Top 3 Living Chefs

I do agree that when using chemicals to turn what nature has provided into a science project, to manipulate the texture or appearance is becoming a fad. I also agree that Molecular Restaurants, will dissipate, and in the history of the food world is very insignificant, and chefs that build there career simply off this trend will not be around long.
I would rate the contributions that Escoffier has provided us, is unmatched as many consider him to be the Father of Food. I would say those that overlook classic technique and jump into Avant garde cooking are foolish, and it shows in there food. More and more Culinary schools are lacking the basic instruction of Classical French Technique and are becoming influenced by "molecular" practices. It is evident in most of my apprentices from major culinary schools, they all want to be the next great chef, and have problems properly peeling a carrot, but could juice that same carrot and add some lecithin and create carrot bubbles. So someone is influencing the Culinary Schools and the next generation of younger chefs. I find some uses of Molecular interesting, such as using Ultra Tex 8 to turn juices into gels without having to use heat , preserving the delicate flavor and color. I do not like hot gelatins, but as a chef I have had to make some to find out for my self. There is a misconception between Molecular and Avant garde. One might think Grant Acachtz is a molecular chef, and that Alinea is a knock off el Bulli want a be imitation. I think Grants food is amazing, not all 27 courses were excellent, but a majority of them blew my mind. And it was Real Food, presented in a way that was artful and different, but was satisfying and his food has essence and character. There is a basic theme and surprisingly not that much smoke and mirrors as I may have thought there would be. It is entertaining, and there is anticipation for the next dish unlike any restaurant I have ever been to. I think that the Y generation also some Xers are looking for more in dining out than simply nourishment. So to say that people go to el Bulli for a experience is correct, but how that makes them a lesser restaurant is unclear. Also to rank Adria 102 on a list of 100, makes me wonder if it is done to provoke or if that is how one truly feels. Adria's restaurant has been awarded The best Restaurant in the World 5 times and is currently the award holder on a 4 year consecutive streak. How this does not factor into a top 100 living chefs list is a bit bewildering. I do respect your opinion Rogov, and I would like to see your list of 101, and a brief description of what a chef would have to accomplish or deciding factors that have to be met, to be on your list. Again I am open to all cooking concepts and I am a chef that likes simplicity and I do prepare dishes in a minimalistic way. I love using local products and I believe in providing the highest quality for my guest. I am not Molecular or Avant garde. If any thing I am Traditional with Contemporary influences. So I am not trying to defend Molecular cooking, I just do not think Adria is just a Molecular chef, even if he has influenced the "molecular movement".

Rick, Hi....

When I used the 102 on a list of 100 I was being metaphoric. Truth be told, I am not nearly familiar enough with the best chefs of the Far East to even attempt to build a list of the 100 best chefs in the world. I might have the chutzpah to do that for chefs in North America and Europe but that would be not a list of the best but of the best with whom I have dined.

As to being open, I consider myself quite open to new trends in wine and dining. What I am not open to are fads that set out to capitalize on jaded palates and overstuffed pocketbooks. That chef Adria has been listed as the "world's best chef" or his restaurant the best in the world on several occasions and by several critics makes little impression on me other than to demonstrate how well his joke is working. Please do note however, that as I have said before even on this thread, that mine is a very strong and obviously biased opinion.

As to my requirements for a fine chef.......let me focus on that for a day or two and I'll get back to you on that.

Best
Rogov

Hello Daniel,
Fair enough, Like I said in the beginning there is no need to debate, but I guess my passion for food and wine has got in the way of that concept.
I was sure that you were being metaphoric, and there is no need to give me your requirements for your list. It up to you and it is your opinion.
I understand where you are coming from, and anybody who has ate at the Fat Duck and el Bulli is going to be open minded, I was not questioning that at all.
This has been a fun post either way, and I am looking forward to posting a new one soon. Though I am not sure how controversial of a subject it will be.
Have a great day
Rick

Do you think that any of the new MG techniques could produce something worthy of the table? Do you separate the techniques from the artificial "chemicals" used in MG preparations?

