San Francisco rightly enjoys a reputation for being a food-centric city. Our finest restaurants are classified as such almost entirely because of the quality of the food and ingredients, not the poshness of the decor or strictness of dress code.
That’s why we thought it worth peeking into the discussion forming on our sibling blogs MenuPages: Chicago and Grub Street, over the question posed in Food and Wine of weather “fine dining,” per se, should cease to exist.
We’d argue that in this city, it somewhat already has. The most expensive places in town won’t make you put on a tie to adhere to some self-identified fanciness. Meanwhile some of our most lauded food — from places like Mission Street Food and Bi-Rite — is so praised exactly because of its everyman appeal. And already fancier places like The Dining Room at the Ritz-Carlton and Masa’s are now offering lower-priced options. Does this make San Francisco a bastion of reasonableness or an unshaven backwater?
MPC editor Helen Rosner summarizes nicely:
Von Bremzen’s conclusion, which we stand firmly behind, is that “haute cuisine done right” is worth keeping around — L2O, New York’s Corton, San Francisco’s Coi. And as for the rest, the fancy-for-fancy’s-sakes that rake it in for subpar dozen-course chef’s tastings and would go dark if it weren’t for expense accounts and anniversary dinners? Yes.
Here here. Ties are great, but the restaurant should inspire diners to don them, not force them. Same goes for the check. We should be moved to part with hundreds of dollars because the food was so good, not convince ourselves the food was good because it cost so much.
Food & Wine Asks ‘Should Fine Dining Die?’ [MP: Chicago]
Question: ‘Should Fine Dining Die?’ [Grub Street]
[Photo: Via No Salad As A Meal]
