So jump to the present. A dear friend and I wanted to try Les Bouquinistes.in the 6th. And I’m sure you know why. You know the restaurant. You’ve passed it a million times walking down the Quai on the left bank of the
The answer is not only because of the food but because of its price-quality ratio. But I’m getting ahead of myself.
Nice welcome. No aperitif asked about, but that’s cool. The menus are opened; startlingly uninteresting choices a la carte and equally true on the reasonably priced “menus;” which featured two courses for 25 €; three for 28 €. I start to backpedal. The last refuge of a scoundrel is not patriotism but ordering two entrees. But that’s wussing out. So a bit of negotiation with my dining partner and we agree on a first; but make the same mistake we made three months ago, we ordered the same thing. Fortunately it (raviolis with shrimp) was alright, not great, mind you, but alright, although two other friends had raved about it. Then the mains – spring suckling lamb and scallops on a bed of black ink risotto – I know, I know, never order risotto in this country, French chefs think that Italian cooking, being inferior to the French variety, is easy. Well, it’s not. The scallops themselves were good product, OK prepared; the lamb overcooked, overdried, over there. Desserts? – are you kidding. Just some weak pallid coffee fit for the Occupation and the bill – no mignardises mind you.
Oh, the wine. Well, you’ll recall that one of
As we’re waiting for the bill, my pal asks what I thought of the meal (a question my partners in eating always ask, thinking I know more than they do or they want to disagree with the self-proclaimed expert) and how was I going to write it up? “Alright, no more than that - and I’ll never be back” I said and added something like “and not at all exciting.” Earlier he had responded to my complaint that I found nothing interesting to order as follows - “Yes, but if tourists come and have the menu it’d be OK.” I said “but the choices?;” he replied “they’re not looking for what we are.”
OK, so that’s how it stood before we saw the tariff. The bill arrives = 140 €. What? My friend, this mild mannered, erudite, sophisticated and not dirt-poor, long-ago immigrant to
Now in fairness, we are jaded eaters. And, our standards are probably a bit tougher than most people. And, and, nothing was disgraceful – well, I lie - the risotto was utterly disgraceful. And finally, we didn’t think it was worth it for 100 €, but at 140 €, forget it.
But let’s go a bit farther along this path. A meal a few weeks ago at the hottest ticket in
Now, do you agree? Is there a point or price at which any food, no matter how good, is just not worth it? (Economists have a technical term that I can never recall, for such a price.) Obviously, from my Carre Des Feuillants and Bouquinistes experiences I’d say yes.
My favorites from the above.
Spring
28, rue de la Tour d’Auvergne, 9th, (Metro: St Georges or Pigalle)
T: 01.45.96.05.72
Open for dinner everyday but Saturday and Sunday (now, and about to open for lunch Thursday and Friday)
Menu du jour 36 € for four predetermined courses
Le Versance
16, rue Feydeau, 2nd (Metro: Bourse)
T: 01.45.08.00.08
Closed Saturday lunch, Sundays and Mondays
John - I'm right there with you on the Bouquinistes. I finally got around to trying it a year or so ago after being told how great it was. Completely mediocre eating experience. Long wait for our table (even though we were right on time for our reservations) They were keeping our wine on a sort of communal table and bringing it over to pour - however, at some point in the middle of the meal, they started pouring us someone else's wine. The staff alternated from being rude and standoff-ish in the beginning, to overly friendly in a creepy-trying-to-pick-you-up kind of way by the end.
My steak was fine. Friend's tuna was pretty good. Heard the couple next to us send a dessert back saying it tasted like soap. Anyway, there are too many other restaurants that I like way too much better to give this one a second try.
Posted by: Forest | October 16, 2009 at 05:45 PM
Good to hear from you Forest: Well I suppose in their favor you could say that they are consistent; consistently mediocre that is, over two years.
Posted by: johntalbott | October 16, 2009 at 05:55 PM