Is Philly this Country's 3rd best food city?

Sarah_Kirschbaum · January 17, 2017, 7:56pm

OK, since the question of criteria has come up, I will try and summarize the article I have at home. I agree that there’s a degree of meaninglessness to questions like this. That said, we’re endlessly fascinated by them – I know I am – and I think that trying to have the discussion, with as much substance to it as possible, is not only fun and interesting (to me, anyway), but also important as we participate on the consumer side of this food/restaurant world and seek to make it better and ensure a future where our passion is nurtured and celebrated. Tilting at windmills though it may be.

Please read this understanding that I fully recognize these are my opinions. I by no means think this theory, or whatever you want to call it, is comprehensive. It’s also a work-in-progress. But it is based on a lot of thought and discussion. Meaning no horn-tooting, I have a great deal of experience with restaurants around the world, at all levels, in cities and rural areas, in palaces and huts (both of those in the literal sense) in more than 60 countries. I eat pretty much everything, and can be excited about pretty much everything, regardless of fanciness, if it’s a good version of that thing. And I work really hard to keep objective judgments of quality separate from personal preferences, though no one is perfect at that. Anyway, disclaimer over.

I believe that the very best food cities in the world, the truly top-of-the-top, not just places where you have a blast eating over the weekend (don’t get me wrong –that’s really important, too, it’s just a different question), have to have ALL of the following:

High-end dining. Doesn’t necessarily mean white tablecloths and tons of waiters, but we all have a general sense of what we’re talking about. Cooking that has seldom equaled technique, soul, excitement, great taste and a certain je ne sais quoi, all offered in a setting where what we see, hear, feel, and taste has been carefully tended to in order to produce an exquisite experience. Not everyone likes this kind of dining, I know. But it’s important. We can talk about why I think so another time.
A wide variety of ethnic, for lack of a better word, cuisines readily available and well executed with respect for and awareness of where they came from. Not every single country need be represented, of course.
A critical mass of strong 2nd tier restaurants, where the chefs are working hard to produce something truly special, not generic. This category would include, but is not limited to, the places where cooking is at or near the level of those high-end restaurants, in a much more casual setting.
A pervasive appreciation, on the part of both chefs and diners, of quality ingredients and the role they play in raising food, both simple and complex, to another level. Local bounty is a plus, for various reasons, but not necessary.
A dispersion of good, exciting, above-the-norm restaurants into various areas of the city, geographically speaking. I feel strongly about this one and would be happy to discuss why I think this is important at another time.
Chefs who take what they are doing seriously (not stodgily) at all levels. Where there are chefs who think perfecting the burger is just as important as perfecting the souffle.
A general sense of food being important and taken seriously in that city. Not every restaurant or every person, but a certain groundswell of feeling that food and quality food at that, is a part of this city’s identity.
Some innovation, experimentation and pushing of the boundaries going on; not necessarily as a rule, but present enough that it’s part of that city’s food identity. On the flipside…
Good, respected, examples of very traditional cuisines like Italian and French. The ones that manage to pay homage to the past and how those cuisines have been important, without getting stodgy.

I’m sorry – that’s all I can remember right now. I think I had 10 points in my original article.

So, applying these criteria, I believe that, in the US, only New York and San Francisco make it there. And that’s ok! To begin categorizing or ranking those cities that don’t have all of those things, I begin to look at how many of them are missing. The more that are missing, the further down the ladder that city belongs. To the point of the original post, Philadelphia is missing quite a few.

RyanC · January 17, 2017, 7:56pm

We just had this thread a few months ago. Philly did not figure prominently in the discussion. By near acclimation, NY was No. 1, followed by LA/Chi/SF in some order, followed by spirited debate over Portland/Houston/Charleston/New Orleans/DC/etc. That said, I’d love to explore Philly dining more - for some reason I never end up on business travel there. Wish that would change.

Sarah_Kirschbaum · January 17, 2017, 7:59pm

Ryan - if you ever make it here, please let me know. My cellar is open to you.

David_K_o_l_i_n · January 17, 2017, 8:05pm

Sarah Kirschbaum:

OK, since the question of criteria has come up, I will try and summarize the article I have at home. I agree that there’s a degree of meaninglessness to questions like this. That said, we’re endlessly fascinated by them – I know I am – and I think that trying to have the discussion, with as much substance to it as possible, is not only fun and interesting (to me, anyway), but also important as we participate on the consumer side of this food/restaurant world and seek to make it better and ensure a future where our passion is nurtured and celebrated. Tilting at windmills though it may be.

