Advertising

Is Simple Food Killing Molecular Gastronomy?

taxim_ehfisher.jpgDavid Tamarkin packs a potent punch into a recent short article for Gourmet: in it he wonders whether Chicago, long a flagship city of experimental cuisine and molecular gastronomy, is riding the pendulum back towards a simpler, more straightforward culinary experience: "I first noticed it at The Publican," he reports, "where you’d be hard pressed to order anything that has more than five ingredients. At Taxim, a dish can take the simple form of a braid of phyllo and a chunk of feta. My unsauced, wood-grilled trout at Nightwood shared the plate with a little pile of lentils. And their cheeseburger is, well, a cheeseburger—no fried egg on top, no pâté stuffed in the middle." It's certainly the case that the preponderance of newly opened restaurants are no-frills, but we do question Tamarkin's hypothesis that back-to-basics is an actual backlash against molecular gastronomy.

For starters, there's the economic question: opening a restaurant dedicated to simple preparations is simply less costly than, say, acquiring a weapons-grade laser for use in the kitchen (Moto) or enough liquid nitrogen to host nitro dance parties (Alinea). If you look at the number of molecular gastronomy restaurants in Chicago (or whatever phrase they use to self-identify their cuisine), you'll get maybe half a dozen. So of course a majority of the openings will be less complex, more accessible, more simplistic in their presentations.

That said, we're not sure that's entirely what Tamarkin's getting at. It's more the idea of what's trendy, rather than what's simply got the dominant numbers. In that respect, we agree that the move towards simple, high-quality food is a blessed relief: it feels wonderful to wave goodbye to the molecular gastronomy's popular diffusion, the Adria-for-dummies platings of foams and powders that seemed to plague every third menu item. Now that the culinary trend is for things to taste good more than look pretty, restaurants that focus on quality and depth of flavor are praised, encouraged, and — ideally — rewarded with patronage. But that doesn't mean that restaurants like Alinea, Moto, L2O, and Avenues should stop doing what they're doing — or that they're going to die out anytime soon (whether or not Achatz says he's tired of molecular gastronomy), wiped out at the hand of simple, market-driven menus. We say: why not happily live and eat in a city that houses both? [Gourmet]

[Photo of mezethes at Taxim via ehfisher, MP Flickr Pool]

Share

2 Comments - Add yours

  • Anon, I think you're right that "the public" needs to be persuaded to pay someone else to, say, slice a tomato for them and toss it with olive oil. But in terms of restaurant startup costs: one of the points I didn't have space to make above is that it's not like molecular gastronomy restos don't buy top-notch, responsibly sourced products. Grant Achatz touched on this a few months ago at a demo at Now We're Cookin: "I think it's a false division [between slow food philosophies and molecular gastro]. We have a co-op, we use farm-raised Amish vegetables, we have our lamber in Pennsylvania who does his lambs in certain ways and for certain reasons. However, that's not our ... identity, shall we say? In today's modern times it's almost a given that you're focused on sustainability, that you're focused on artisan products. So incorporating that philosophy with the avant garde, with progressive American - that's where we stand." Also: not all simple-food restaurants are made the same. Places like the Publican choose to go with a high-cost design; I'd imagine you could build four Nightwoods for the cost of one Publican.

    By Helen on 07/01/2009 at 3:40 PM

  • The article will surely result in a jolt of business for some new restaurants that are in the spotlight. I hope for their sake "minimalist" cooking is not a trend. According to Tamarkin the food at these places is no-frills and minimal in their ingredients--it's "simple." The majority of people eat simple food everyday. The writer says that it's cheaper to open a "simple" restaurant than it is to open a molecular gastronomy restaurant but an award winning restaurant design like Publican's does not come cheap. The same goes for pasture-raised meats, locally grown produce and a large payroll. An article like this helps to justify the price for this type of "simple" food in the eyes of the public. After all, those of us who already know and go to the simple places are the same ones going to the molecular places, we know why one is pricey and the other one is ridiculously pricey. While a food writer or a foodie may push around lentils on a plate looking for more, he may find something. Sometimes, an average diner may not, unless he is persuaded. That persuasion seems to be the sign of a cool place, whether it be simple or molecular.

    By anonymous on 07/01/2009 at 3:34 PM

Add Comment

  • All comments need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear.

Advertising

Recent News

Advertising