Greg, Hi....

Indeed several of the techniques that have evolved will prove quite worthy. Two things of import however - the first that these concepts not come to dominate all that a specific chef sets out to do; the second to realize that many of these techniques developed not from molecular gastronomy but from military-space applications and were adapted to the molectular gastronomy repertoire.

A fuddy-duddy I may be but a Luddite I am not.

Best
Rogo

Do you think that any of the new MG techniques could produce something worthy of the table? Do you separate the techniques from the artificial "chemicals" used in MG preparations?

Greg, Hi....

Indeed several of the techniques that have evolved will prove quite worthy. Two things of import however - the first that these concepts not come to dominate all that a specific chef sets out to do; the second to realize that many of these techniques developed not from molecular gastronomy but from military-space applications and were adapted to the molectular gastronomy repertoire.

A fuddy-duddy I may be but a Luddite I am not.

Best
Rogo

Thanks Rogov. I appreciate your insights.

The greatest chefs are the ones who have the most influence on the profession - at this moment. So that excludes Bocuse and Michel Guerard, the most influential chefs of the 60s and 70s.

Unequivocably, Adria has influenced more chefs and food trends (for better or worse) than any other living chef. Such is not really an arguable claim and he belongs at the top of the list. Adria's transformative ideas are emulated around the world, not just in his home country. One does not have to like molecular gastronomy to acknowledge that it is the most influential global concept gripping the culinary world at the moment.

The greatest, most influential American chef is still Alice Waters. I think even Keller would acknowledge that, even though Keller in his own right is the most important chef in the US. But not so many chefs are emulating Keller as are still influenced by Waters' philosophy of fresh, local, and unfussy cooking.

I'm guessing Robuchon is still the most important French chef, for having stepped back at the peak of his career to focus on taking French haute cuisine down from its pedestal to make it more affordable and approachable. Since then, many chefs have opened lower tier alternatives. But I'd also put the Troisgros brothers at the same level of influence, so maybe we need a top 5 instead of 3, with these 3 being tied for third place.

The greatest chefs are the ones who have the most influence on the profession - at this moment. So that excludes Bocuse and Michel Guerard, the most influential chefs of the 60s and 70s.

Unequivocably, Adria has influenced more chefs and food trends (for better or worse) than any other living chef. Such is not really an arguable claim and he belongs at the top of the list. Adria's transformative ideas are emulated around the world, not just in his home country. One does not have to like molecular gastronomy to acknowledge that it is the most influential global concept gripping the culinary world at the moment.

The greatest, most influential American chef is still Alice Waters. I think even Keller would acknowledge that, even though Keller in his own right is the most important chef in the US. But not so many chefs are emulating Keller as are still influenced by Waters' philosophy of fresh, local, and unfussy cooking.

I'm guessing Robuchon is still the most important French chef, for having stepped back at the peak of his career to focus on taking French haute cuisine down from its pedestal to make it more affordable and approachable. Since then, many chefs have opened lower tier alternatives. But I'd also put the Troisgros brothers at the same level of influence, so maybe we need a top 5 instead of 3, with these 3 being tied for third place.

I do think Alice Waters is very influential, and I am aware of the historical impact that Chez Panisse has had over the decades, but the greatest American chef? I am not sure about that. There are a lot of young chefs who have never heard of Alice Waters, and surely could not name her restaurant. When you say the French Laundry, a majority of those same chefs would know, thats Thomas Keller's restaurant. Thomas cooks at a higher level, and to me that makes him a better chef. Being influential is part of my criteria, as is vision, creativity, drive, passion, technical skills, standards, credentials, quality of product and leadership. Alice is a Culinary Icon, no doubt about that. I just think that where she may fall short, Keller picks up and leads in ways no American chef has ever led before. He is not only a Culinary Icon, but to many American chefs, the Gold standard. If by only influence than it would have to be by region, as in Wisconsin we are more influenced by Odessa Piper and her restaurant L' Etoile in Madison, and by Charlie Trotter in his namesake Restaurant in Chicago. I think their influence is more important to Midwest chefs where seasonal cooking involves" 4 seasons". It is a lot more challenging to use local sustainable products where you do not have the same availability of product as you would in California. Chef Trotter in my mind is on a short list, right behind Keller because Trotter has more influence on me than any other chef, I just think Keller is a stronger cook. Again these are my thoughts and my reasoning behind them. I do strongly believe that some will disagree, and I am sure a lot of it is due to where they live, who has influenced them and what chefs are in there region.

