Kennyz wrote:
It baffles me that publications still think that these internal distinctions among things like "reviews," "blog posts," and "restaurant profiles" matter, or are even noticed, in the real world.

On point. It baffles me as well.

I'm most thankful to this thread for the opportunity to re-read this sentence:

Comfort Food, Hold the Kitsch wrote:"I got the black beans and rice for the Puerto Ricans," she says. "And every black person that walks in the door says, 'Oh, is this a soul food restaurant?' And I go, 'Oh, OK.' I got neck bones in my collard greens."

Especially since it is at least less artificial and belabored than this opening:

Comfort Food, Hold the Kitsch wrote:On the 2800 block of West Chicago, where the city dissolves into industrial anonymity, Feed catches the eye like a piece of found art.

There be dragons here.

I don't know how you'd merge them, but it seems rather odd to have two separate threads for Lillie's given it hasn't been open very long. Here's the other one, already loaded with food pictures: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=29279&start=0&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=Lillie%27s

AdmVinyl wrote:I don't know how you'd merge them, but it seems rather odd to have two separate threads for Lillie's given it hasn't been open very long. Here's the other one, already loaded with food pictures: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=29279&start=0&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=Lillie%27s

Hey, I just started talking about Lillie's Q and can't account for where others want to take it or what others want to post about the same restaurant later on and elsewhere. It's all about food, some way or another:

Many years ago on Chowhound, Vital Info and I went back and forth about fried pickles. I was intrigued by the idea of this food because, at that point, I was unaware that this food existed. It just seemed like a totally cool idea for a food. And I knew I would eat this food if I ever saw it.

Since then, I’ve enjoyed fried pickles at Violet Hour and elsewhere, and I really dug them at Urban Burger Bar.

David Hammond wrote:

The fried pickles are different at Lillie’s Q.



At Lillie’s Q, they’re cut wide not thin, across the grain rather than with it…but still, fantastically delicious (as I imagined they would be, many years ago) and the sour saltiness of the pickle, given the mass, was more pronounced, which I also liked. The house-made ranch dressing seemed quite superfluous, though the steel tray/brown paper liner does seem to need something just to balance it out, visually.

Okay, that’s all today for Lillie’s Q (probably;maybe).

Kennyz wrote:It baffles me that publications still think that these internal distinctions among things like "reviews," "blog posts," and "restaurant profiles" matter, or are even noticed, in the real world.

The people who write them don't think so, but their management does. That the readers can't tell the difference matters not. (The readers often can't tell the difference between editorial and advertising, either.)

See, a "review" is an opinion piece and supposed to be written by a critic who visits anonymously and who pays for his meal, whereas a "profile" is a descriptive piece done by a reporter who visits openly and doesn't pay for anything; in theory, it's not supposed to contain opinion but a lot of contemporary journalists seem to have trouble with that. (Blog posts, meanwhile, are the way traditional media try to compete with new media, and as near as I can tell it means the same kind of stuff they used to do in other formats only with less depth, more snark and no copyediting.)

Anyway, "profiles" are the means by which media management splits hairs over the ethical issues of covering restaurants without anteing up for the check.

LAZ wrote:Anyway, "profiles" are the means by which media management splits hairs over the ethical issues of covering restaurants without anteing up for the check.

This is excellent! Best thing I've read in a while.

I thought LAZ meant that the media outlet pays for the meal, not that it is comped by the restaurant.

See, a "review" is an opinion piece and supposed to be written by a critic who visits anonymously and who pays for his meal, whereas a "profile" is a descriptive piece done by a reporter who visits openly and doesn't pay for anything; in theory, it's not supposed to contain opinion but a lot of contemporary journalists seem to have trouble with that.

Really, it's simple. A review is when a writer is rigorously anonymous in his dealings with a restaurant, and a profile is when the same writer meets the chef and interviews him for a puff piece, then comes back rigorously anonymously later.

Santander wrote:

Kennyz wrote:
It baffles me that publications still think that these internal distinctions among things like "reviews," "blog posts," and "restaurant profiles" matter, or are even noticed, in the real world.

On point. It baffles me as well.

Take this ass-kissing piece about Grahamwich, for example. A "restaurant profile," I presume, of a restaurant that exists only in digital form. It earned GEB his first Yelp review, which despite his Twitter complaints is a reasonable assessment of Grahamwich's pre-opening PR.

