Chicago - the best dining city in North America

In case you haven't seen it, Alan Richman writes in the June 2006 issue of GQ that Chicago is the "most influential and dynamic restaurant city in North America," and goes on to call Chicago the "Barcelona of North America."

In particular, he singles out Alinea, Avenues and Moto and (in the print edition) lists his 10 favorite dishes at these restaurants (five best tasting and five most eye-popping). He focuses on innovation and the fact that innovation in food is being seen here more than anywhere else.

In addition to mentioning the above, he also lists (in the print edition) several other restaurants that he says makes Chicago "North America's most exciting dining city": Riques, Custom House, Avec (although he notes that he prefers Blackbird), Naha, Sunshine Cafe, Rosebud Steakhouse, Quartino and Butter.

The article is a great read and a nice salute to Chicago food.

Here's a link to the article: http://men.style.com/gq/features/landin ... ntent_4414

Interesting. Two quick thoughts: Richman is much better than his counterpart at the other men's magazine, but he seems rarely to write about Chicago. Then, suddenly, he proclaims it the best dining city in North America.

BR wrote:...that Chicago is the "most influential and dynamic restaurant city in North America," and goes on to call Chicago the "Barcelona of North America." ...

Kind of ironic... best, sort of, but still second, according to this guy...

Antonius

Antonius wrote:Kind of ironic... best, sort of, but still second, according to this guy...
Antonius

Now I'm curious . . . your favorite dining city . . . and why?

BR wrote:

Antonius wrote:Kind of ironic... best, sort of, but still second, according to this guy...
Antonius

Now I'm curious . . . your favorite dining city . . . and why?

BR,



I can't afford to eat multiple times in multiple restaurants at that level. No, I have no dog in this fight but I just found it funny (in an ironic sort of way) that the critic in question bestows exalted status on Chicago but then still puts someplace else above it.

Me, pending the winning of a Power Ball jackpot, I just listen and read and, for what it's worth -- which ain't much -- it seems to me that whatever any one critic says, the cutting-edge haute cuisine scene in Chicago is very much cutting-edge.

Sorry if my first post above sounded in any way grumpy. I find the general discussion interesting but one-two rankings have their limitations and, in the end, how does one react to what a critic says? If one can, one goes and judges for oneself, otherwise...

A

Antonius wrote:Sorry if my first post above sounded in any way grumpy. I find the general discussion interesting but one-two rankings have their limitations and, in the end, how does one react to what a critic says? If one can, one goes and judges for oneself, otherwise...

At the risk of sounding grumpy myself, all analysis of restaurants is qualitative in nature. Ranking is misleading when it comes to anything that can't be quantified. In this case it's all ego and no flow. Ask me about flow and I will paint you a picture. Then you can judge whether the place is for you.

Antonius wrote:Sorry if my first post above sounded in any way grumpy. I find the general discussion interesting but one-two rankings have their limitations and, in the end, how does one react to what a critic says? If one can, one goes and judges for oneself, otherwise...
A

Actually, it didn't sound grumpy. And I agree that such rankings have limitations, but it does nonetheless show that Chicago has taken great steps since the day when there were very few high end meals in town. The article probably has little effect on readers in Chicago (who know the dining scene) versus readers elsewhere, who may not think Chicago has that much more to offer than steaks, pizza and hot dogs -- kind of like the days when foreigners would say "you're from Chicago? Al Capone . . . bang bang."

I'm a little suspicious of a best ranking when it's based, basically, on three restaurants. What's happening at the highest of the high end is hardly an indicator of the overall scene, any more than the lifestyles of three movie stars give you a picture of the overall economy. For me the most interesting point in the article was Cantu talking about his rent being low-- now there's a real point of distinction between us and New York or San Francisco! Compare that to what happened when Trotter tried to open in New York (the numbers rose and rose until the deal was called off) and it's clear that Chicago does give talented chefs a little more freedom to discover who they are and what they can do without the numbers breathing down their necks quite so ferociously. Reading GAF's account of fine dining in New York, you often get the sense of diverse chefs running very same-ish places dictated by more demanding and precarious finances and the expectations of the expense account crowd. That's despite the fact that New York still has natural advantages in terms of being a draw for the talent of the world.

Anyway, magazine conventional wisdom runs in cycles and it seems safe to say our moment in their sun will be brief. Enjoy it!

I think that Richman set up a bit of a straw man to knock down. It's a little lazy to begin with the premise that Chicago was never much in the food department (while at the same time admitting a USA Today-level of knowledge that Chicago is good for architecture and comedy (as if its other cultural assets are unknown or unimpressive)), when Chicago(land) is the city of Banchet and Trotter and Bayless, Spiaggia and Everest (even Melman and Levy). The whole "second city no more"-themed popular criticism piece goes back, far as I can tell, to the late 1800's. It's a threadbare, hackneyed, cliche' of a chestnut. Little matter, since most of the GQ demo probably has no reason not to buy the silly idea that Richman discovered Chicago the way Colombo discovered America.