I have not dined at every restaurant on the planet so I cannot say who the top three living chefs are these days. From where I have dined, I would say these are three of my favorite chefs in no particular order:

Eric Ripert
Thomas Keller
Charlie Trotter

Are there better living chefs? Yep, I'm sure, but those three always exceed my expectations and I look forward to tasting the cuisine of the other best chefs in the world.

I found it interesting that someone noted Alice Waters. She is definitely a fine person and her attitude and philosophy are admirable, but I would not list her as one of the three best living chefs. My Brother-in-Law's favorite restaurant is Chez Panisse and out of obligation I take him there just about every year. Her restaurant is certainly consistent. Consistently underwhelming. Her bistro upstairs is even more of a disappointment.

My Brother-in-Law's favorite restaurant is Chez Panisse and out of obligation I take him there just about every year. Her restaurant is certainly consistent. Consistently underwhelming. Her bistro upstairs is even more of a disappointment.

What were you expecting?

I probably haven't been as many times as you have, but I always found Chez Panisse to be pretty good value for the money (both upstairs and downstairs). It's not revolutionary and there are many other places to get more interesting food. But they run a good operation and are good at what they do.

The added baggage seems to come from their 'historical importance' which means that a lot of people know the name and think it's a 'great' restaurant. So then it becomes fashionable for more savvy people to critique the restaurant as overhyped. But from what I can tell the hype only comes from people who don't know what they are talking about and should be ignored anyway. And if you just focus on the restaurant and what it does, it is a pretty good place to get reliably fresh and intelligent food. No more no less.

Rahsaan,

You always have excellent, well-developed responses. I agree with what you said but should also mention that I never said I expected her cuisine to be “revolutionary” nor did I place judgment upon the “value”.

The original question was who are the best three living chefs. One person stated, “ The greatest, most influential American chef is still Alice Waters.” I simply do not concur based upon numerous experiences at her restaurant and bistro. The original question also did not ask, “Who are the best three living chefs from a value perspective.” My response may have been different had I been asked to factor in “value”.

One person stated, “ The greatest, most influential American chef is still Alice Waters.” I simply do not concur based upon numerous experiences at her restaurant and bistro...

Ok. But there is a long way between not being the most influential American chef and your critique of her restaurant as 'consistently underwhelming'.

I wouldn't say she is the most influential chef in terms of the cuisine she produces but I wouldn't call the restaurant underwhelming either. Perhaps because I never had expectations beyond getting a civilized meal with correct ingredients at a fair price.

But, the claim that she is the most influential chef takes yet another interpretation of 'top living chef'. The claim for Keller and Bocuse is that they produce stellar food at the highest level. Adria's claim was that his creativity changed the way people looked at food. Waters' claim is almost outside her restaurant because her influence is on the politics of organic food and farmers' markets. Maybe she shouldn't be considered the most influential American chef but the most influential American food activist.

Interesting point you make, Rahsaan.

In terms of acclaim, I'd say Keller is currently more praised than Waters. And he is no doubt, in the long run, to be considered more of a haute cuisine chef.

But in terms of who has had more influence on the cuisine and the eating habits of our country, I think I'll have to give the nod to Waters rather than Keller.

Keller has some great restaurants, and his food is superb---but I don't see anything he has done as truly revolutionary and having a lasting effect on the cuisine of our country. Whereas I would term the influence that Waters (along with Jeremiah Tower and John Ash at the time) as having a profound effect on the course of our cuisine.

