« Recent trip to Alba, Not only good truffles | Main | Gastronmic trip to Donostia/San Sebastian »
December 11, 2004
El Bulli 2004 - Rating (16/20)
No chef in history has received as much publicity as Ferran Adria. He is called an artist and is compared to Dali, Picasso and is often called a genius. The acclaims are such that one wonders if he is soon about to get the Nobel Prize in physics or chemistry.
Is all the hype justified? Is he the greatest chef in the world? Is he the best chef of his generation or maybe even the best chef ever?
We will give a few thoughts on those questions. We have together eaten at el Bulli over several years in the late 90’s and in May 2004. The purpose of this post is to make an overall analysis of el Bulli and speculate about where it is going.
The fundamental methodology behind the reasoning and our analysis are described in our standards.
The food that was on the 2004 menu can roughly be divided into four categories:
The first category is dishes that are foremost based on morphing, a concept which means that an ingredient is transformed into something else or into another state. Successful examples of this in the 2004 menu are a yoghurt jelly and the chips made of beet juice. Both are very good examples of creations that show a great respect for the ingredient – although it is turned into another shape and form and a different taste angle - and where the taste has a very high level of clarity. The beet chips were truly exceptional. But there are other less convincing or even catastrophic examples, such as the frozen Parmesan fluff with cereals with raspberries that can only be described as a massacre of good Parmesan cheese, since the only association it gives is that of frozen fermented (poorly stored) milk. It is easy to be puzzled by the presence of raspberry muesli on the table. The problem with morphing as Adria practices it, is that, the majority of dishes prepared by this method result in creations where the taste of the finished ingredient is often a shadow of the true taste of a particular ingredient or the excitement that such an ingredient can give in an un-morphed state.
The second category dishes are based on various earlier concepts developed by Adria mainly creations with an appearance different than what we normally associate with the name or looks of a dish. Some examples of this are the use of agar-agar jelly to make transparent pasta, using thinly sliced fat as a pasta wrapper, a baguette that is really a cracker with Serrano ham, an onion peel that acts as a ravioli wrapper etc.. The baguette was quite successful and it was one of the better dishes of the meal expressing and even enhancing the fantastic taste and appearance of Serrano ham. On the other hand, the egg put inside an onion wrapper served with truffle oil and shaving of a cheap truffle, was a humiliation of the true taste of truffles since it had a pronounced artificial taste of truffle oil that gave quite bad aftertastes which lingered far too long. Let us stay with this truffle dish for a while. Why would this dish be served at all? Is there a meaning with it? Adria writes in one of his books that the dish is a “homage” to the real Alba truffle. There seems to be no other meaning with it. It is expressively stated that the truffle oil used with it is not particularly good and that they would not go at length to acquire good oil (if there is one (doubtable there is)). It is often alleged by people defending Adria that these type of dishes are intellectual and that he is an artist and that there is a lot of emotions in the dish. Well, since there – according to Adria's own account – is no deeper meaning with the dish and the taste associations more resemble that of truffle varieties that are not commercialised due to there lack of interest, claims that dishes such as these are intellectual or emotional becomes quasi-intellectual at best.
The third category consists of a few dishes that are more normal dishes but where a less than normal taste combination plays a part in the dish. Examples of this category were the civet of rabbit and the chocolate dessert with a black sesame sauce. Both these have been on the repertoire for a long time.
Finally, a disturbingly large number of dishes for a multi-starred restaurant, could be put into a category that should be called “pointless”. One example of this is the balloon filled with fleur d’oranger air, which, despite its sensual evocation apparently with the aim of recalling the smell of Andalusian orange trees, ends up leaving a pretty nasty residual smell of rubber. Another example of this category is the use of Blumenthal’s (of the Fat Duck) nitrogen bucket. It is useless from a culinary perspective and, besides, it endangers freeze injuries in the guests’ mouths!