Please read this understanding that I fully recognize these are my opinions. I by no means think this theory, or whatever you want to call it, is comprehensive. It’s also a work-in-progress. But it is based on a lot of thought and discussion. Meaning no horn-tooting, I have a great deal of experience with restaurants around the world, at all levels, in cities and rural areas, in palaces and huts (both of those in the literal sense) in more than 60 countries. I eat pretty much everything, and can be excited about pretty much everything, regardless of fanciness, if it’s a good version of that thing. And I work really hard to keep objective judgments of quality separate from personal preferences, though no one is perfect at that. Anyway, disclaimer over.

I believe that the very best food cities in the world, the truly top-of-the-top, not just places where you have a blast eating over the weekend (don’t get me wrong –that’s really important, too, it’s just a different question), have to have ALL of the following:

High-end dining. Doesn’t necessarily mean white tablecloths and tons of waiters, but we all have a general sense of what we’re talking about. Cooking that has seldom equaled technique, soul, excitement, great taste and a certain je ne sais quoi, all offered in a setting where what we see, hear, feel, and taste has been carefully tended to in order to produce an exquisite experience. Not everyone likes this kind of dining, I know. But it’s important. We can talk about why I think so another time.

A wide variety of ethnic, for lack of a better word, cuisines readily available and well executed with respect for and awareness of where they came from. Not every single country need be represented, of course.

A critical mass of strong 2nd tier restaurants, where the chefs are working hard to produce something truly special, not generic. This category would include, but is not limited to, the places where cooking is at or near the level of those high-end restaurants, in a much more casual setting.

A pervasive appreciation, on the part of both chefs and diners, of quality ingredients and the role they play in raising food, both simple and complex, to another level. Local bounty is a plus, for various reasons, but not necessary.

A dispersion of good, exciting, above-the-norm restaurants into various areas of the city, geographically speaking. I feel strongly about this one and would be happy to discuss why I think this is important at another time.

Chefs who take what they are doing seriously (not stodgily) at all levels. Where there are chefs who think perfecting the burger is just as important as perfecting the souffle.

A general sense of food being important and taken seriously in that city. Not every restaurant or every person, but a certain groundswell of feeling that food and quality food at that, is a part of this city’s identity.

Some innovation, experimentation and pushing of the boundaries going on; not necessarily as a rule, but present enough that it’s part of that city’s food identity. On the flipside…

Good, respected, examples of very traditional cuisines like Italian and French. The ones that manage to pay homage to the past and how those cuisines have been important, without getting stodgy.

I’m sorry – that’s all I can remember right now. I think I had 10 points in my original article.

So, applying these criteria, I believe that, in the US, only New York and San Francisco make it there. And that’s ok! To begin categorizing or ranking those cities that don’t have all of those things, I begin to look at how many of them are missing. The more that are missing, the further down the ladder that city belongs. To the point of the original post, Philadelphia is missing quite a few.

I think your tenth criteria must have been “10) Not Chicago”

Stuart_BeauneHead_Niemtzow · January 17, 2017, 9:53pm

I think it was that the pizza is great and not just generic high heat, wood oven stuff. (And, I agree that Philadelphia is missing that one.)

Tom_Gibson · January 18, 2017, 2:00am

Sarah, you’re a gem. I love that list.

Philly hits (in my mind and I’d welcome debate): 3, 6, 9. 4 and 5 are partially hit. 7 exists but it’s at the very low end (cheesesteaks, Pretzels).

I think it straight misses 1, 2 and 8. And 10, of 10 is pizza.

ybarselah · January 18, 2017, 3:06am

there’s plenty of new-wave and traditional pizza in philly. as much as any other city outside NY, so not sure it’s fair to ding it for that. but i also don’t think having pizza does anything for putting a city on the food map.

Nolan_E · January 18, 2017, 3:55am

If you feel so confident about third place I’m curious what you think first and second are.

RyanC · January 18, 2017, 3:57am

What a nice invite - I’ll certainly reach out if I head to Philly. Same offer goes for Houston if you’re ever down here.

Nolan_E · January 18, 2017, 3:59am

Sarah Kirschbaum:

OK, since the question of criteria has come up, I will try and summarize the article I have at home. I agree that there’s a degree of meaninglessness to questions like this. That said, we’re endlessly fascinated by them – I know I am – and I think that trying to have the discussion, with as much substance to it as possible, is not only fun and interesting (to me, anyway), but also important as we participate on the consumer side of this food/restaurant world and seek to make it better and ensure a future where our passion is nurtured and celebrated. Tilting at windmills though it may be.

