As you walk into this small East Village hotspot, you are instantly struck by the glaring orange and yellow décor and you can’t help but feel that you’ve stepped right into a bowl of macaroni and cheese.
S’Mac joins the ranks of one-dish themed restaurants unique to New York City. From cupcakes to grilled cheese, peanut sandwiches and rice pudding, New Yorkers have an affinity for catchy one-trick pony restaurants. But the bottom line is that you have to provide a quality product to keep customers coming back past that curious first time. S’Mac does just that.
Opened by husband and wife team Sarita and Cesar Ekya, both ex-engineers, S’Mac was inspired by a restaurant that specializes in one thing - peanut butter sandwiches, at Peanut Butter and Co. The couple gambled that New Yorkers would embrace a restaurant based on another type of comfort food, macaroni and cheese. Nine months later S’Mac, short for Sarita’s Macaroni and Cheese, was born. While the restaurant is still fairly new on the New York food scene, having been open less than 8 months, it remains a neighborhood favorite.
Setup and décor are simple. The restaurant is small in size, with a few scattered tables with orange plastic chairs on one side, and a few high tables with yellow plastic leather chairs on the other side. There is a counter against the front window, optimal for people-watching and at the back we see a cashier, a large menu on the wall, and a case of various types of cold beverages, and an array of condiments. We can see into the kitchen, located right behind the cash, giving us a glimpse of the chef as he works busily making cheesy creations.
While you do order and pay at the back, the food is brought to you, piping hot, it what seems like record time. Above you there are yellow and orange retro-style light fixtures and two walls of exposed brick on either side. Classic rocks tunes play in the background, completed the look and feel of a fun, slightly cheesy (no pun intended), eatery. Due to the setup of S’Mac, it is hard to judge the service as you would a more traditional restaurant. The young man at the cash register also functioned as our waiter, bringing my dining companion and I our food as it was ready. Ultimately the service was fast and friendly, which is the most important thing.
Naturally S’Mac offers the traditional macaroni and cheese with cheddar and American cheeses, but they also provide a variety of other options for the more sophisticated pallet. As you look up at the menu on the wall you find mac and cheese dishes with Brie and figs; mozzarella, roasted tomatoes and fresh basil; four cheeses; manchego, fennel and shallots; and beef, cheddar, and onions. They also have specials such as “Masala Mac,” featuring Indian spices, and “Buffalo Chicken Mac” featuring cheddar cheese, chicken pieces and buffalo wing sauce. All dishes can be served with their regular twisted elbow macaroni or whole wheat pasta, and with or without breadcrumbs. If none of the menu combinations strike your fancy, you can create your own, selecting from a variety of cheeses, meats, and vegetables.
While even the most refined pallet could be pleased with such high-end combinations, for me nothing beats the classic all-American mac and cheese. With its gooey combination of cheeses, bread crumbs on top and served in a hot skillet, this dish would make even the most cynical individual think back to their fondest childhood memories.
Each item comes hot in a caste iron skillet, which is definitely a nice added touch. The dishes also come in three sizes – nosh, major munch, and mongo, ranging from $4.25 to $6.75 for a nosh, $6.50 to $9.00 for a major munch, and $11.00 to $16.00 for a mongo. Even the names of the sizes ads to the youthful, fun appeal of the restaurant, and along with the reasonable prices S’Mac is accessible to all.
S’Mac also serves side salads, a token effort perhaps, and brownies and cookies for dessert. But in all reality, when you go to place like S’Mac, you go right for the good stuff. If you’re worried about your waistline, you’d be well advised to stay away.
Between my dining companion and me we tried three different kinds, of the potential ten options offered on the menu. We had the classic, the gruyere and bacon, and the goat cheese, sautéed spinach, and black olives. We ordered bread crumbs on all three dishes, which added a nice extra crunch to each. The favorite of three for both of us was clearly the classic, as it disappeared the fastest. For me the key to good macaroni and cheese is in the cheese and the consistency. Both were perfected in this dish, with the use of high quality cheeses and the right amount of creamy consistency.
