Locke Ober Review in Globe [moved from Boston board]

[scotty27]

What do folks think of the review in today's paper? I found it amazing: "Don't go there for the food." Uh, OK, but what are you paying for? History, says rhe critic. So turn it into a museum and serve snacks.

www.shrinkinthekitchen.com

[MC Slim JB]

The reason it was re-reviewed was that the restaurant has gone through a number of significant changes very recently: new ownership, the departure of their famed celebrity chef (Lydia Shire), a revamped menu under the new chef, some redecorating, and the end of the jackets-required dress code, the last one in Boston.

I'm withholding judgment until I get to visit myself, but I don't think the Globe critic is usually crazily far off-base. Her take does confirm a lot of my fears about these changes.

The economy is rough, the Downtown neighborhood in bad shape (e.g., Filene's Basement is now a giant hole in the ground, its redevelopment in limbo), tastes are changing, and there's a ton of new fine-dining competition around. I'd hate to see Locke-Ober become another once-excellent, now-faded landmark restaurant relegated to tourist trap status (like Durgin-Park or the Union Oyster House), but that possibility doesn't seem remote to me at the moment.

http://mcslimjb.blogspot.com/

[hazelhurst]

Your concerns are exchoed from afar but I am hopeful its adherents will step up and support the place. Certainly the last lunch I had there....a few years ago..was not as noisy as those of my youth. In the 1960's and 1970's the Cafe was always packed at lunch. But you are right about location problems. The fact that London Harness moved out a few years back was terrible news. I'd hate to see the place closed and relocated to South Shore Plaza "Just the Same! Only better!" The city and developers need to get that Dresden-style bomb crater fixed up and some business back. And not-a-few lawyers or bankers need to get back (but those professions don;t get their long lunches anymore and its a shame). Good thing George V. Higgins is dead...he'd be distraught.

[gfr1111]

As a fan of Robert B. Parker's Spenser novels, this Floridian is sorry to hear about what has allegedly happened to Locke Ober. Spenser liked it, and what was good enough for him is good enough for me. On the other hand, the Spenser novels began in 1973 or 1974, so I guess there has been plenty of time for change. Anyway, the next time I'm in Boston, I'll still try the restaurant.

Also, one relatively negative review does not a conclusion make. I'd love to hear what some other Boston critics are saying. Old, venerable, "tradition" restaurants make easy targets, both in Boston and elsewhere. The restaurant review starting with "Tradition-bound restaurant X 'ain't what it used to be'" is a staple for reviewers, a good hook for a story, and not necessarily true.

[Joanie]

I don't understand why this discussion had to be moved off the Boston board.

[jjbourgeois]

I'm sorry but reading the Boston Globe for anything related to food is like reading The Onion for news.

[treb]

word!

[ChefJune]

That link doesn't go to any review of Locke-Ober.

That said, not all restaurants need to be "cutting edge."

[Chris VR]

Here's the review: http://www.boston.com/ae/food/restaur...

Well, "review" is stretching it. It's about 85% on the scene and the history and 15% on the food.

[DoubleMan]

I'm no fan of First and the obligatory first page of pointless filler, but this review was worse than normal. The restaurant sounds terrible and 2.5 stars seems far too generous for a very expensive place that is wildly inconsistent and offers only a couple of dishes worth recommending.

I like this comment from the article (though I probably wouldn't have picked Lumeire to make that point):

"I just got back from a weekend in Chicago and through the contrast realized that there is a difference between respecting history and being stuck in it. In many areas (architecture, fashion, urban planning, and yes, restaurants) Boston's devotion to the area's history holds it back from growing, developing, and becoming something a little more interesting. Is that photo above of the "renovated" restaurant?? It looks like something preserved from the 70's .. and not in a good way. Given a choice I'll take Lumiere every time."

-----
Lumiere Restaurant
1293 Washington St., West Newton, MA 02465

[MC Slim JB]

I've noticed a pattern in both the Globe and Herald recently of awarding star ratings that don't quite match the review. I know most pros hate having to give star (or other 1-5 scale) ratings, but it seems like there's some fudging going on: you slam the place in the review's body, but soften the blow with a less damning star rating.

http://mcslimjb.blogspot.com/

[robwat36]

The Herald gives almost everything a B.

[hazelhurst]

I did not see that quoted comment in teh review I saw on-line..is that a complaint about the Cafe's decor? If so it is simply idiotic. The whole thing has a nose-pressed-to-the-glass sound to it as if she feels hurt to ot have been invited to a party. We need places such as Locke-Ober and Antoine's and Galatoire's if only as places to preserve a style of eating. People who complain that the food is not "innovative" are in for a long downhill stretch in life. There is nothing wrong with classic "dull, boring" food. There is plenty wrong with the oafs in T-shirts

[robwat36]

Also, Locke-Ober isn't representative of anything but Locke-Ober. There's no other place in town that looks anything like it.

[hazelhurst]

Quite true.

[MC Slim JB]

Nose pressed to the glass? I think I saw her commenting more on the occasional obnoxiousness of that old-money crowd, which can be painfully evident. There is a museum-like quality to more than just the decor at times.

Her online chat today alluded to some less-than-stellar treatment of non-white customers, too.

http://mcslimjb.blogspot.com/

[hazelhurst]

That's similar to what I am saying..it just seemed a bit defensive. I sent the review to a Boston friend who grew up in there and who remarked he'd prefer comment on the food to social observations. Your notion that it is dangerously close to toursist trap is unsettling. I will try to get by there on my next trip north, the urgency for which has been underscored by Da Brooins win.

[robwat36]

I also saw that allusion in the chat and thought it was a little irresponsible. It's really easy to brand a place as racist or homophobic without any substantiation.

[MC Slim JB]

It still got 2.5 stars. It reads to me like the review of someone who thought the food was a lot better under Shire, and who (as I've loudly lamented) thinks the just-retired dress code helped make it seem a lot more special. I've also noted (as have other observers) that the bar is a badly wasted opportunity.

I haven't been in since the ownership change, so I can't comment on the food yet. But it doesn't seem a crazy conclusion to reach that if the place is very expensive, the food is inconsistent and rarely great, and they now admit folks in t-shirts, it is verging on tourist-trap territory. Maybe it is now at the point where you're going to want to go once for the historical value but not again, the way you might with the Union Oyster House, Durgin-Park, and other once-worthier dining experiences.

http://mcslimjb.blogspot.com/