Thanks for the link. It says a lot about "profiles." Reminded me more of a publisher's blurb (on the back cover of a paperback) than any kind of review.

Why does Yelp allow people to review someplace that isn't open yet?

And yes, that Chicago Magazine whateveritwas was pretty pointless.

jesteinf wrote:Why does Yelp allow people to review someplace that isn't open yet?

Why shouldn't they? If Chicago Magazine, Grubstreet, and others are essentially reviewing the place before it opens, it seems reasonable for Yelp to capitalize on the buzz too. It makes perfect business sense. Now, when people google "Grahamwich," Yelp is in the running with the others for where the clicks will go. It's all one big, useless-to-the-public game.

But those aforementioned sites aren't really reviewing, they're reporting and speculating. Wouldn't sampling of product be required for a review?

Are not people smart enough to assess the credibility of these things?

It just seems so dam odd to me. On the one hand, people in the restaurant biz wring their hands about stuff like this, which should have little influence, and yet they turn around and criticize "bloggers." On one hand, you have these posts in a vacuum; on the other hand, you have people with long trails of posts, histories, stated preferences, biographical insight, etc. Who's opinion matters?

Vital Information wrote:Are not people smart enough to assess the credibility of these things?

No. Not in most cases (LTH participants excluded)

Stephen wrote:But those aforementioned sites aren't really reviewing, they're reporting and speculating. Wouldn't sampling of product be required for a review?

The Yelp comment makes it very clear what the dude is writing about, and it's more honest and useful than the "sounds really cool" and "we can't wait" ass-kissing crap from chicagomag, grubstreet and others vying for an invitation to some pre-opening media dinner. Maybe people are caught up in the fact that the Yelpers are forced to give a star rating with their comments. For people to whom that matters, all I can say is too bad for you.

4 stars from Time Out Chicago for Lillie's. Guess they'll be happy about this review posted within the first few weeks of opening.

jesteinf wrote:4 stars from Time Out Chicago for Lillie's. Guess they'll be happy about this review posted within the first few weeks of opening.

Just to clarify on your "Guess they'll be happy about this review posted within the first few weeks of opening", we found out post TOC review the first visit was at the three-week mark and the two follow-up visits were both at the one-month mark.

daveandrews3 wrote:

jesteinf wrote:4 stars from Time Out Chicago for Lillie's. Guess they'll be happy about this review posted within the first few weeks of opening.

Just to clarify on your "Guess they'll be happy about this review posted within the first few weeks of opening", we found out post TOC review the first visit was at the three-week mark and the two follow-up visits were both at the one-month mark.

I'm just being snarky about the owner commenting about reviews posted online from people going right after they opened. This review is obviously great news for Lillie's.

jesteinf wrote:

daveandrews3 wrote:

jesteinf wrote:4 stars from Time Out Chicago for Lillie's. Guess they'll be happy about this review posted within the first few weeks of opening.

Just to clarify on your "Guess they'll be happy about this review posted within the first few weeks of opening", we found out post TOC review the first visit was at the three-week mark and the two follow-up visits were both at the one-month mark.

I'm just being snarky about the owner commenting about reviews posted online from people going right after they opened. This review is obviously great news for Lillie's.

What owner? The Feed owner from the other thread? The snark gets lost and is a bit confusing in this thread.

I was referencing this. My unfunny joke has now been rendered even less funny by this two post explanation.

David Hammond wrote:Opening Week Critics

I had read several reviews of Lillie’s before we ate there, and McKenna admitted that some of them had rankled him because he thought it wasn’t fair to go hard on a place during the first few weeks. I played devil’s advocate by observing, "But if you’re opening your doors, and you're charging full prices, isn’t it fair for customers to expect that you’re up to speed?

jesteinf wrote:I was referencing this. My unfunny joke has now been rendered even less funny by this two post explanation.

David Hammond wrote:Opening Week Critics

I had read several reviews of Lillie’s before we ate there, and McKenna admitted that some of them had rankled him because he thought it wasn’t fair to go hard on a place during the first few weeks. I played devil’s advocate by observing, "But if you’re opening your doors, and you're charging full prices, isn’t it fair for customers to expect that you’re up to speed?

Ha. No worries. Anyways, this thread needs to get back on track .... with more postings about Yelp and Grahamwich! ( I mostly kid...I clearly see how the thread progression regarding those two things are relevant to the thread).

Looks like Yelp has taken down all reviews as well as Grahamwich's star rating.

