Kevin redux

We re-visited Kevin the other night for a special dinner; it’s one of Lovely Dining Companion’s favorite places in Chicago and it had been quite some little while since we were there.

Once again, a truly excellent meal in wonderful surroundings (well, okay, the group of six at the next table could have kept their conversation among themselves instead of carrying on as if they owned the place). Since I have opined before, I shall limit myself to a recap. I started with the quail. I generally shy away from little birds because, though I enjoy them, they’re usually more trouble than they’re worth. This one, according to the menu, is “birch syrup glazed quail on potato cake with roasted apricot, grilled shiitake, arugula and sheep’s milk cheese in port wine reduction.”

The description is tiresome. I’ve left out the German-style capitalization but even so find the description—precise though it is—just too much. C’mon! Yes, all of those items were there, but there’s just something de trop (as our French friends would say) about it all. Isn’t it possible to name the dish without listing every single ingredient to be found in it? It seems that the above description is lacking only the “lightly seasoned with sel de mer and Tellicherry peppercorns harvested on July 2, 2004, under a generally sunny sky and slowly ripened in the hot southern sun for seventy-two days, sixteen hours, and forty-three minutes.” That complaint aside, the dish was excellent. All of the tastes melded—though I’m not positive I tasted the birch syrup glaze (in my experience it’s a much more delicate flavor than maple). The sweets and bitters and salty all combined beautifully and the textures were wonderful together. Best of all, the quail. A generous portion, meaty, expertly trimmed and a dish to remember.

LDC's aspirations were less filling but no less minutely described: “grilled asparagus in sherry vinaigrette with mixed greens, Nancy’s sheep’s milk camembert, figs, sweet onion and toasted almonds." Had I been able to pry more than one small spoonful from her fist, I’d report on it in more detail than, “sure seemed delicious.”

For entrees, LDC tried a roasted Alaskan halibut (okay, okay: “on coconut risotto with papaya, tomato, watercress and corn in sesame lobster broth with steamed crab wontons"). Again, my observations are limited by my inability to obtain more than a token, albeit generous bite. A healthy portion of fish and quite good, though I’m not convinced by the idea of coconut risotto. I think it sounds better than it is. But the multiplicity of flavors blended beautifully and she was happy (that’s the test, right?)

I ordered a three-fer, in that my entrée was a trio of pork items: pork tenderloin (about five or six meaty, melt-in-the-mouth slices—very possibly the best pork tenderloin I’ve ever had), “braised Chinese pork belly” (think char siu), and pulled pork potstickers. The latter an interesting idea: down-home barbecue meets Chinese! All three parts were top-notch, intriguing flavors, different textures.... Oh, almost forgot: served with “smoked Bhutanese red rice, mushrooms, tart cher-ries and rapini.” Again, superb choices that blended magnificently.

We split dessert and I must, once again, take a moment to ask what the hell is going on here…. Let me quote from my first, extremely lengthy review:

And speaking of Asian influences: someone better tell Cindy Schuman that she's working for Kevin Shikami. Her desserts are superb. Let no one quibble about that. Truly and honestly among the best in the city. But what seems a bit odd is that in this particular restaurant, where the chef prides himself on the Asian influences--and it shows--it seems strange not to have one dessert that shares that emphasis. Just one. I don't think that asking for such unity of theme is unreasonable and frankly, reading the dessert menu after studying a dinner menu rife with Asian influences, is more than a bit of cognitive dissonance. It's an excellent menu but it doesn't belong in this restaurant. I don't know. I do know that we were both a little disappointed to read a dessert menu that could be found in almost any other high class French spot in the city. Kevin has chosen to pride himself--as well he might--on the Asian influences. Why doesn't he demand the same from his dessert chef?

Nothing has changed. Excellent desserts. But with a dessert menu that belongs to another restaurant. Doesn’t Kevin believe that his approach to the first part of the menu should be mirrored in the second part? Why on earth can’t an inventive, creative, top-notch pastry chef come up with a few dishes that have Asian/fusion influences? This is how the restaurant advertises itself, for crying out loud. Not every dessert item, but at least a couple. Do I expect too much?

So let's have it, Cindy: add some azuki beans, some mochi flour, some ginger or green tea some-thing or other and use it as a base for something else to add to your already stunning repertoire.

But we’ll be back. No doubt whatsoever about that.

Gypsy Boy

P.S. For the terminally curious, dinner with a glass of wine and one dessert and coffee, including tax and tip, about $135.

I think there are two reasons for that style of description:

1) To make it more appealing. "Quail with Latke" and "Grilled Asparagus with a Salad, too" aren't quite as appetizing to most people. Add on the name of the farm that provides your quail and it's even better. I bet you could charge 20% more just for the fancy name.

2) To appease the food phobic, who either require a rundown of every ingredient in a dish or, worse, reject it upon receipt, saying "oh, I'm allergic to figs", or some other similar lie.*

Just my two cents.

* I'm not saying people aren't genuinely allergic or averse to certain foods. I'm saying many people pretend their dislikes and phobias are allergies or other non-mental ailments.

I always found Kevin to be a little heavy on the ingredients. Some dishes shine, but some get lost by trying to put too much.