or 2 stars, it's on my radar now, for a certain kind of special occasion, and I don't see how that's a bad thing.

Everyone's a critic, goes the old showbiz saw. And now more than ever, in the age of blogging, every critic seems to be a critic of other critics. No surprise, really.

Katie wrote:But then, who was it, Mike Sula or Dave Hammond, or both, who were all over the kimchee taco in Evanston a while ago ... not like you couldn't make that at home ... so, everyone bows to their own little gods.

Wha...

David Hammond wrote:

Katie wrote:But then, who was it, Mike Sula or Dave Hammond, or both, who were all over the kimchee taco in Evanston a while ago ... not like you couldn't make that at home ... so, everyone bows to their own little gods.

Wha...

Rene G and G Wiv = Mike Sula and David Hammond

Really sorry David, I was thinking of Michael Nagrant's New City Resto blog post on the subject. On the internet, you all look alike.

Katie wrote:Really sorry David, I was thinking of Michael Nagrant's New City Resto blog post on the subject. On the internet, you all look alike.

actually Sula did blog about the kimchi taco at some place. I think Nagrant had the kimchee burger at some other place. That data aside, I have no idea what any of it was supposed to have to do with this thread.