Please read this understanding that I fully recognize these are my opinions. I by no means think this theory, or whatever you want to call it, is comprehensive. It’s also a work-in-progress. But it is based on a lot of thought and discussion. Meaning no horn-tooting, I have a great deal of experience with restaurants around the world, at all levels, in cities and rural areas, in palaces and huts (both of those in the literal sense) in more than 60 countries. I eat pretty much everything, and can be excited about pretty much everything, regardless of fanciness, if it’s a good version of that thing. And I work really hard to keep objective judgments of quality separate from personal preferences, though no one is perfect at that. Anyway, disclaimer over.

I believe that the very best food cities in the world, the truly top-of-the-top, not just places where you have a blast eating over the weekend (don’t get me wrong –that’s really important, too, it’s just a different question), have to have ALL of the following:

High-end dining. Doesn’t necessarily mean white tablecloths and tons of waiters, but we all have a general sense of what we’re talking about. Cooking that has seldom equaled technique, soul, excitement, great taste and a certain je ne sais quoi, all offered in a setting where what we see, hear, feel, and taste has been carefully tended to in order to produce an exquisite experience. Not everyone likes this kind of dining, I know. But it’s important. We can talk about why I think so another time.

A wide variety of ethnic, for lack of a better word, cuisines readily available and well executed with respect for and awareness of where they came from. Not every single country need be represented, of course.

A critical mass of strong 2nd tier restaurants, where the chefs are working hard to produce something truly special, not generic. This category would include, but is not limited to, the places where cooking is at or near the level of those high-end restaurants, in a much more casual setting.

A pervasive appreciation, on the part of both chefs and diners, of quality ingredients and the role they play in raising food, both simple and complex, to another level. Local bounty is a plus, for various reasons, but not necessary.

A dispersion of good, exciting, above-the-norm restaurants into various areas of the city, geographically speaking. I feel strongly about this one and would be happy to discuss why I think this is important at another time.

Chefs who take what they are doing seriously (not stodgily) at all levels. Where there are chefs who think perfecting the burger is just as important as perfecting the souffle.

A general sense of food being important and taken seriously in that city. Not every restaurant or every person, but a certain groundswell of feeling that food and quality food at that, is a part of this city’s identity.

Some innovation, experimentation and pushing of the boundaries going on; not necessarily as a rule, but present enough that it’s part of that city’s food identity. On the flipside…

Good, respected, examples of very traditional cuisines like Italian and French. The ones that manage to pay homage to the past and how those cuisines have been important, without getting stodgy.

I’m sorry – that’s all I can remember right now. I think I had 10 points in my original article.

So, applying these criteria, I believe that, in the US, only New York and San Francisco make it there. And that’s ok! To begin categorizing or ranking those cities that don’t have all of those things, I begin to look at how many of them are missing. The more that are missing, the further down the ladder that city belongs. To the point of the original post, Philadelphia is missing quite a few.

I’ve been here less than a year, so I don’t have a ton of city pride, but I feel like all your criteria points towards Portland, do you have enough experience with the scene here to say why it doesn’t hit your radar?

RyanC · January 18, 2017, 4:07am

Sarah Kirschbaum:

OK, since the question of criteria has come up, I will try and summarize the article I have at home. I agree that there’s a degree of meaninglessness to questions like this. That said, we’re endlessly fascinated by them – I know I am – and I think that trying to have the discussion, with as much substance to it as possible, is not only fun and interesting (to me, anyway), but also important as we participate on the consumer side of this food/restaurant world and seek to make it better and ensure a future where our passion is nurtured and celebrated. Tilting at windmills though it may be.

Please read this understanding that I fully recognize these are my opinions. I by no means think this theory, or whatever you want to call it, is comprehensive. It’s also a work-in-progress. But it is based on a lot of thought and discussion. Meaning no horn-tooting, I have a great deal of experience with restaurants around the world, at all levels, in cities and rural areas, in palaces and huts (both of those in the literal sense) in more than 60 countries. I eat pretty much everything, and can be excited about pretty much everything, regardless of fanciness, if it’s a good version of that thing. And I work really hard to keep objective judgments of quality separate from personal preferences, though no one is perfect at that. Anyway, disclaimer over.

I believe that the very best food cities in the world, the truly top-of-the-top, not just places where you have a blast eating over the weekend (don’t get me wrong –that’s really important, too, it’s just a different question), have to have ALL of the following:

High-end dining. Doesn’t necessarily mean white tablecloths and tons of waiters, but we all have a general sense of what we’re talking about. Cooking that has seldom equaled technique, soul, excitement, great taste and a certain je ne sais quoi, all offered in a setting where what we see, hear, feel, and taste has been carefully tended to in order to produce an exquisite experience. Not everyone likes this kind of dining, I know. But it’s important. We can talk about why I think so another time.