The gruyere mac and cheese was also excellent, also due to the high quality cheese being used. The big chunks of slab bacon found in this dish also complimented the flavor of the cheese nicely. As for the goat cheese dish, it was somewhat of a disappointment, and certainly the least favorite of the three. Overall, it was a bit on the mushy side. It was evident that the goat cheese did not have the right consistency for a baked mac and cheese dish. Furthermore, the spinach completely overpowered the goat cheese taste. Perhaps a feta cheese would have complimented this Mediterranean-themed dish better.
One negative aspect for me was the draftiness of the restaurant. Granted we did go on a particularly cold evening, but for a place that prides itself on serving cozy food, the atmosphere should fit that bill as well. My dining companion and I moved twice to avoid the door, but in a space as small as S’Mac, it has only 25 seats total, that doesn’t leave you with many options. While this did not take away from my enjoyment of the food, it did take away from the atmosphere of the restaurant.
S’Mac is clearly a local haunt, ideal for twenty- and thirty-somethings living in the area to just come and grab a bite after work, but also providing local NYU students and other hipsters a place to just hang out on a Tuesday. Overall the restaurant had a nice laid back feel to it, while offering a change from the typical burger and fries scene that one might come across when looking for a cheap, quick place to eat.
Overall, I would highly recommend this restaurant both for food and fun. In a city full of high-end cuisine and snooty atmosphere, S’Mac provides a nice alternative for the kid in everyone….
Saturday, July 14, 2007
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Josh Wolf and the Big Bad Federal Government
On July 8, 2005, Josh Wolf, blogger, activist, and amateur journalist, armed himself with a camera and set out to tape a San Francisco protest staged by a group called “Anarchist Action” against the G8 summit meeting in Scotland.
Following the demonstration, Wolf posted clips of his tape on his website, as well as selling part of it to a local news station, KRON-TV. Due to the violent nature of the protest, the Federal government swooped in, claiming jurisdiction because demonstrators had attempted to light a bottle rocket under a police car, a police car paid for in part by Federal dollars. Incidentally, the only actual damage done to the vehicle involved a broken tail light. Wolf was then subpoenaed and ordered to turn over his footage to the grand jury. Though he had not shot the car incident, Wolf was targeted by Federal officials because he had shot other scenes of protesters. He refused to comply.
On August 1, 2006, a U.S. District Judge ordered that Wolf be thrown in jail for contempt of court until he complied. On August 31, 2006, the Federal Appeals Court granted him bail. After being released briefly, but then had his bail revoked, due to his continued refusal to hand over the tape. The Court of Appeals has refused Wolf’s subsequent appeals. Roughly seven months later, Wolf has served, and continues to serve, the longest contempt-of-court term ever by a journalist (if you are inclined to consider him as such.) He will likely be in prison until the grand jury term expires in July 2007.
In an interview with Frontline, shortly before being sent to prison, Wolf explained his position. His main concern was that in turning over the tape he would open the floodgates to questioning about the identities of those on tape. He called it a “never-ending witch-hunt” on the part of the Federal government, in their attempts to create a “database of civil dissent.” In that same interview, former assistant U.S. Attorney, Randall D. Eliason said, “it not really his to decision as to what’s important and what isn’t in a Federal grand jury investigation. We don’t really know what exactly the government is looking at in this case.”
Some say that Wolf's reasoning behind withholding the video, and refusing to testify, is unclear. The videotape was shot in a public place, and there are no confidential sources involved in the case. What's more, He had sold a portion of the tape to a local television station and put other clips of it on his blog. Wolf addressed this in his Dateline interview. “There was a trust established between people involved in the organization that I was covering and myself into the fact that what I chose to release was what I chose to release and that I wasn’t an investigator for the state turning over piles of tape for a fishing expedition.”
