My wife and I went out for a Valentine's Day dinner earlier this evening. This year we went to one of our favorite restaurants,
Compass, instead of going to one of the hot new restaurants we've read about, as in previous years. Every year we'd be disappointed. Last year we tried going to a place we had been to a few times over the years,
Terrace in the Sky up by
Columbia University. But we were still disappointed--the food was about as good as it had been on previous visits, but the service was really poor.
So this year we went back to the tried and true. We got a booth as we had requested (OK, as my wife had requested--she's the one who makes restaurant reservations usually). It makes the largish room much more intimate--especially with the one we got, that had a pillar pretty much hiding us from view on the open end.
There was a very limited prix-fixe menu available, but that wasn't a problem--actually, what
was a problem was choosing between the "Heirloom Beets" (with black truffles, goat cheese and pistachios) and the risotto (with foie gras, chestnuts and butternut squash) for the appetizer. I love foie gras, so I went with the risotto. For my main course I had sirloin steak and braised oxtail, which came with fingerling potatoes and a truffle Bernaise sauce. I don't have beef very often, but I was in the mood. For dessert, chocolate-hazelnut tart. My wife had the same appetizer and dessert, but chose the pan-seared red snapper for her entrée. We decided to get the wine pairing--a 3 oz. glass specially chosen to go with each dish.
But before the appetizers came (but after a
great basket of rolls and bread), a little "amuse bouche" appeared. It consisted of three tiny things each: an oyster (very appropriate for Valentine's Day) with some sort of sauce, a little piece of foie gras on some sort of cracker, and a third, I can't remember what exactly, in a tiny pie crust. And to accompany all this was a small glass of a Spanish sparkling wine, Cava. It certainly was as good as most champagnes I've had.
The risotto was next, along with its wine, the 2001 Damilano Barolo from the Piedmont region of Italy. The wine was served by the sommelier, who gave an explanation of why he thought it was right for the dish. Most of what he said went right over my head. My wine vocabulary doesn't get too far beyond white and red. There are a few types (i.e. type of grape) that I recognize, e.g. merlot or riesling, and I can sort of understand and recognize sweet vs. dry, spicy and fruity, but when you get to oak, and waxy, and such terms, I'm lost. Anyhow, his choice worked well with the risotto--which was marvelous, with a generous portion of beautifully seared foie gras in it.
Next were the entrées. I was surprised that the sirloin was sliced. The portion seamed a bit skimpy. I had to search for the oxtail. It was shredded, and was hiding under the potatoes and a layer of braised watercress. The steak was superb. I ordered it medium-rare, and it came just the way I like it--pink on the inside, but still cooked (and hot) all the way through. What really surprised me was the sauce. Usually I find Bernaise sauce to be unnecessary, even distracting, for any good steak. But this example was the best I've ever had, and
added to the wonderful taste of the meat. The oxtail was quite nice, too, though I think it would not have worked too well just on its own--but accompanying the steak it was fine.
This time the sommelier brought a California cabernet sauvignon, the 2001 Valentine "Echo Valley." Yes, he had a Valentine wine for Valentine's Day. How cute. He poured me a generous amount--quite a bit more than the 3 oz. we had been promised. And regardless of the name, it was a great pairing with the steak.
Of course, it turned out that the portion was
not skimpy. Perhaps I was misled by the huge plate it was served on, but the amount was fine.
The chocolate-hazelnut "tarts" came, though it was more of a multilayer sandwich than a tart to my eyes. It was very good, though not quite up to the level of the previous courses. The sommelier came again, with some sweet dessert wine, the 2000 Banyuls "Vigne d'en Traginer" from the Roussillon region in southern France.
Were we done? No. We wanted coffee, which was not on the prix-fixe menu--nor was it offered by the waiter (I suspect it was not an oversight. I think the restaurant would prefer people not lingering over coffee on a very busy evening like Valentine's Day). And then
more food came, a trio of tiny after-desserts: a tiny marshmallow heart, an equally tiny strawberry shortcake, and a chocolate "lollipop," some dribbled dark chocolate stuck to the end of a six inch stick--all very nice. Oh, yes, I almost forgot--they gave us a little box of chocolates to take home (on normal nights they give little scones).
After paying the bill (don't ask--but it was just a few dollars less than the monthly rent on my first apartment in New York, back in 1973) we went out to retrieve our coats. It was an excellent meal, certainly the best Valentine's Day dinner I've ever had, and it
was worth the cost. (It
is nice being able to afford such things.) My only complaints were about not being offered coffee, and about the up-tempo pop music they piped in. It certainly wasn't necessary once the place started really filling up.
On the way out one of the hostesses (not the one in the great, lacy black skirt with the asymmetrical hem) handed my wife a long-stemmed red rose--a nice touch. But I noticed that they did
not give a rose to the gay couple leaving right behind us. How unfair. We need same-sex marriage!
----------------------------
ADDED AFTERTHOUGHT: I have realized that I may have judged Compass' actions concerning the roses too hastily. Perhaps it was just a gender thing--maybe if it were a lesbian couple
both of them would have gotten roses. The more I think about it, that's probably the way it was. If a mixed group with an unequal number of men and women came in, I'm sure they would given all of the women roses.
Of course, this brings up the entirely different question of gender discrimination.
