Wow.
For the record, some of us can’t just up and travel to SF on a whim because of other obligations and responsibilities outside of work. I have these pesky things that live with me called kids and my dog. CPS sort of frowns upon leaving kids alone for a weekend.
It’s not a comparison, it’s an analogy.
Couldn’t agree more - and like you, I wouldn’t trade it for anything.
Brick layers create rows upon rows and layers upon layers of work that they they can look back to and be proud of doing something substantive and worthy. Then there are those who lay down rows and layers of spite, controversy and pettiness. Whether or not they are proud of such actions who knows, but it obviously brings them some sort odd satisfaction.
“I pity the fool.”
There are at least two important reasons for the progression of a kaiseki meal.
1 - Kaiseki, reflecting the aesthetic principles of the culture that produced it, is largely concerned with showcasing ingredients as an expression of the time and place. So seasonality and local produce are paramount. The presentations and progressions have evolved to become more luxurious and elaborate, but highlighting the qualities and ingredients of the season remains the driving ethos of a kaiseki meal.
I think this Brancusi quote a friend shared with me is very apt - “simplicity is not an end in art, but we usually arrive at simplicity when we approach the true sense of things.” The dishes are somewhat simple so they can highlight the ingredient and not get in the way of it. This also speaks to the Japanese principle of shibumi - unobtrusive beauty. Think of a kaiseki vegetable dish of ingredients done takiawase, i.e. simmered individually so you can taste each one distinctly. Or a simply grilled piece of fish with a touch of citrus and or salt and grated daikon.
There is a progression since these separate techniques - a grilled dish, a steamed dish, a clear soup dish, a fried dish, etc. - encourage focus.
A rice dish almost always comes near the end; often times it is quite bare, maybe with a little bit of topping and/or some pickles. Rice was a very valuable commodity in Japan’s history, in part because there was a big famine before and rice was even a measure of currency. Its name in Japanese means “honorable food.” So it’s presented near the end to allow diners to appreciate it in its simplicity, which is largely about texture (fragrance and luster are secondary attributes) and not all about flavor, leading to my next point.
2 - Washoku - traditional Japanese cuisine - prizes texture and contrast as much as it values flavor. This is maybe why Japanese food may be lost on you at times. The "“hazawari” (loosely, a descriptor for how food feels on the tongue) is important, so you may have a delicate and silky chawanmushi egg custard with fine strands of horsehair crab followed by a crunchy piece of root vegetable tempura. The contrast is interesting and accentuates the distinct textures. Something crunchy follows something soft, and so forth.
Now - N/Naoka takes some liberties since it’s admittedly “Modern Kaiseki” or “California Kaiseki.” A modern kaiseki restaurant in Japan like Azabu Kadowaki will serve a big rice pot with truffles. But N/Naka is a Japanese restaurant in Los Angeles - and Los Angeles is very much into sushi. So much so that many sushi restaurants serve a “sushi kaiseki” kind of menu that isn’t really found in Japan. N/Naka serves sushi near the end instead of a pot of rice, but in my opinion the sushi course does double duty in not only catering to Angelenos’ love for sushi, or reference Chef Niki’s previous cuisine but also acting as a “rice and pickles” course of sorts through the vinegared rice. In all honesty I think some of the cooked dishes were stronger than the actual sushi, but I honor the intention. And I am reminded that N/Naoka is a personal reflection of a Japanese American chef with sushi and kaiseki training working in Los Angeles.
If N/Naka were strict kaiseki, it would probably be lost on a lot of local diners. So by making the cuisine “California Kaiseki,” they are introducing diners to a cuisine while paying homage to the local surroundings. And, by reflecting its location in Los Angeles, N/Naka is in a sense staying true to kaiseki principles. If they imported everything, it wouldn’t reflect the specific time and place much.
Anyway, pretty much all of the places you listed has its own viewpoint which we could discuss. If you learn about them, instead of lumping them together, it will heighten your ability to critique or appreciate the cuisine from an informed perspective, not ignorance.
A few comments about some of the NorCal restaurants mentioned.
At one point, California kaiseki in Northern California could have been loosely defined as following the progression of a proper Japanese style kaiseki meal, or at least having the basics (out of order, but obvious ones are soup course, sashimi, yakimono, agemono, steamed item, gohanmono etc), using a combination of using/sourcing local California ingredients and Japanese (e.g. sashimi) and a combination of modern and traditional preparation/cooking methods. So from the San Francisco Bay Area list, Wakuriya would be following that the closest (and no nigiri course to please crowds). Hashiri would be 1/3 or so (Hashiri’s kaiseki chef Shinichi Aoki used to work with the chef of Wakuriya at the defunct Kaygetsu in Menlo Park). The new San Francisco Japantown restaurant OzaOza (which replaces Kappa) would also fall into that category since they are following the kaiseki path more or less.
