Chez Panisse loses its Michelin star

[Jenise]

Once so idiosyncratic it was cutting edge, it's no longer trendy enough.

http://sf.eater.com/archives/2010/10/26/there_are_10_in_north.php

How accurate do you think this rating is? According to the comments, it sounds questionable. I was surprised to see Fleur de Lys on the one star list. They have been around for a very long time. I loved going there years ago.

[Jenise]

No idea Karen--it's a rating, so it's subjective. I did just read in Spoon Fed, the memoir by NYTimes food writer Kim Severson I'm gobbling up now, that while she was at the Chronicle her boss had been on the defense about his high rating of Panisse for years. I would find it hard to dig up exactly what she said, but it was to the effect that you either 'got' and loved Chez Panisse for not the most technically advanced food but Alice's vision and uncompromising idea of quality (which her boss did), or you didn't. Personally, I loved the restaurant.

But Michelin isn't sentimental, so maybe Michelin compares everything to the French Laundry by which standard most restaurants fall short. And maybe that's fair, maybe the world has moved on. It's certainly true that in the post-Keller/Adria world, the gold standard has changed. But does/should that relegate Panisse to obsolesence? Maybe it should, maybe Panisse's time is truly past, like the formerly grand 'Continental' style restaurants of the 60's my parents still think are GREAT but which I long ago deemed fuddy-duddy. Doesn't mean you don't eat well there, but hey. Steak Diane is so over. And so, maybe/sadly, is Alice's goat cheese. At least as far as Michy is concerned.

Too often we throw out the old for the new without due consideration. As there is a place for the modern, so should there be a place for the classical, that in music, the opera, the dance, the plastic arts, the theatre and indeed in dining. If all is done in the name of modernism (read too often as "fashion") alas for the classics. At least so methinks.

Best
Rogov

It seems your thinking applies to a lot of things. What is really disturbing is when old, beautiful architecture is torn down and replaced with something less beautiful and minus any character. This is even true of restaurants. There used to be a beautiful old building on the coast, where I grew up, near Eureka. It housed a restaurant called The Big Four. They served the very best Italian foods. You walked into a huge room, which had round tables with crisp white cloths. Along the side walls were raised seating areas, each sectioned off by a wall. You entered through a curtain. Very private for those who wanted complete privacy while dinning. The entire building was torn down, it was so sad for those of us who ate there for years, and loved the great Italian foods.

As a Berkeley resident, I'm familiar with Chez Panisse and go to the cafe or restaurant at least once a year. The ingredients are impeccable, but this is no longer unusual in Northern California (or some other regions). They are treated with respect and careful cooking. It's almost impossible to have a bad meal here, but it is quite possible to have at least one boring dish. Once in a while there is a dish that is an absolutely splendid intersection of exceptional ingredients, but at Chez Panisse I never go "wow, how did they do that?" or "I never would have thought of that!" This is OK for an unpretentious bistro but not for an icon, in my book. That said, I'm surprised they lost their one star; I would have said one star was just right.

Old doesn't necessarily mean classic.

Traditional doesn't necessarily mean good.

And sometimes restaurants fall back on traditional, unchanging, rote preparations because they've run out of force or energy or passion---or simply because they are tired of doing the same thing for so long. And the magic disappears. It happens.

Sometimes things just fall out of vogue.

And sometimes pioneers and trend-setters do what they do well enough that they no longer have any point of differentiation.

Whether we like it or not, the restaurant business is so much more than simply putting food on a table. It's as much entertainment as it is food, honestly. And when people go to Chez Panisse and they are not entertained---in all things, food, decor, service, attitude, all the fine details that make up an excellent restaurant---then people stop going.

And one of the warning signs of a restaurant's eminent decline is when the founder doesn't spend time in the kitchen anymore, and is apparently more occupied with things extraneous to the restaurant and pertaining more to her iconic status. That may have happened here. When focus is lost, all is lost.

And sometimes pioneers and trend-setters do what they do well enough that they no longer have any point of differentiation.

I wonder how much of their diminished status (as far as Michelin is concerned) is due to this. Alice Waters has been incredibly successful in pushing her ideas and they've been adopted by many in this area, anyway. I haven't eaten at Chez Panisse in many years, so I don't have too much to judge by myself. Still, when I look at some of the young turks in our area who are doing some amazingly imaginative (and very tasty) things with local produce and meat, I wonder if Alice's success has resulted in her restaurant being passed by.