There are a few widely used techniques that kept coming back on several occasions during the 2004 meal. It is worthwhile to make some general comments. First the overarching technique is the use of alginates to create liquid balls or ravioli like creations. A second is the use of bathtub like foam in dishes to create a visual effect as an end in itself, rather than any taste enhancement. A third often used technique is the use of agar-agar based jelly.
How interesting is the repeatedly used alginate trick? One should admit that the liquid balls in the cocktail, served very early in the meal are very nice and certainly justified. When in the mouth they burst and give the sensation of an unmixed Pinacolada that is mixed in the mouth. This was an exceptional creation. On the other hand, other uses of this technique, such as the melon caviar, the liquid pumpkin ravioli or the coconut milk ravioli have little culinary value. This is not only because they are not made from absolutely pristine raw material, but because they did not capture the extraordinary clarity and taste of the initial raw material. Even if they had, more than one snack or course made with this technique would have been too much and superflous. From a culinary point of view, serving a liquid in this manner is of little interest and it is an overkill to do it many times during the course of the meal. Furthermore, many creations made by using this technique at el Bulli end up becoming dull tasting shadows of the original tastes. It is also enigmatic that Adria is getting recognition as if he has invented this technique, which has been used in the food industry and have been published and documented for years prior to Adria’s use of it.
The widespread use of bathtub foam is also quite questionable since it provides little improvement from a taste point of view and, in most cases, the desired visual effect was not there since the foam had largely turned into liquid when the plate arrived at the table.
Using agar-agar jelly is also a technique that Adria seems to be getting credit for discovering. But again agar-agar is nothing new. It can be very interesting but the problem is that in some of the preparations, too much agar-agar is added so that the taste of it is traceable and the texture becomes too firm, causing the diner to lose the sensation jellies should provide by melting in the mouth. The visual effect of having clear transparent pasta rarely outweighs the down side of forsaking the benefits of encapsulated taste and a crunchy texture, not at all comparable to the desired al dente texture in real pasta. Agar has many interesting uses rather than acting solely as a jellifying agent. Strangely such uses seem not to have been explored by any chefs.
Surely, Adria should be credited for his researcher-like exploration for certain concepts, such as the above mentioned, or that of finding alternatives to traditional pasta, such as using thinly sliced fat. The major question is why other top restaurants in Europe rarely copy these concepts or techniques. The answer may be that many, but not all of these creations, lack culinary interest, simply because they provide little excitement from a taste point of view. The difficulties with using agar-agar to provide a top-notch dish were touched upon above, but it is not to say it does not have an important role. The same goes for using thinly sliced fat as a pasta wrapper. It is difficult to use as the taste of the fat easily takes the upper hand. Surely Adria should have credit for conducting focused experiments around it. But his oysters wrapped in smoked pork fat, included in the 2004 menu, provide just another example of how difficult it is to make this concept work. The smoked pork fat effectively kills any positive taste sensation that the oysters could and should have provided. Gagnaire, where both of us had eaten in March 2004, in contrast, had a similar dish on his menu but he was using top-notch very thin lardo di collonata as a wrapper. Gagnaire’s dish also had a more pronounced component of iodine and he used a larger and higher quality Militon oyster that had a much clearer taste and crispiness. Finally, to counter the presence of fat and to impart a complex and harmonious taste, Gagnaire wrapped the oysters in crisp and garden fresh spinach leaves.
The most disturbing memory from the 2004 menu is the lack of real ingredients. Much of what is being served is made with what could be called generic ingredients, that is ingredients where the quality of the individual ingredient matters little, such as coconut milk, corn, eggs, pumpkin oil etc. The “real” or rare ingredients included 2 small morels (Admittedly the small ones are the best), 2 small shrimp tails (had little taste but it did not matter since they were paired with a sharp tasting bathtub foam), a tiny portion of sea cucumber, two small oysters, a small piece of rabbit leg and some tiny pieces of lamb’s sweetbreads, that indeed were so tiny that the taste of lamb’s sweetbreads was undetectable much to the delight of one person at the table who hates them.
We also believe that, if one looks at the progression of Adria’s cuisine, certain generalizations are in order.