Support for Wolf from the journalist community has generally been positive thus far. In 2006, Josh was given the “Journalist of the Year” award from the Society of Professional Journalists for “upholding the principles of a free and independent press.” Journalists Without Borders have called for his immediate release and the Independent Press Institute and the Professional Lawyers Guild have both condemned Wolf’s continued imprisonment. U.S. Federal Attorney Kevin Ryan, on the other hand, said in a court filing that Wolf's resistance "is apparently fueled by his anointment as a journalistic martyr" and that he needs "to come to grips with the fact that he was simply a person with a video camera who happened to record some public events."
But if the Federal Government truly believes he is not a real journalist, why did they feel the need to circumvent the authority of the local courts with this trumped up excuse of a Federally-funded police car, thereby avoiding state shield laws? California courts protect journalists and their sources, but there is no such law at the federal level - seems convenient. The other question is, what are they really looking for? Wolf contends that the unedited version of the tape contain no evidence of a crime. What the tape does contain is interviews with protesters without their identities concealed – one of Wolf’s prime reasons for concern.
So is Josh Wolf a journalist with an interest in activism, or is he an activist with a video camera? One supposes that once you open the journalistic door to any blogger, it will muddy the waters. But the problem is, in this country, journalism has become elitist. News outlets such as The New York Times, NBC, and Newsweek have set themselves up in a position of power over the people they are meant to cover. Journalism is not like medicine or law, there is no one governing body to regulate it, and no official certification in order to practice it.
Still, I believe the greater issue at hand is the Federal government overstepping its legal bounds. In the post-9/11 political climate we are experiencing in the United States, Wolf’s claims of a “database of dissent” are completely legitimate. Though perhaps somewhat misguided, because he did videotape people in a public domain where there was no expectation of confidentiality, Wolf’s ideals are in the right place.
The Federal government is clearly using the argument of funds for the damaged police car to gain access to the identifications of those that would dare speak out against the government. We do not live in a police state. This is a democracy and the right to criticize the government is supposed to be essential to that democracy. Of course, no one is condoning violence as a means to an end, and Anarchist Action would likely be more effective by working within the system instead of outside of it. But we have to allow for dissent in this nation. We have to allow for people to criticize the administration, the president.
What’s more, Wolf has offered to show the tape to U.S. District Judge William Alsup “in camera,” who could then decide if it contained any evidence of a Federal crime. The judge, who has described Josh as an “alleged journalist,” declined.
Some might argue that Josh Wolf made this choice in order to become a media martyr. But the truth is, by keeping Wolf incarcerated for such an extended period of time, it is Federal officials who have placed him in the role of martyr. The longer he stays in jail, the more he becomes a champion for the cause of freedom of the press. It becomes a David and Goliath scenario, as a 24 year-old amateur journalist and blogger goes up against big government. At a time when the Federal government is struggling with its popularity, actions such as these are not aiding their image.
Following the demonstration, Wolf posted clips of his tape on his website, as well as selling part of it to a local news station, KRON-TV. Due to the violent nature of the protest, the Federal government swooped in, claiming jurisdiction because demonstrators had attempted to light a bottle rocket under a police car, a police car paid for in part by Federal dollars. Incidentally, the only actual damage done to the vehicle involved a broken tail light. Wolf was then subpoenaed and ordered to turn over his footage to the grand jury. Though he had not shot the car incident, Wolf was targeted by Federal officials because he had shot other scenes of protesters. He refused to comply.
On August 1, 2006, a U.S. District Judge ordered that Wolf be thrown in jail for contempt of court until he complied. On August 31, 2006, the Federal Appeals Court granted him bail. After being released briefly, but then had his bail revoked, due to his continued refusal to hand over the tape. The Court of Appeals has refused Wolf’s subsequent appeals. Roughly seven months later, Wolf has served, and continues to serve, the longest contempt-of-court term ever by a journalist (if you are inclined to consider him as such.) He will likely be in prison until the grand jury term expires in July 2007.
