banq, thank you for trying

banq / 1375 washington street, boston / 617-451-0077 / m-sat 5:30pm-1am, sun 5:30pm-11pm / appetizers $8-12, entrees $19-26

did that title sound a little snide? too snide? yeah, it’s a little snide. this is a review of banq, the new-ish restaurant on washington street, next to union bar & grille. it’s located in a newly renovated building, with an interior by nader tehrani.

a few words about the interior: it’s pretty cool, but here’s me not really understanding the relationship of the booths, which are walled in an exotic-looking wood veneer, to the interior ceiling/landscape, which is created by cnc-routed sections of plywood that are spaced evenly to create a 3d reverse landscape. my beef with the booths: they detract from the plywood dealio, rather than enhancing your experience of it. i have to wonder if nader did just the plywood, or also the booths. i have to say that i prefer ltl’s tides restaurant to banq, which seems a little too hip to me. also, these restaurant interiors always bring up the issue of how they’re supposed to age. in the case of stuff like this, which is very showy and trendy, and sometimes very cool, i can’t imagine that it will still be as showy and cool in ten years.

so, the food. let me start with a note about the bread. um….mini naan with a remoulade (specifically, one with sundried tomatoes that was more like an aioli) is kind of a strange bread choice, but i was willing to buy it if it was good. it wasn’t. who wants to start a meal with such a doughy, heavy bread product? i assume that indian people eat naan with other things (ie rice and a main course) for a reason: thousands of years of civilization prove this point to be true. and i have had odd bread choices that have been rather unusual, most memorably at restaurant pava in newton (search this blog, you’ll find my rapturous bread review), which served a very wonderful french baguette, a crispy potato thing, and a chewy roll. even sel de la terre’s overrated breadbasket is better than the one at banq. and the mini naan weren’t even good naan – i’ve had good naan, and it certainly isn’t as doughy and…solid…as this was. it was served in an asian bamboo steamer basket, to boot. time to shape up, banq, or ship out: the bread makes a huge difference in how people perceive their dinner. at least address the problem of the bread and its accompaniment: the warmth of the naan melts the remoulade, making it seem even more like a buttery mayonnaise than something you’d actually want to eat. now, i know this may seem nitpicky, but first impressions go for a lot in a restaurant. while we’re on the matter of first impressions: banq, please drop the stupid notes on your menu: “main course/”cosmopolitan palate”,” “appetizers/”yin and yang for the soul”,” etc. they’re stupid and even the drunk hipsters aren’t buying it.

on to the main event: we started with the coffee tossed baby back ribs (puffed rice and bamboo salad) and the lemongrass scented steamed mussels (with white wine and holy basil). both were pretty good, more so the baby back ribs, i think. the baby back ribs had just enough sauce and just enough coffee, but not too much, and while i thought the puffed rice was kind of negligible (this is one of those textural things that grant achatz must be able to do much better than banq), the bamboo salad was quite nice. not the best baby back ribs i’ve ever had, but quite pleasant. the mussels were ok; i thought they were lacking in lemongrass flavor/”scent.” i also dislike the practice of extracting the meat from the shell, chopping it up, and stuffing it back in, having mixed it with other stuff. this practice is just a way to make us think we’ve gotten more than we’re actually getting, and i’m telling you right now, banq, to stop it. the mussels were slightly overcooked, and while the accompanying tomato/onion relish-y thing was nice, it wasn’t doing the mussels that great a favor.

the main courses fared much better: i had the fire-charred sirloin (with smoked cha choy, cilantro, and taro pave, caramelized lotus seed, creamy chanterelle sauce). to my server: do not assume that because i am a girl, i like my steak medium-rare. asshole. i like my steak rare, just like any sane person would. so, to summarize: don’t assume, just ask, and avoid offending your clients. back to the steak: it was pretty good. the cha choy/cilantro/taro pave: too starchy. the caramelized lotus seed: well, kind of nice…but i’m still wondering why. the creamy chanterelle sauce: i guess i have a different conception of creamy; this was more jus-like than creamy, and was a touch too salty, but overall it was quite nice. the sirloin, however, was great with respect to flavor. i think my server only pretended to have it done rare, as it was somewhere between rare and medium rare, but i’ll forgive the lapse because the flavor was so good. and there you have it, people: the bright point of the night – a steak with good flavor is always a pleasure, and harder to find than you might think.

but let’s wait for banq to get a little less pretentious and scene-y before recommending it to other people. banq gets brownie points for trying interesting flavor combinations, but loses some of them (ok, most of them) for not actually pulling it off. and for obnoxious service, although the non-server (ie busboy) service was excellent. it’s too bad that the restaurant doesn’t do a better job on the food, given the non-traditional interior.