Then again, he has a point that is, possibly, substantively different than that which has been said before: never has something so different been so clearly happening almost exclusively, and certainly mostly, in the kitchens of one city.

Of course, with the Second City piece comes the comparisons to NYC. I love NY, but the myth that anything worth happening must happen there because, basically, all good things come from God, still confuses me. In fact, it seems to me that NY is more apt to absorb than to forment in any number of endeavors. Today, "most" New Yorkers apparently would rather spend hundreds of dollars for dinner at Il Mulino than at WD-50. That makes no sense to me, and my NY friends agree. That will change.

I think the press in NY has much to do with it. I have noticed that NYC critics, more than anyone (and particularly for the Times), are dismissive of the long tasting menu and innovation. This seems not to have bothered the Chicago chefs, who work in a city that does not live and die by the critic's pen and does not have a restaurant culture that worships French gastronomy. By rejecting, in part, his peers' common wisdom, Richman is saying something new.

I also think that comparisons to Spain, on a broader level, are interesting. Spain is similarly popularly perceived as a throwback, culturally stagnant to the point of resting on laurels half a millennium old. But Spain has been shaking up Europe, culturally, for a long time as well --whether in art, literature or food.

JeffB wrote:... It's a little lazy to begin with the premise that Chicago was never much in the food department (while at the same time admitting a USA Today-level of knowledge that Chicago is good for architecture and comedy (as if its other cultural assets are unknown or unimpressive)), when Chicago(land) is the city of Banchet and Trotter and Bayless, Spiaggia and Everest (even Melman and Levy). The whole "second city no more"-themed popular criticism piece goes back, far as I can tell, to the late 1800's. It's a threadbare, hackneyed, cliche' of a chestnut. ....

I agree.

I actually stopped reading the article after the first couple paragraphs, because I got so annoyed by those clichéd statements.

Similarly, in the Roadfood write up of Manny’s which kl5 linked to recently, I was a little taken aback by Stern’s assertion that “Maxwell Street is tame these days”. Huh?? (Good thing Mike G has given him the Gorilla Gourmet video of Maxwell Street Mexican.) Well, Stern must have heard that assessment from someone who hasn’t been to Maxwell Street lately, and then he passes it along as if it is his own, first-hand knowledge of the place. Kind of like the issues under discussion lately on Site Chat.

As Jeff says, this is just laziness on the part of the writers. And okay, I know the Roadfood review focuses on Manny’s, not on contemporary Maxwell Street; so too Richman’s review is about Alinea/Avenues/Moto, not about other stuff in Chicago. But the consequence of the writers’ laziness, for me, is that I am less inclined to believe any of their other statements. If they can be so wrong about Maxwell Street, or the rest of Chicago’s dining scene, why should I think they are right about matters elsewhere?

(A Site Chat-ish postscript: I guess this is also an argument for why LTH posters should avoid presenting second-hand information as their own: it destroys your credibility.)

i like all the views presented, and its nice to see critics finally giving chicago its due. ive never been impressed with the foods prepared by the mentioned restaurants. my take on chicago is that its still a working mans kind of town, and the true beauty of our cuisine and culture lies within the ethnic restaurants and neighborhoods. i personally dont want to eat anything thats nitrogen frozen, or an edible menu. as a chef i like to cook and explore other natural cuisines such as china, thailand or vietnam. it seems chicagos 4 star restaurants are going now more for shock value than actual cooking.

JeffB wrote:I also think that comparisons to Spain, on a broader level, are interesting. Spain is similarly popularly perceived as a throwback, culturally stagnant to the point of resting on laurels half a millennium old. But Spain has been shaking up Europe, culturally, for a long time as well --whether in art, literature or food.

There as been a lot of writing I've seen recently saying how Spain is so creative, and the center of modern European food these days, whereas France, long considered the epitome of dining, is stale, old, etc etc.

Same old same old.

tonyd wrote:it seems chicagos 4 star restaurants are going now more for shock value than actual cooking.

At least in the cases of Avenues and Alinea (I have not been to Moto, which I don't believe qualifies as 4 star anyway), I could not disagree more.

In fact, in the article, I believe Richman criticizes Chef Achatz for taming down his food too much. Are there specific dishes at these two restaurants that you feel go more for shock value than flavor?

dear jestin. you know i could not honestly pick out a specific dish. to humble myself i quess in a sence im jealous of the noteriety that these guys get for a cusine thats technology based then on actual culinary principles. when i was 17 i got a job at le francais and was blown away! that was 1977. in 1984 i got a job with charlie trotter and was even more blown away for the styleistic presentation, but noted that dishes were more garnished based then actually cooked. in between i worked for alot of great chefs and saw a clear evolution, this new guard of chefs in my opinion is just skaking the rink but not taking slap shots to the knees.