In an interview with Frontline, shortly before being sent to prison, Wolf explained his position. His main concern was that in turning over the tape he would open the floodgates to questioning about the identities of those on tape. He called it a “never-ending witch-hunt” on the part of the Federal government, in their attempts to create a “database of civil dissent.” In that same interview, former assistant U.S. Attorney, Randall D. Eliason said, “it not really his to decision as to what’s important and what isn’t in a Federal grand jury investigation. We don’t really know what exactly the government is looking at in this case.”
Some say that Wolf's reasoning behind withholding the video, and refusing to testify, is unclear. The videotape was shot in a public place, and there are no confidential sources involved in the case. What's more, He had sold a portion of the tape to a local television station and put other clips of it on his blog. Wolf addressed this in his Dateline interview. “There was a trust established between people involved in the organization that I was covering and myself into the fact that what I chose to release was what I chose to release and that I wasn’t an investigator for the state turning over piles of tape for a fishing expedition.”
Support for Wolf from the journalist community has generally been positive thus far. In 2006, Josh was given the “Journalist of the Year” award from the Society of Professional Journalists for “upholding the principles of a free and independent press.” Journalists Without Borders have called for his immediate release and the Independent Press Institute and the Professional Lawyers Guild have both condemned Wolf’s continued imprisonment. U.S. Federal Attorney Kevin Ryan, on the other hand, said in a court filing that Wolf's resistance "is apparently fueled by his anointment as a journalistic martyr" and that he needs "to come to grips with the fact that he was simply a person with a video camera who happened to record some public events."
But if the Federal Government truly believes he is not a real journalist, why did they feel the need to circumvent the authority of the local courts with this trumped up excuse of a Federally-funded police car, thereby avoiding state shield laws? California courts protect journalists and their sources, but there is no such law at the federal level - seems convenient. The other question is, what are they really looking for? Wolf contends that the unedited version of the tape contain no evidence of a crime. What the tape does contain is interviews with protesters without their identities concealed – one of Wolf’s prime reasons for concern.
So is Josh Wolf a journalist with an interest in activism, or is he an activist with a video camera? One supposes that once you open the journalistic door to any blogger, it will muddy the waters. But the problem is, in this country, journalism has become elitist. News outlets such as The New York Times, NBC, and Newsweek have set themselves up in a position of power over the people they are meant to cover. Journalism is not like medicine or law, there is no one governing body to regulate it, and no official certification in order to practice it.
Still, I believe the greater issue at hand is the Federal government overstepping its legal bounds. In the post-9/11 political climate we are experiencing in the United States, Wolf’s claims of a “database of dissent” are completely legitimate. Though perhaps somewhat misguided, because he did videotape people in a public domain where there was no expectation of confidentiality, Wolf’s ideals are in the right place.
The Federal government is clearly using the argument of funds for the damaged police car to gain access to the identifications of those that would dare speak out against the government. We do not live in a police state. This is a democracy and the right to criticize the government is supposed to be essential to that democracy. Of course, no one is condoning violence as a means to an end, and Anarchist Action would likely be more effective by working within the system instead of outside of it. But we have to allow for dissent in this nation. We have to allow for people to criticize the administration, the president.
What’s more, Wolf has offered to show the tape to U.S. District Judge William Alsup “in camera,” who could then decide if it contained any evidence of a Federal crime. The judge, who has described Josh as an “alleged journalist,” declined.
Some might argue that Josh Wolf made this choice in order to become a media martyr. But the truth is, by keeping Wolf incarcerated for such an extended period of time, it is Federal officials who have placed him in the role of martyr. The longer he stays in jail, the more he becomes a champion for the cause of freedom of the press. It becomes a David and Goliath scenario, as a 24 year-old amateur journalist and blogger goes up against big government. At a time when the Federal government is struggling with its popularity, actions such as these are not aiding their image.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)