db bistro moderne

Note: Click here for a more recent visit to db bistro moderne.

db bistro moderne is the least formal of Daniel Boulud’s New York properties. The menu is organized by ingredients, instead of the usual appetizer/entrée split. The categories are in French (hommard, thon, artichaut, etc.), but the descriptions of the items in each category are in English. You have to notice an “AP” or “MC” next to the price to identify whether the item is an appetizer or a main course. You can also look at the price itself: db’s entrées are remarkably consistent, at about $28-34 apiece regardless of the item.

I just had to try the “Original db Burger,” to find out what a $29 hamburger tastes like. The menu says it’s a “Sirloin Burger filled with Braised Short Ribs, Foie Gras and Black Tuffles.” I was not able to identify all of those ingredients from the taste. It’s thick (to accommodate all of the goodies stuffed inside), but not very large. Getting your mouth around it is a challenge, somewhat like a three-decker sandwhich at a Jewish deli.

Was it a very fine hamburger? Yes. Do I recommend spending $29 on it? No. Rounding out the meal was a smoked salmon appetizer ($14) that was perfectly competent, but not a patch on what I had at Ouest a couple of weeks ago.

The burger and the salmon are both found in a section of the menu labeled “Specialitiés De La Maison.” Gimmicks of the house seemed more like it. I saw a lot coming out of the db kitchen that appealed to me. Neither of these really did the trick. If I go again, I’ll try something else. At $72 per person (including drinks, tax, and tip), I think this town has better bargains for your money.

db bistro moderne (55 West 44th Street between Fifth & Sixth Avenues, West Midtown)

Spinning Debate #2

Last night’s Cheney-Edwards debate was a draw. Both men scored points. Both men missed opportunities. The “insta-polls” afterwards went either way, depending on which network you watched. There were no obvious gaffes on either side. Both sides can claim victory…of a sort.

From Bush’s point of view, Cheney had to stop the bleeding. With Bush having clearly lost last week’s encounter in Miami, the campaign could ill afford another drubbing. Whether Cheney won or not, he was at least solid. I doubt that Cheney persuaded any Kerry supporters to switch sides, but at least he reassured a nervous Republican base.

From Kerry’s point of view, Edwards matched blows for 90 minutes with the Vice President and managed to appear substantially his political equal. When you’re the challenger, your first goal is simply to demonstrate that you belong there. To the undecided voters who still matter, Edwards showed he belonged. No undecided voters will choose Kerry-Edwards as a result of this debate, but at least Edwards gave them no reason to choose Bush.

So, it was a draw. Vice Presidential debates historically are not relevant to the final outcome, and it appears this wasn’t the one to change that trend. The stakes remain high for the two remaining Bush-Kerry debates.

Spinning Debate #1

In the first of their three debates, John F. Kerry appears to have scored a victory over President Bush. I haven’t found any source outside of the Bush campaign that believes the President won. Every journalist, pundit or commentator — of whatever party — declares it a Kerry victory or a tie.

Assuming, charitably, that it was a tie, you have to assume that the debate helped Kerry. In any election involving an incumbent, the challenger’s first task is to persuade the voters that he’s a plausible commander-in-chief. No matter how vulnerable the incumbent may be (and Bush is as vulnerable as any), no challenger can be elected until he passes that threshold. Merely by standing toe-to-toe with Bush and not wilting, John Kerry, perhaps for the first time, seemed Presidential.

I’m obviously not much of a pundit, because I initially thought Bush had won. Although Kerry was articulate and poised, he seemed stiff and humorless. Bush imbued his answers with the folksy, unsubtle, no-nonsense Southern twang that voters four years ago found appealing. There wasn’t much levity in the debate, but such as it was, it came from the incumbent. On a gut level, I thought that Bush did a better job of making an emotional connection with his audience.

But Bush stammered through several of his answers, and he was clearly on the defensive. I was disappointed that moderator Jim Lehrer spent so much of the debate (at least 2/3rds of it) re-hashing the rationale for invading Iraq. While the candidates clearly disagree on whether the war was a mistake, after an hour they were just repeating themselves.

Kerry supporters shouldn’t get too giddy. Post-debate insta-polls initially showed Al Gore winning the first debate in 2000. By the time the punditocracy was finished dissecting Gore’s performance, he had lost. It will take a few days to see whether Kerry’s solid performance last night actually made a difference to persuadable voters. What’s more, there are two Presidental debates to go, plus a Cheney-Edwards tilt next Tuesday. Any one of them could produce one of those defining moments that changes an election.

Danube

Note: Click here for a more recent visit to Danube.

Last night, I had a wonderful dinner at Danube. A vendor was buying, and he asked if I had a favorite. I approach my restaurant life a little differently. An invitation to dinner is opportunity to try someplace I’ve never been. Danube came immediately to mind.

This is one of those restaurants that hardly ever attracts an unfavorable comment. It is almost universally adored, and for good reason. From its Klimmt-inspired décor to its impeccable service, everything at Danube is well thought out and smartly executed. Whether it’s a romantic occasion, a business dinner, or a birthday celebration, Danube delivers a memorable experience.

The amuse bouche was a tiny salmon square on a bed of avocado cream. To start, my dining companion and I both chose the what I called the double foie gras ($19), which came with a conventional seared Hudson Valley foie gras and an odd confection called “Crème Brûlée of Foie Gras with Harvest Corn Goulash.” If you love foie gras, then twice as much of it is heaven. My only complaint is that the crème brûlée was at an in-between temperature: it had been allowed to cool a bit too long.

I almost never order Wiener Schnitzel, but I figured that if any restaurant was going to make it memorable, Danube would. (I also concluded that if you’re at an Austrian-themed restaurant, you should try some Austrian food. My colleague concluded the same, and ordered the goulash.) The Wiener Schnitzel came with austrian crescent potatoes, cucumber salad, and a lingonberry sauce. I must say that I was initially underwhelmed, but the dish grew on me, and I was sad to take the last bite. The light breading was just perfectly fluffy, the veal succulent and tender. Still, part of me wondered if this really deserved to be a $30 entrée.

Desserts at Danube are mostly Austro-Germanic specialities, such as Caramel Strudel and Sacher Torte. I tried a pina colada ice cream dish, which is not shown on the restaurant’s website, and I can’t quite recall how it was put together. After this, a plate full of chocolates arrived, which I struggled (in vain) to resist.

Danube offers a vast array of menus. As at many uscale restaurants, the first page shows the tasting menu (five courses, $75; or, $135 with wine pairings). The nine-course degustation is $95. A four-course seasonal menu is $55. There are three à la carte sections of the menu: the Austrian specialties, “Modern Eclectic,” and the chef’s weekly market choices. Appetizers are $9-19; entrées are $26-35.

You’ll pay handsomely for your experience at Danube, but it is well worth it. A glance at the bill showed a bottom line of $270, which included more wine than was strictly necessary. But then, there’s no point in doing Danube half-way. Go and enjoy yourself.

Danube (30 Hudson Street at Duane Street, TriBeCa)