LEO's Eat'N'Blog: Plus ça change at Café Lou Lou

[Robin Garr]

<table border="0" align="right" width="210"><tr><td><img src="http://www.louisvillehotbytes.com/loulou_pic.jpg" border="1" align="left"></td></tr><tr><td>One of the reasons Café Lou Lou's new locale works is the retention of the original look, including striking art pieces. LEO photo by Nicole Pullen.</td></tr></table>LEO's Eat 'n' Blog with Louisville HotBytes

The 19th century French satirist and polymath Alphonse Karr was not, as far as we know, a food critic. But when he penned the lines, "<i>Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose</i>" ("The more things change, the more they stay the same"), he might as well have been talking about Louisville's <b>Café Lou Lou</b>.

A lot of us obligate urbanites were horrified to learn earlier this year that Chef Clay Wallace and co-owner Helen Ellis planned to move the popular eatery's quarters from Frankfort Avenue in Clifton to St. Matthews, literally across the street from where Sears used to be.

Leaving the artsy, hippy-dippy diversity of Clifton for almost-suburban St. Matthews? How can this be, we wailed! Café Lou Lou can't possibly stay the same! How can it survive in the whitebread land of SUVs?

As it turns out, the answer to these questions turns out to be, "Very nicely indeed." Or, if you prefer, "<i>Plus ça change</i>."

Taking over the quarters that long housed the original Asiatique and more briefly were home to a Beef O'Brady's and the short-lived MacVittie's, Café Lou Lou managed to retain very much of its original look and feel by bringing along its bold, bright avocado and red-chile color scheme and striking art pieces. (Yes, the familiar, wacky portrait of Big Boy, seen from the back, is part of the new decor, hanging in a place of pride near the bar.)

Full reports in LEO and on LouisvilleHotBytes.

Very nice review. I am enjoying the new location as well, and I think the food seems better than ever. Some of the nightly specials really showcase the chef's talent. If you read this though, Robin, I am wondering why you gave them only 86 points. That is a good rating to be sure, but to me it seems that there weren't any negatives in your experiences and mine have certainly been positive as well. I only ask because I know you tend to give a fair shake to non white tablecoth venues if they do what they are supposed to do as well as they can. The 90 point rating for Yang Kee Noodle comes to mind. Anyways, I was just wondering, but as far as Cafe Lou Lou is concerned I am just happy that it is still great and doing a better business than ever.

The ONLY complaint I have about the new place is volume.

It gets pretty darn noisy in there.

I crave the mezze plate weekly, and their muffaletta may be the best in town.

[Robin Garr]

It gets pretty darn noisy in there.

This is definitely a point worth noting. I took my best shot at explaining my attitude in the review: At Lou Lou, it's a <i>happy</i> noise, a place that's slammed with people having an excellent time. It's not the kind of place I'd take my sweetie for a quiet, romantic evening, but to me, the noise is appropriate to the overall style of the place.

I think it's a real testimony to what Clay and Helen and crew are doing out there that this place has been absolutely slammed for lunch and dinner since opening day, and they carried over a going operation from the old place without a misstep.

[Robin Garr]

Robin, I am wondering why you gave them only 86 points. That is a good rating to be sure, but to me it seems that there weren't any negatives in your experiences and mine have certainly been positive as well. I only ask because I know you tend to give a fair shake to non white tablecoth venues if they do what they are supposed to do as well as they can. The 90 point rating for Yang Kee Noodle comes to mind. Anyways, I was just wondering, but as far as Cafe Lou Lou is concerned I am just happy that it is still great and doing a better business than ever.

I guess since I'm never loath to nitpick Marty's point ratings in the CJ, it's only fair that it come back on me eventually.

I'll try to give the best response I can, though: The point system is much like the Parker or <i>Wine Spectator</i> systems for wine, which is a little funny since I don't approve of those rating systems and don't use points in my own wine ratings. For local restaurant reviews, though, I think the situation is different: There are so many variables and so much nuance that a one- to four-star system is simply insufficient.

I award a point rating by a system that I keep confidential (so restaurateurs won't try to "game" it), and that's a combination of some objective criteria and, naturally, some subjective criteria. Basically, I'll calculate points by a formula, then think about it overnight, go back and take another look at the entire review, and tweak the numbers until I feel comfortable with my rating.

One significant variable - and this goes directly to the point you made about my not downgrading casual joints with no tablecloths - is how a restaurant stacks up <i>within its own niche</i>. Since Yang Kee was really sui generis upon its arrival - I could tell it probably took some concept ideas from Pei Wei but executed them much, much better - it ended up earning a place in the very low 90s - the highest bracket - because it did something unique in the community <i>and</i> did it very well.

Cafe Lou Lou is unique in some ways, but if you think about it, it's in a broader niche of casual, fun, noisy bistro-style places with internationally influenced dishes prepared well, lots of libations and decent but not overwhelming selection - it quickly qualified for middle 80s or above. That, as you say, is an excellent rating. But just thinking aloud, the menu being mostly sandwiches, pasta and pizza, same lunch and dinner, the relatively short and low-end (but nicely chosen) wine list, paper napkins and very basic flatware - stuff like that - are all criteria that don't make me enjoy it less but do hold my comfort zone for the point rating into the mid- to upper 80s rather than pushing into 90-plus territory.

That was pretty much stream-of-consciousness, and I'm not even sure it's grammatical. But it's my best quick shot at explaining how I assign point ratings in general and how I came to 86 for the new Cafe Lou Lou in particular. (It might also be noted that my rating for the old Cafe Lou Lou was an affectionate 84; I assigned the new 86 rating <i>without</i> looking that up, so again, the slight uptick for the new quarters seems reasonable to me.

You write for both the LEO and the St. Matthews Voice Tribune, no? Those two publications seem to appeal to different demographic groups, and their editorial policies seem diametrically opposed. Does the intended audience affect the way you prepare your pieces for the two papers?

[Robin Garr]

You write for both the LEO and the St. Matthews Voice Tribune, no? Those two publications seem to appeal to different demographic groups, and their editorial policies seem diametrically opposed. Does the intended audience affect the way you prepare your pieces for the two papers?

Jay, to be more legalistic, LouisvilleHotBytes partners with <i>LEO</i> and <i>The Voice-Tribune</i> to provide food-and-drink content on a regular basis. That seems so much more entrepreneurial than free-lancing.

But yeah, while I don't think editorial policies are at issue - I rarely take on Republican/Democratic political issues in dining or drinks articles - certainly I try to speak with my own voice in both publications (and when I write articles in <i>Food & Dining</i>), but I also tailor the style of my writing to fit the medium. I think this is a pretty routine thing for writers to do. I seek to be light, bright and conversational in all my writing, but certainly I'm more straightforward and traditional when I write for <I>The Voice</i>, while for LEO - whose middle name, remember, is "Eccentric" - I tend to cut loose a little with wacky and offbeat turns of phrase that might not feel quite right in The Voice. I've never had any advise from either paper to either tone it down or kick it up a notch, though, and I wouldn't say the differences in tone are dramatic.

I also tend to give The Voice reviews in which I can comfortably be positive. I'll never write "see-no-evil" reviews for any medium, but I sense that the Voice is happier when I can honestly speak well of the place I'm reviewing, while the LEO editors don't mind an occasional trashing as long is I'm fair. I still think readers in general would rather be told about a good place they'll enjoy than a bad place they should avoid, anyway. But if it happens, LEO is usually okay with that.