A wide variety of ethnic, for lack of a better word, cuisines readily available and well executed with respect for and awareness of where they came from. Not every single country need be represented, of course.

A critical mass of strong 2nd tier restaurants, where the chefs are working hard to produce something truly special, not generic. This category would include, but is not limited to, the places where cooking is at or near the level of those high-end restaurants, in a much more casual setting.

A pervasive appreciation, on the part of both chefs and diners, of quality ingredients and the role they play in raising food, both simple and complex, to another level. Local bounty is a plus, for various reasons, but not necessary.

A dispersion of good, exciting, above-the-norm restaurants into various areas of the city, geographically speaking. I feel strongly about this one and would be happy to discuss why I think this is important at another time.

Chefs who take what they are doing seriously (not stodgily) at all levels. Where there are chefs who think perfecting the burger is just as important as perfecting the souffle.

A general sense of food being important and taken seriously in that city. Not every restaurant or every person, but a certain groundswell of feeling that food and quality food at that, is a part of this city’s identity.

Some innovation, experimentation and pushing of the boundaries going on; not necessarily as a rule, but present enough that it’s part of that city’s food identity. On the flipside…

Good, respected, examples of very traditional cuisines like Italian and French. The ones that manage to pay homage to the past and how those cuisines have been important, without getting stodgy.

I’m sorry – that’s all I can remember right now. I think I had 10 points in my original article.

So, applying these criteria, I believe that, in the US, only New York and San Francisco make it there. And that’s ok! To begin categorizing or ranking those cities that don’t have all of those things, I begin to look at how many of them are missing. The more that are missing, the further down the ladder that city belongs. To the point of the original post, Philadelphia is missing quite a few.

Great post. Being generous, Houston has 2, 3, 5, 7, and 9. Sort of kind of has 8 on a good day. Houston is a lot like a weaker version of LA - very strong on any diversity/ethnic/geographically dispersed scale, and strong 2nd tier restaurants – but almost completely lacking an interesting high-end, important chefs, or any destination type places. (Oxheart being the arguable exception, but it’s closing in March.) The biggest issue is that, despite being a big and very wealthy city, there’s still very little cultural appetite for paying even $150 per person for a meal, much less the prices charged at the top SF/NY spots.

Sarah_Kirschbaum · January 18, 2017, 11:59am

It does hit my radar. See my initial post on this thread. I think LA, Portland (assuming we’re talking about Oregon), and maybe Chicago come closer than Philadelphia to the top of the ladder.

Stan_Y · January 18, 2017, 12:40pm

Sarah that’s a really good list. Something I like to see that follows from many of your main points is a very dynamic food scene, where the critical mass of talented chefs a range of great places top to bottom combined with the serious appreciation of quality and ingredients results in a fairly continuous stream of innovation and interesting new places to try. A great food scene constantly spins off and incubates great talent and great food.

Clayton_Wai-Poi · January 18, 2017, 1:09pm

David K o l i n:

Sarah Kirschbaum:

OK, since the question of criteria has come up, I will try and summarize the article I have at home. I agree that there’s a degree of meaninglessness to questions like this. That said, we’re endlessly fascinated by them – I know I am – and I think that trying to have the discussion, with as much substance to it as possible, is not only fun and interesting (to me, anyway), but also important as we participate on the consumer side of this food/restaurant world and seek to make it better and ensure a future where our passion is nurtured and celebrated. Tilting at windmills though it may be.

Please read this understanding that I fully recognize these are my opinions. I by no means think this theory, or whatever you want to call it, is comprehensive. It’s also a work-in-progress. But it is based on a lot of thought and discussion. Meaning no horn-tooting, I have a great deal of experience with restaurants around the world, at all levels, in cities and rural areas, in palaces and huts (both of those in the literal sense) in more than 60 countries. I eat pretty much everything, and can be excited about pretty much everything, regardless of fanciness, if it’s a good version of that thing. And I work really hard to keep objective judgments of quality separate from personal preferences, though no one is perfect at that. Anyway, disclaimer over.

I believe that the very best food cities in the world, the truly top-of-the-top, not just places where you have a blast eating over the weekend (don’t get me wrong –that’s really important, too, it’s just a different question), have to have ALL of the following:

High-end dining. Doesn’t necessarily mean white tablecloths and tons of waiters, but we all have a general sense of what we’re talking about. Cooking that has seldom equaled technique, soul, excitement, great taste and a certain je ne sais quoi, all offered in a setting where what we see, hear, feel, and taste has been carefully tended to in order to produce an exquisite experience. Not everyone likes this kind of dining, I know. But it’s important. We can talk about why I think so another time.