1) There is a progression away from the use of rare ingredients towards generic and pedestrian ingredients. In the past Adria prepared some dashing dishes from a good dose of cigalas (langoustines), percebes, gambas, foie gras, caviar, espardenyes. Recently the use of “fake” caviar (from melon, from apple), or “fake” Alba truffles dominate. The problem is not that they taste different than the imitated object, but in the case of the fake truffle they border on taking the clients for idiots.
2) Especially with decreasing portion size and an increasing number of dishes, Adria’s menu is becoming too repetitive. It is now quite common that one dish or technique is over used and a good thing is becoming overkill. Quail or salmon egg with a caramel sheet is very good but having them both as an appetizer and dessert is overkill. Similarly, Adria’s ajo blanco is a revelation but having it twice in the same meal with a slight variation leaves one with the impression that the second is superfluous. The repeated use of alginate-based preparations tires the palette. One can add that, Adria has a continuing bias to overuse sweet and citrus or citrus-like flavours. This may appeal to some diners but repeated use of citrus or citrus-like flavours upsets the overall harmony which should be a character of great dining.
3) In order to be classified as a great chef one should improve upon traditional dishes and create some dishes that will become part of the culinary cannon. Admittedly such creations are rare. Early in his career, Adria had some fantastic dishes with the potential to become classics. Oddly, these were his more “simple” dishes, created without morphing or without an intended pun or surprise effect. Examples include tuetano con caviar, exceptional quality bone marrow with a dollop of caviar and celeriac puree and his percebes preparations which retained the pristine taste and enhanced it, his version of ajo blanco, etc. The common element of all these dishes was that they were based on, what another contributor called, “true associations” in the sense that ingredients were in a symbiotic relationship with one another where supporting elements (say caviar) responded well to the main ingredient (say bone marrow) and the sum was greater than the individual parts. Adria succeeds most when he does not try to impress using wow techniques.
4) Adria’s cuisine is becoming more risk free in two senses. First, his recent offerings, which are based on generic ingredients, should appeal to most international diners who have a limited repertoire and are afraid of new tastes (percebes, espardenyes, offals, game birds, etc). Everybody likes sweet-caramelized and citrus-like flavours. Second, by privileging the visual over the primary taste, Adria appeals to the largest common denominator of diners. He gives people what they want: familiar and well liked taste combinations disguised in avant garde forms. The lingering impression is that one ate “interesting” things, “can not quite remember what but nothing offensive” and that the chef has great “style”.
5) Compared to the past, Adria is serving smaller portions(not tapas really but raciones) and more of them. In the beginning, while one is sipping the aperitive, this works well. Relaxing in his terrace watching the sun recede against the background of Montjol Bay while gulping down little caramelised tidbits of rice, nuts, fruits is a sensual experience second to none. Adria’s deconstructed cocktails are fantastic. But later on, when one sits at the table and the meal proceeds, we are under the impression that Adria gets away with offering many taste combinations which are not well worked out. Only very rarely does all the work put into making snow out of parmesan for instance or fluff out of this, crisps out of that or liquid ravioli out of whatever(the filling has been changing over the years) make any sense as the true taste and exceptional quality of a divine ingredient in its original state and shape is masked and becomes diluted by this, most of the time superfluous, process. Adria gets away by serving a lot of second rate dishes because they are served in very small portions. Inexperienced diners can take a bite and think it was great. Had the same been served in larger portions, the same diners would have thought otherwise. By spreading the amuses throughout the meal, Adria avoids a great deal of critical scrutiny.
The current menu for 145 Euros is not necessarily cheap for what is being served. The average food costs at a multistarred restaurant are in the region of 26-30%. The food cost of el Bulli’s 2004 menu is hardly close to that figure. Adding to this the large number of unimpressive dishes the price feels rather steep. It should be noted that the price charged at el Bulli is roughly equivalent to that charged in the French countryside by 3 stars such as Bras who serves superior and more expensive ingredients.
Gastroville rating: 16/20