Mosu has a unique style/blend, and the descriptor “contemporary American kaiseki-style tasting menu with Asian influences” is a good and accurate one. Notice it is kaiseki-style which can be a loose interpretation, and not kaiseki. I really like what they are doing, from the presentation to the seasonality of ingredients (the Japanese side), and fusing the Korean elements in there (mountain yam porridge, a certain kind of Korean seaweed). Their goma tofu (a staple in many high end kappo / kaiseki restaurants) is arguably the best in Northern California and can probably give some places in SoCal a run for their money. The other thing Mosu does so well, is that their food goes so well with sake (particularly the more aromatic, slightly fruit forward Junmai Daiginjo and Daiginjo sakes), and I’m guessing it’s the same at n/Naka.
Wako’s focus is sushi and always has been. The side dishes done kaiseki-style and offered as part of their tasting course, are a reflection of the chef owner’s initial culinary background (he worked in the Kansai area in kaiseki for a number of years before doing sushi). To me they are more high end kappo style plates, rather than select individual items from a kaiseki lineup
These days if you are running a SF style Michelin star omakase restaurant, your non nigiri portions of the tasting/omakase menu need to stand out (aka the “otsumami” where they were originally served to facilitate the consumption of alcohol with the meal). It can no longer be your neighborhood sushi bar’s favorites of slipping you an occasional extra piece of toro, a side hamachi kama, a piece of simmered fish head stew, or the lazy tried and true cucumber/ wakame salad / sunomono. They are now being replaced by super ultra refined “kappo ryori” style small plates, elegantly presented, and reflecting the seasons and their flavor.
Saw some recent photos of a Kenzo meal. The “kaiseki” portion was weird…three courses of straight up grilled fish (nothing fried or steamed) and then a bunch of nigiri.
Only if someone tells them… 
Is this not true of every haute cuisine restaurant? I keep seeing this emphasis on local ingredients presented as a main factor, as if restaurants like Saison, Californios, Benu, Coi, Crenn, et al. don’t give a shit about ingredient sourcing or something. In my experience, the opposite is true.
That reminds me far more of a meal like Saison, or even my meals at a restaurant apparently aptly named, Shibumi, in DTLA. A restaurant as lowbrow and uncouth as Salt’s Cure even indulges in this aesthetic when it serves a grilled pork chop in its own juice straight up, perhaps a dab of apple sauce on the side, no?
I have to say, my meal at N/Naka did not capture the essence of your example at all. The majority of the dishes were the same texture, or very similar. Nothing as interesting as eating chawanmushi followed by tempura.
The sushi was quite good, but did give the meal a quite divisive feel to it. It sort of made me wish I had gone for an all sushi meal; it did convince me to give more thought to getting more into sushi though.
Yeah, every restaurant has their own view on food. So what? From what you’ve said, there is not much that differentiates it. If California Kaiseki is about a focus on local ingredients, to express time and place, textural contrasts, and allows for breaking of many rules…then pretty much all of the places I listed should count in my opinion. All of them certainly do all of those things, many of them better than N/Naka imo.
I feel like there is some odd orientalism going on here or perhaps some kind of provincial pride? There is some desperate need to feel N/Naka is the best restaurant in the world only because it is in Los Angeles? It couldn’t POSSIBLY be anything like all of these other places because it would be a blow to its somehow special uniqueness as a sacred Japanese institution!
But when you dig beneath the surface it seems it is not so sacred, and the qualities that make it special are shared by all haute cuisine restaurants.
I appreciated the attempt at discussion before ending on insults for no reason.
Or, who knows, maybe you all seriously belief N/Naka is the only restaurant that cares about local ingredient sourcing, and textural contrasts in its cooking… How bitterly ironic that such people would accuse others of ignorance.
Too bad, was an interesting discussion for a while at least.
Terms that you find interesting and fascinating in a distant, conceptual way may be deeply offensive to others for very valid reasons. You are treading on very thin ice. I suggest you step away from this aspect of the discussion b/f the ice cracks.
No one is saying that. People are simply trying to explain the concept of kaiseki to you, which you said you don’t understand. And rather than consider it thoughtfully, you immediately prepare counter arguments. And again with the extremes and exaggeration. Calm down.
Getting ugly and engaging in argumentum ad hominem is not a good look.
Studying and experiencing something deeply relies upon an ability to draw distinctions. Anyone can engage in a silly exercise and “prove” that Sichuan food is actually no different than French cuisine . . . but only if one ignores critical facts that would otherwise allow one to draw distinctions.
We get it. You’re not that into n/naka. That’s cool. You’re in a minority. That’s also cool. It’s pretty uncool to minimize and marginalize kaiseki in general and attack posters genuinely attempting to educate you and the board.