It was that trio that created a new style of cooking, and a very new sensibility of food production and consumption. It may be easy to forget their influence now that most chefs are not only using locally produced/artisanal foods and emphasizing the absolute freshness and purity of what they produce---but I remember very well when that was not the case, and it was in very large part, these three chefs who created that entire movement.

It's hard to think of salad greens being revolutionary, I know. But when three chefs can exert sufficient influence to lead other chefs to demanding that they have a locally grown mache'---just to pick one small ingredient that is now passe' but not too long ago was nonexistent on the tables of restaurants in this country---is true culinary revolution at work.

Ash was, and still is, a profound influence that helped make Sonoma/Napa into the culinary heaven it has become. And it's not merely the case in one or two restaurants----it's everywhere and considered de rigeur to produce food that way, and the customers demand nothing less.

Does everyone cook the way Keller cooks? No, I'd say not. Does everyone cook the way Waters pioneered? Much, much more so.

Nowadays you can go to the vaunted hearland...flyover country...in the US, and even in the stodgiest of midwestern towns find some creative cuisine, and often from locally sourced supplier/producers. Who now have a market that makes it profitable to supply such ingredients. That would be much more of Waters (and others I cited) than Kellers.

Maybe...just maybe...the success and importance of what Waters has achieved is reflected in your comment that Chez Panisse is not producing what you consider revolutionary food. Could be she raised the bar high enough that other people had to step up to her level to stay in the game? Now, that's influence!

Maybe...just maybe...the success and importance of what Waters has achieved is reflected in your comment that Chez Panisse is not producing what you consider revolutionary food. Could be she raised the bar high enough that other people had to step up to her level to stay in the game? Now, that's influence!

I agree. I think everyone would agree that what she was doing was revolutionary in the 1970s and 80s but not so much these days precisely because her style/inspiration is now available in many other places.

And you make a good point about the influence on a wide range of restaurants which I was extending to supermarkets, farmers' markets, and home cooks, portraying her as a food activist/evangelist and not just a chef.

Hoke,

Great response. I can assure you though that Alice Waters did not invent her culinary wheel as it were. Before she came along, my Grandparents and many others were living off locally grown food and also educating others about the benefits of that lifestyle. The only difference is that they were not profiting from cookbooks and over-hyped restaurants.

Alice has a great philosophy and attitude, but it is not as though she is bringing something new to the game. Perhaps city folk find her ideas new, but the rest of the country have been on board for generations.

Alice has a great philosophy and attitude, but it is not as though she is bringing something new to the game. Perhaps city folk find her ideas new, but the rest of the country have been on board for generations.

I wasn't around at the time, but I thought microwaves, tv dinners, and canned and frozen food were common in a lot more places than just Urban America during the 1960s and 70s?

Waters, tower, Ash, "creators of California cuisine"...nope.
Great marketers, especially Waters, all of whom managed to forget to attribute the credit to the person from whom they "borrowed".
Google is a wonderful resource, makes it easy to check out "Helen Evans brown", who wrote the "West coast Cookbook" in 1951, the first "significant" cookbook on California Cuisine.
If you search, you'll find references from James Beard and Ruth reichl, (then a food editor with the L.A. Times) among others giving credit where it's due.

Alice has a great philosophy and attitude, but it is not as though she is bringing something new to the game. Perhaps city folk find her ideas new, but the rest of the country have been on board for generations.

I wasn't around at the time, but I thought microwaves, tv dinners, and canned and frozen food were common in a lot more places than just Urban America during the 1960s and 70s?

Being organic and eating locally was popular in rural areas long before the 1960's and 1970's. I hope an intelligent fellow like you does not seriously think Alice Waters invented the movement.

Being organic and eating locally was popular in rural areas long before the 1960's and 1970's. I hope an intelligent fellow like you does not seriously think Alice Waters invented the movement.

Of course eating organic and locally existed before the 1960s and 70s because that is all there was for much of human history and it was only from the 1950s that large scale industrial food began to take off. The point is that industrial food became (and still is) an important force in this country and Alice Waters was one of the important chefs/activists who led the counter-movement back/towards (whatever you want to say) real food.

