Gordon Ramsay at The London

He's a character, isn't he? When I first saw Ramsay doing his stroppy, sweary routine on television I had two thoughts: one, that Marco Pierre White had already done this shtick and two, that Ramsay had better be able to put his cuisine where his cocky foul mouth was or his shelf life would be extremely short.  Last year we went to his three-Michelin-starred flagship London restaurant at Royal Hospital Road in Chelsea. This is not a review of that restaurant so I'll just get to the point and say that it was the best meal of my life. We left that place feeling drugged, in a good way. There was some involuntary moaning and sighing. I was completely won over. Ramsay was the real thing: a truly world-class chef.

So when he opened Gordon Ramsay at the London (which is in New York, for those who have not been paying attention) we were thrilled, and eagerly anticipated a visit. And when Frank Bruni, the New York Times Restaurant critic, gave it an extremely sniffy review ("Eric Ripert: meet Colonel Sanders") and a measly two stars, we were somewhat taken aback. Teething troubles, perhaps? It seemed unlikely there'd be many problems of that nature, given both Ramsay's vast experience in the business and his clear determination to do well in arguably the best, most competitive restaurant city in the world. Was Bruni just being a dick? Resenting the presumptuous outsider, the enfant terrible? Well, last night we found out. If there were teething troubles at the London, they're dealt with. The place just received two Michelin stars and they are very well deserved. I have no way of knowing what was happening at The London when Bruni reviewed it but what's happening there now is very good indeed.

To get to the main restaurant you first have to walk through the London Bar, which is a moderately large and attractive space. Tables (and places at the bar) were available both when we arrived at 6:30 and when we left at 9:00. It seems it's perfectly possible to just walk into the place without reservations and spend an evening enjoying cocktails and their allegedly delicious tapas-style bar snacks. That's not something you can do at the restaurant but I was surprised to discover that it is still very easy to make a short-notice reservation there. I called only a week before ours and I was offered at least one time for every day of the following week. For a New York restaurant of this quality that's fairly amazing. I guess people are still giving more weight to Mr. Bruni's review than they are to the Michelin effect. I suspect this will not continue for much longer so now is a very good time to eat at The London. I certainly hope to go at least one more time before reservation becomes as difficult and tiresome as it can be at similarly rated places in New York.

The restaurant, as Bruni correctly observed, is very muted in appearance. The seats are sage green; the walls are a combination of glass and unobtrusive pale shades. The effect is formal but relaxed and I was immediately struck by certain similarities to Hospital Road. Not, perhaps, in the detail but more in the general air of cool refinement. The wait staff is efficient and smooth without being overly fussy or formal, and they quickly make you feel that you are in capable hands. If I wanted to nitpick I'd say that they haven't yet quite attained the truly awe-inspiring impression of well-oiled efficiency one finds at Hospital Road, but that's to be expected in a relatively new establishment that is clearly working to find and maintain its level. They're definitely getting there.

The food? Well, as is our custom when visiting restaurants of this quality, we had the tasting menu with wine pairings. Here's the rundown:

We started with a glass of champagne (Ann had a rosé variety). They were serving three different types of bubbly by the glass and these were delivered to the table via a trolley bearing the bottles in a large ice bucket. We were then given some little canapés – four light, savoury pastries – which tasted good enough to encourage optimism about what was to follow. And what followed was… four more canapés, delivered to our table by a different waiter!  I felt obliged, perhaps foolishly, to point out that we’d already had some of these, and the response was “Oh… well, now you have some more.” Correct answer!

The amuse bouche followed. This was a butternut squash soup with thyme. It was light and silky; the delicate squash flavour punctuated with lovely and quite discrete bursts of fresh thyme. It definitely amused the bouche.

The first course proper was confit foie gras with slow cooked chicken, truffled quail’s egg and pear chutney. This was accompanied by a full-flavoured but not overly sweet Riesling. 

Next we had ravioli of tiger prawn with fennel cream, shellfish vinaigrette and chervil velouté. For me it was the first really superb dish. The texture of the prawn was toothsome without the slightest chewiness, the pasta was light and yielding and the sauce complemented the fish perfectly. Our wine for this course was the first of two quite complex whites. Unfortunately I don’t recall the type (I really must start taking notes on these occasions) but I do remember that it was light-bodied, pale and fairly dry with subtle floral hints.

Staying with fish, we next had baked fluke with sweet almond crust, celery hearts and champagne velouté. This was another winner because it had what I am starting to think may be something of a Ramsay speciality: subtle delicacy of texture and suave, refined taste combinations. Each ingredient's contribution had a distinct purity which neither overwhelmed nor diminished the integrity of the dish. Nothing overpowered anything else; the dish was about balance. Ramsay’s cooking is not, for the most part, about big, broad strokes and cavalier explosions of flavour. It’s classy and seductive, not loud and tarty. Not that I have anything against loud, tarty food – sometimes that’s exactly what you want – but that’s not what  you go to Ramsay’s for. The wine made a striking but effective contrast to the restraint of the dish: a fairly full-bodied white involving seven grape varietals; it had a big fat nose,  a rich taste involving hints of buttery chardonnay cut with brighter notes of acid and fruit, and dirty undertones of barnyard and sweat. Very pleasing to find such depth in a white.

We split the two meat dishes for our next course. The cannon of lamb with olive crusted potatoes, vidalia onions and lamb jus was accompanied by a hugely powerful, sweaty Malbec,  and the venison medallions in red wine sauce came with a drier, sharper but very satisfying Vacqueyras. I’m afraid my memory has failed me on the precise details of the venison but I do recall that a smear of chocolate and three sweet little cranberries were involved. It was superbly simple and satisfying, and possibly the tenderest venison I've ever had.

We both decided to go for a selection of cheeses with port before dessert, which was Valrhona chocolate fondant with caramelized banana ice cream. Served alongside this was a small glass of malted milk which provided a light, cool contrast to the intensity of the chocolate. The final wine pairing was a medium sweet sherry which, once again, complemented the food admirably. We finished with a small selection of bonbons and some smooth, powerful espresso. I wish I could remember the wines in more detail but unfortunately we haven’t yet received the promised email from the sommelier. If he doesn’t forget I’ll update this post with the information later.

Once again, Ramsay has pulled it off and created another fine, top-class restaurant. Is it up to Hospital Road standards? Maybe not quite, but it’s damned close. Perhaps the already very good service needs to get just a little more of that relaxed, unobtrusive efficiency; perhaps the menu needs just a tiny bit more tweaking for balance; perhaps they should ditch the table they’ve placed in a rather unfortunate position directly in front of the kitchen doorway… but this is nitpicking. Gordon Ramsay at The London fully deserves its two Michelin stars and Frank Bruni needs to revisit and reconsider.

Comments

[Suzanne]

I love Gordon Ramsay.. I particularly love that show when he revamps struggling kitchens.
Alas, I don't believe he has a restaurant in LA yet (please correct me if I'm wrong) but your review was so descriptive I can imagine how enjoyable it would be!

[Jack]

Suzanne: I'm pretty sure The London is Ramsay's first foray into the States, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's hoping to expand elsewhere - and I'd guess San Francisco or LA would have to be contenders. We shall see...