I do remember you had some issues with the gender politics surrounding Niki Nakayama. Perhaps that’s coloring your ability to enjoy the restaurant or even appreciate the nuances of kaiseki?
Please tell me you didn’t just write that.
Because that is seriously something I cannot unsee.
It is, so what? You’re misunderstanding my point. I’m not saying that this approach is unique to kaiseki. I’m saying that the focus on seasonality has in turn led to focused dishes that hinge on a technique, and these dishes come in a certain prescribed order. Japanese aesthetics like wabi-sabi, mono no aware, etc. are part of its backdrop.
Nobody is saying that Saison, Meadowood, Benu, etc. don’t “give a shit about ingredient sourcing.” Of course they do. Of course all high-end places do. Even non high-end places do. Ingredient sourcing is a trait of kaiseki, but it’s not the only quality which makes something kaiseki. Kaiseki is inherently Japanese, naturally. It follows a specific progression of dishes, and it has evolved from a specific cuisine and aesthetic and cultural viewpoint. Other cuisines and other restaurants’ menus may have parallels or even shared elements, but that does not then make them de facto kaiseki or make the whole cuisine of kaiseki irrelevant. Just because something is analogous to another does not mean that they are necessarily synonymous or interchangable.
Yes, I believe that Saison often shares this viewpoint. It, in my opinion, is one of the best, maybe the best restaurants in California. Shibumi, I’m not so sold on. It’s not really “kappo” cuisine, or really all about shibumi, but it’s good nonetheless. Salt’s Cure very well may do that, ok. But I guarantee you that Salt’s Cure (or Mourad, as you mentioned) would not call themselves “California Kaiseki.” If Salt’s Cure started to serve Japanese ingredients in a procession of dishes that follows the kaiseki format, then it’s closer to kaiseki. Not that that’s necessarily better or worse; the cuisines are just different, and to say that they’re essentially the same thing is simply inaccurate.
Personally, I thought the sushi was one of the relatively weakest parts of the meal at N/Naka, at least from a technical standpoint. But sushi is indeed worth exploring!
My point is that you’re being reductive by lumping them all in under “California Kaiseki.” Quince is not the same as Benu which is not the same as N/Naka which is not the same as Californios. etc. The lowest common denominator is that they are all high-end restaurants in California. Their cuisines are different.
There’s a very obvious point that you’re missing: Kaiseki - California, Modern, or otherwise - is ostensibly Japanese at its foundation. It then has at one if its aims to follow the kaiseki progression. So no, Quince, Mourad, and Californios are not “California Kaiseki” - and again, not that there’s anything good or bad about that…they do their own thing, with their own merits and points of interesting discussion.
I’ll try to let that slide. None of that is at play here. FWIW, I don’t think that N/Naka is top 10 in the US, but probably more like top 30. It’s still very good and yes it’s not perfect. Yes, it has similarities to other places, like Keiko a Nob Hill in SF. I know you’re being sarcastic, but you look foolish.
You’re being ridiculous. Everyone can see that. I think you’re smarter than this, but you’re being disingenuous so as to troll us.
I feel very weird about talking about someone as if they’re not in the “room,” but…
I actually do not believe this to be the case. I think Aesthete is very intelligent but extraordinarily concrete and not interested in (or is unable to understand) subtext, nuance, or subtlety in written communication. It is most confusing.
But, strangely enough, I don’t believe this poster to be volitionally mean-spirited (or, at least, that what most – hell, all – of us consider to be totally disruptive is perhaps simply his/her baseline method of communication)…
@BradFord Good sir or madame, many thanks for the detailed, remarkably informative posts. It is users like you that make FTC such a wonderful place to discuss food.
I believe Aesthete has mentioned in a previous thread that he has Asperger’s.
Oh, did he? Well, that would explain the, er, miscommunications.
(Edit: just used the search function. I don’t think I had ever read the thread in which he informed us of that, so thanks for the clarification)
So acts of racism are not offensive just the idea of racism?..
Unfortunately, you’re correct.
If I could flip a switch and become normal and somehow understand all of the things everyone else takes for granted I would 
So it’s a matter of intention?
N\Naka aims to be Japnese so that makes it good? What about the fact that it seems to fail in so many ways? In fact, by what you’ve said, it seems it failed in many many ways that I didn’t even notice as an unwashed diner.
Basically though, in the end, you’re saying the only thing differentiating N/Naka and, say, Californios is that one aims to be Japnese and one aims to be Mexican?
I submit that that is a tremendously abstract view of restaurants compared to the gustatory realities of eating in them. But I guess it makes sense.
What about the places in SF that also aim to be Jaqpnese though? What prevents them from being the same as N/Naka?
Throughout all of this the point you’re missing is that it’s not about being the same as n/naka, but about being n/naka.
Fine dining restaurants (and perhaps even all non-chain restaurants) are not fungible experiences.