I don't know all the minutiae of who came first and which chef/activist borrowed ideas from which other chef/activist. (Although I look forward to reading the sparring if people want to debate the lineage!)

But it seems pretty clear that Alice Waters was important in this trend. I guess you would claim that she was only important for urbanites, which means you must have been lucky enough to live in rural areas where thriving local food cultures flourished throughout the 20th century. Because from what I have seen there are still plenty of rural communities in the US that are stuck in the fried food/fast food loop and which could benefit from this new wave of organic/local food.

Alice has a great philosophy and attitude, but it is not as though she is bringing something new to the game. Perhaps city folk find her ideas new, but the rest of the country have been on board for generations.

I wasn't around at the time, but I thought microwaves, tv dinners, and canned and frozen food were common in a lot more places than just Urban America during the 1960s and 70s?

Being organic and eating locally was popular in rural areas long before the 1960's and 1970's. I hope an intelligent fellow like you does not seriously think Alice Waters invented the movement.[/quote

I would also say, is it not possible that some chefs from around the country were inspired by the Old World Chefs, and 3 Star restaurants over seas in the 70 and 80s.
being from the Midwest. Jean Banchet from Le Francias comes to mind and Chef Bernard Cretier from Le Vichyssois, I would say there influence came from Paul Bocuse and the Troisgros Brothers. I wonder if they even knew who Alice waters was at that time, let alone be inspired by her. I find the French Connection in Chicago to be more of an inspiration to me, than Alice Waters. Where did her inspiration come from if not from France or Italy? That is the question, and The two above named chefs have accomplished more in there respected craft then Waters ever has. Chef Banchet could easily be on the top 3 greatest living chef's and his Influence on dining in America, is clearly greater than Waters ever was. So for those that are propping up Waters influence, she is not solely responsible for a Cuisine where chefs use local organic products, The French and Italian have been doing it since the beginning of time. She was able to market it California Cuisine before any one else. She is more popular for her activism, than being a chef, where she has not been a chef at her restaurant since 1978. She is a American Icon, but not the Green Goddess.

Being organic and eating locally was popular in rural areas long before the 1960's and 1970's.

I can assure you that eating locally was popular before that time, yes. Primarily because most people didn't travel all that much (compared to today), and most eating WAS local. I can also testify that "being organic" was not very common at that time, and it certainly wasn't mainstream in restaurants. Not by a long shot.

I would also say, is it not possible that some chefs from around the country were inspired by the Old World Chefs, and 3 Star restaurants over seas in the 70 and 80s.

Yes, of course they were. They had to be, as the epicenter of cuisine, and especially developing cuisine, was most definitevely NOT the US, but Europe.

I am an old time fan of Banchet (sadly, never got to eat at Le Vichysoisse--and by the way, you forgot to mention Le Papillon the other great Chicago 'French' restaurant of the time) and will testify to how great his restaurant was. That Banchet was a great chef is certain; but I still question how much influence even Banchet had on the cuisine of America. Chicago, yes. Even the Midwest, yes. But changing the cuisine of America? I don't think so.

And as to

I wonder if they even knew who Alice waters was at that time, let alone be inspired by her.

that would have been difficult, if not prescient, as the whole California Cuisine movement didn't really begin to get acclaim until the 70s--early 80s. Let's keep things in perspective here.

And Chef, I'm not "propping up" Waters' inflence. As an inspiration to other chefs, and to the consciousness of America's home cooks, her influence was profound (and I really believe she was part of---albeit a significant part of---a wave of chefs, a la the others I mentioned previously).

And if you and others want to decry her influence by sneering at her marketing skills....since when hasn't a great chef needed marketing skills every bit as much as cooking skills to get recognition?

I did not say she was any sort of goddess. However, I do have to point out that you undercut your own argument by citing her as an "American Icon". Hard to see how she got to that status (especially when it's coming from another Chef) without being influential.