I hate to inform you, but CT's opened in 1987. The new gastronomic movement has many faces, as does the opposition. Welcome to the new world of food. Im here to stay. That I can promise you.

homaro cantu wrote:Im here to stay. That I can promise you.

Superb!

Dish has a little followup interview with Alan Richman this week:

D: How have New Yorkers reacted to your notion that the “revolution” is taking place in flyover country?

AR: From my friends here, I receive scorn, disbelief, and some admiration that I would so boldly scuttle my career by unabashedly complimenting Chicago at the expense of New York. They do not appreciate Chicago—none of them has ever eaten in your city, or if they have, they went to some restaurant operated by Dick Butkus in order to experience quaint local charm. New Yorkers do not see that they are living in a culinary Pompeii, and the mountain is rumbling.

They need Chicken Vesuvio!

Chicago won't be a contender when foie gras is outlawed, not that one food item makes or breaks a dining establishment. But I truly find it ridiculous that the Chicago City Council banned this ONE particular food item. They really have nothing better to do with their precious time. And then they want a raise. Ha!!

Peety wrote:Chicago won't be a contender when foie gras is outlawed, not that one food item makes or breaks a dining establishment. But I truly find it ridiculous that the Chicago City Council banned this ONE particular food item. They really have nothing better to do with their precious time. And then they want a raise. Ha!!

Although I do not support the ban, isn't it also outlawed in the state of California and many parts of Europe?

John Mariani, in the most recent Esquire Magazine, also lauded Chicago as the best restaurant town in the US (or, did he call it the best non-NYC restaurant town?). Regardless, he was effusive.

Not having the issue in front of me, what stands out in my memory is the fact that he doesn't mention Alinea/Moto/Avenues/Schwa, but does mention Gene & Georgetti, Carson's, Ed Debevic's and MK, among others. Honest.

In a sidebar he takes a swipe at the Fois Gras Lollipop (without naming Avenues).

Mariani has come out in the past against the whole molecular gastronomy, avant-garde, or whatever you want to call it movement going on in Chicago. Most notably, when he named his best new restaurants in the US, he chose Butter over Alinea as Chicago's best new restaurant. Having eaten at both, I would describe that choice as "interesting" at best.

Edited to add: I had the foie-li-pop this weekend at Avenues as part of the foie gras tasting menu. If Mariani doesn't like it, I'll gladly take his.

jesteinf wrote: when he named his best new restaurants in the US, he chose Butter over Alinea as Chicago's best new restaurant.

Was Alinea open when he wrote his review? There are a few others (including Chicago Magazine) whose choices I just wonder about.

Yes, there was a whole brouhaha made about how he was pissing on the molecular gastronomy movement.

I've never understood why anyone cares about John Mariani. Has he ever been relevant?

Here's the Sun Times' coverage of the Mariani thing:

Esquiret critic says Butter melts in his mouth

Though he doesn't name them in print, Mariani refers to "a few hocus-pocus chefs trying to make headlines based on things like burning incense next to a dish of venison and forcing desserts into squeeze tubes" -- a thinly veiled reference to Achatz and Cantu, whose unexpected combinations, presentations and custom- designed utensils have indeed made local, national and even international headlines.

Mariani dismisses such cuisine as "a total misunderstanding of the experimental cuisine of Spain's Ferran Adria."

johnny wrote:

Peety wrote:Chicago won't be a contender when foie gras is outlawed, not that one food item makes or breaks a dining establishment. But I truly find it ridiculous that the Chicago City Council banned this ONE particular food item. They really have nothing better to do with their precious time. And then they want a raise. Ha!!

Although I do not support the ban, isn't it also outlawed in the state of California and many parts of Europe?

In California, it will be illegal to produce in something like six or seven years when the law takes effect, but it's perfectly legal to import or sell.

Shasson wrote:John Mariani ... takes a swipe at the Fois Gras Lollipop (without naming Avenues).

That's very funny. Very funny, indeed. (Second paragraph, four lines in).

yeah, cantu steals more recipes than any chef i know!! foie gras on a stick can clearly be traced to the savoy in london!! its in all their cookbooks for years. the guy just doesnt get it!!

tonyd wrote:yeah, cantu steals more recipes than any chef i know!! foie gras on a stick can clearly be traced to the savoy in london!! its in all their cookbooks for years. the guy just doesnt get it!!

Tony,

Your comments above are off-base. It's not like any one chef is claiming they invented 'stuff on a stick.' Also, Cantu is not the one referenced in the linked article nor is he typically associated with foie gras lollipops.

Foie Gras Lollipops, tasty no matter the provenance.

Regards,
Gary