Given multiple launches to choose from, I'm running with the thread with the chef pedigree and giddy Time Out review mention for this particular reblogfile.

Barbecue might not need to be outfitted at a Restoration Hardware. The existence in the world of Mason jars and miniature distressed cast iron au gratin pans does not necessitate serving everything in your restaurant (including the check) in one, especially in cases when you're not going to cook or mix in them. Spa therapy sauce bottles with custom labels may be a signature idea, but it is an impractical one, and combined with everything else makes me feel like I'm in a catalog instead of a joint.

But this is all style. Forced atmosphere can be easily compensated by excellent food. I'm going to have to give that offset another opportunity, since it was not present in our first visit, except for the grits. Ribs were smoked as if to preserve, rather than to cook; they were like very little ham on very big bones, kassler rippchen on a stick, not a trace of the aforementioned 'give.' Tri-tip was akin to average prime rib, respectable but tasting unsmoked and incongruous; perhaps since I'm not from California I can't know, but here I must be counted among Them whose Skepticism cannot be gavel-quashed. Pulled pork was good, but with the exception of Ruby's, just about everyplace can pull that off. I did not find the sauces 'lappable' enough to push it over the top, though the Carolina pair were decent (there is also now a "Hot Smoky," a little overliquidsmoked). Like most things on the menu, the ubiquitous dry rub makes its way on to the fries, making some meal combinations a potentially monotonous slog of seasoning. Watery Cokes and fake lemonade did not help cleanse the palate. The moonshine was enticing for next time.

The grits were stupid good, though. While I couldn't detect anything characteristic about the house-made bacon crumbled on top, $4 for a side of these is worth every mill. I ordered a second au-gratin-pan's-worth to go for lunch, and my two dining companions went down the street for an Italian Beef. Barbecue is variable, and I'm a moth at the light, so I'll be back, but why this place makes any more initial sense than any of the recent batch, I did not see.

Santander wrote:Spa therapy sauce bottles with custom labels may be a signature idea, but it is an impractical one, and combined with everything else makes me feel like I'm in a catalog instead of a joint.

Not sure why the sauce bottles are impractical.

I think attention to detail (including furnishings) is one of the things McKenna feels he's bringing to the table. It's not supposed to be a "joint" (by which I take you to mean an "authentic" and gritty BBQ place) but something approaching a fine dining restaurant. Now, the whole thing may fail in your eyes, but I believe some significant thought has gone into managing the experience.

As I posted on the other Lillie's Q thread, I was impressed from start to finish with my visit here. Especially on its second day open to the public.

Modern, comfortable space, and really good bbq. Some different methods , but everything I had was a winner.

Biggest pleasure was sitting down with Charlie for maybe 10 minutes to discuss his bbq, his methods, and bbq in general. Passionate about bbq & a friendly, knowledgeable guy.

I am counting down the days until I go back next week.

David Hammond wrote:

Santander wrote:Spa therapy sauce bottles with custom labels may be a signature idea, but it is an impractical one, and combined with everything else makes me feel like I'm in a catalog instead of a joint.

Not sure why the sauce bottles are impractical.

I've been back once since that post three weeks ago, and still think the grits are the best thing on the menu. I wish the place well, but the 'que doesn't get close to convincing me at those pricepoints. Good pork, ribs are embalmed, tri-tip weak on the smoke and not my style.

The heavy sauce bottles have to be held upside down even when reasonably full to get the sauce out of the tiny-diameter stainless nozzles, and make people up and down the bar saucing their meat look like they're either Tom Cruise in "Cocktail" or Kirstie Alley at a Bed, Bath, and Beyond sampling area. I guess that could be an improvement in some contexts.

made a stop at lillies Q yesterday
i enjoyed it very much & will be back soon
ribs are tops 8.3
but the bannana pudding is a must

Went to Lillie's tonight and I wasn't terribly impressed.

Started with some fried pickles. They might as well have served hot pickles with a side of breading because these things fell apart pretty much as soon as you looked at them.

Moved on to a sampler that included ribs, tri-tip, and pulled pork. I really liked the ribs, and if I go back that's probably what I'd stick with. The tri-tip tender, but pretty salty. Pulled pork was dry and on the bland side.

While I might go back if I'm in the area and need a place to eat, I'm not going out of my way for a return trip. Plus, $45 for a couple of beers and some BBQ just isn't worth it to me. Give me Honey 1 anytime.