Dave R,
With all due respect, you mis-stated the question. It asked about the Top chefs, not the Best chefs. Had the question been posed as you suggest, I would have gone with Thomas Keller.
The word Top is of course open to interpretation, and I chose to interpret it in terms of influence, not skill.
In any case, I do not see that the US culinary world has moved beyond the Fresh, Organic and Local mantra espoused by Waters. Keller has certainly followed that path, though not as rigorously as he sources countrywide. But all over the country chefs continue to demonstrate the influence of Alice Waters without the results seeming dated. What more do you need to prove a chef's importance and influence?

but I still question how much influence even Banchet had on the cuisine of America.

Banchet was the chef at le Francais from 1973 to 1989 when he retired. And Cretier opened Le Vichyssois in 1976 and he is still standing at the stove over 30 years later. My point is, they were Cooking, and were influenced by Paul Bocuse and Jean and Pierre Troisgros. Banchet has influenced Chicago and is one of the main reasons every suburb around the city has a French restaurant or Bistro. And if his influence is Only Chicago or the Midwest as you have stated, that is a bigger influence than San Francisco or California, being that next to New York, Chicago was the Second Top Rated city for restaurants at that time, and I would go as far to say could be number One as of right now. Influence is a part of being a Icon, but at some point, Cooking skills has to be added as a factor to Top 3 living chef's in the world.

And if you and others want to decry her influence by sneering at her marketing skills....

I am not trying to diminish her marketing skills, that is part of the reason why she is a Icon, I can also say that I think of Alice Waters as a Activist/Restaurateur more so, due to her successful marketing. But what is her influence on young chefs today? and do they care? I am a historian of sorts, when it comes to culinary arts, I have always enjoyed reading about the history of food. But I can also say that more and more cooks are entering this field not caring about History or tradition, and Culinary Schools only care about the money, not whether there students can hold a knife properly or make Hollandaise, in addition these kids all want to be on there own TV show and want to make the big bucks,they do not care about a restaurant in Berkeley CA.

I will say this again, Alice Waters is a American Culinary Icon, as Is Banchet and Certainly Thomas Keller. But when you Compare all 3, Alice is not even considered close to either one of the two chefs as far as Cooking ability, and Creativity, Nor has she ever ran a restaurant at the same level both of these chefs have, and Keller still is with 2 of the top restaurants in the world. My survey was Top 3 living Chefs, and to put Alice Waters on that list is watering down a already diluted Influence point.

I also want to add that I am only referring to Waters' influence on the restaurant kitchen, not the home kitchen, which is what being a Top chef is about. Waters got the message out for chefs to pay attention to sourcing, to treat these ingredients with respect. Whether or not a few other chefs also were following that mantra independently is irrelevant, as they were not the effective communicators of the philosophy and their restaurants did not kick start a nationwide trend.

Measuring a chef by her influence on home cooking, Rachel Ray would be a Top chef.

As Hoke rightly points out, being a great chef does require marketing acumen in these times. Otherwise you go out of business.

Also, the fact that Waters herself had influences - especially Mediterranean cooking - does not subtract from her influence. Every great chef traces that greatness to previous masters and cultural roots. I'm not putting her on a pedestal, but I suspect that her detractors think that proper recognition is tantamount to worship. Waters has gotten pretty much every accolade from her peers, and to snip at her influence for what seems like petty reasons is, well, petty.

Responding to Rick, Waters' influence on young chefs today is the same it was on their mentors. The lessons of respect for the ingredients, the farmers, the methods of producing the food, and nurturing relationships directly with the farmers is still the same lesson as it was 40 years ago at Panisse. Keller's message is no different. Chefs that learned from Keller learned from Waters through Keller, and that is the influence that will pass on to another generation of American chefs. I just don't see how you can deny her that influence just because she isn't still out there on the front lines anymore.

Banchet was the chef at le Francais from 1973 to 1989 when he retired.

He also opened the short-lived La Mer in Chicago and put Richard, his sous chef, in charge there. Great restaurant. I was fortunate to eat there on their first anniversary - everything was half price, including the wine list.