A wide variety of ethnic, for lack of a better word, cuisines readily available and well executed with respect for and awareness of where they came from. Not every single country need be represented, of course.

A critical mass of strong 2nd tier restaurants, where the chefs are working hard to produce something truly special, not generic. This category would include, but is not limited to, the places where cooking is at or near the level of those high-end restaurants, in a much more casual setting.

A pervasive appreciation, on the part of both chefs and diners, of quality ingredients and the role they play in raising food, both simple and complex, to another level. Local bounty is a plus, for various reasons, but not necessary.

A dispersion of good, exciting, above-the-norm restaurants into various areas of the city, geographically speaking. I feel strongly about this one and would be happy to discuss why I think this is important at another time.

Chefs who take what they are doing seriously (not stodgily) at all levels. Where there are chefs who think perfecting the burger is just as important as perfecting the souffle.

A general sense of food being important and taken seriously in that city. Not every restaurant or every person, but a certain groundswell of feeling that food and quality food at that, is a part of this city’s identity.

Some innovation, experimentation and pushing of the boundaries going on; not necessarily as a rule, but present enough that it’s part of that city’s food identity. On the flipside…

Good, respected, examples of very traditional cuisines like Italian and French. The ones that manage to pay homage to the past and how those cuisines have been important, without getting stodgy.

I’m sorry – that’s all I can remember right now. I think I had 10 points in my original article.

So, applying these criteria, I believe that, in the US, only New York and San Francisco make it there. And that’s ok! To begin categorizing or ranking those cities that don’t have all of those things, I begin to look at how many of them are missing. The more that are missing, the further down the ladder that city belongs. To the point of the original post, Philadelphia is missing quite a few.

I think your tenth criteria must have been “10) Not Chicago”

Yip… not sure how. Chicago doesn’t easily meet all of these criteria (except no. 10).

Tom_Gibson · January 18, 2017, 1:51pm

Fair enough, although I always felt Philly was lacking in pizza quality. It definitely misses fine dining and innovation, though. Which is fine - most cities miss those.

Sarah_Kirschbaum · January 18, 2017, 2:06pm

I think the saddest miss for Philly is my fourth point, an appreciation for quality of ingredients. It’s made especially sad by the fact that we have easy access to great local produce and meats. Getting good fish in Philly is even hard, which makes little sense. I think diners here simply aren’t willing to pay what better ingredients would cost. The result is that a lot of restaurants that would be solidly 2nd tier if they just invested in better ingredients, fall well below that bar for me now.

I also don’t think Philly is there yet in having a critical mass of 2nd tier restaurants, which is why I have enjoyed my meals at many local BYOB places, but can’t name one I think is really strong. Vernick and Zahav are the only two restaurants in town I think fit the bill.

It’s arguable for me whether Philly has good versions of the classics and I agree with Tom that food as a serious part of the city’s identity only really applies to a few local specialties.

I guess I’m largely with Yaacov on Philly overall, both my sense of things and when I apply my own specific criteria. The ability to bring wine for free almost everywhere is the only really great thing. That doesn’t mean there aren’t places we really enjoy, of course, but I don’t consider it a food town.

P_Willenberg · January 18, 2017, 2:40pm

I completely agree with this, although as a former resident of SF I cannot support the usage of San Fran.

It’s depends on what you like. The best cities list is different if you’re into ethnic food or fine dining.

Sarah_Kirschbaum · January 18, 2017, 2:47pm

No. That’s precisely what I’m trying to work against here - that “it depends on what you like.” I don’t think the question needs to be dictated by taste, or not unduly so. We should be able to have a discussion that doesn’t devolve into “I like this, so that means it’s good.” There’s a difference between being objectively a great food city, and being a city where I personally really love to eat.

Siun_O_Connell · January 18, 2017, 3:46pm

Love Sarah’s list which seems to capture the real food culture needed for a great food city - but I’m another vote wondering how Chicago does not make the grade?

Philly should get at least one extra credit point for Tastycakes however.

Tom.Cole · January 18, 2017, 3:58pm

For me, it is a toss up between NYC, San Francisco, and New Orleans. Ranking would depend on personal preference.

I will say that Sarah has a good list of traits one should look for. I would include one more and for me maybe the most important - history including a long history of food appreciation, innovation, and being a food destination city.

New Orleans includes all of Sarah’s traits along with my addition.