A Quote by Marcus Samuelsson

Each city should have its own type of restaurant. — © Marcus Samuelsson
Each city should have its own type of restaurant.
In a city, it's very hard to do a restaurant, an avant-garde-cuisine restaurant, where each year you need to change the whole menu.
Each city has strengths. Cities should be developed with their own individuality and characteristics.
It's one thing to execute dishes on your own time for family and friends, but quite another to perform and be judged in a competition. And that's what cooking in a high profile restaurant is. It's a competition. You're up against every other three-star restaurant in your city, and if you want to stay in business, you'd better deliver.
I went straight from college into restaurants, so, from the beginning, my idea of what a kitchen should be was the highfalutin' restaurant type - and what I had at home never measured up to that.
Winter in Peking is insurpassable, unless indeed it is surpassed by the other seasons in that blessed city. For Peking is a city clearly marked by the seasons, each perfect in its own way and each different from the others.
I don't get the animosity when someone tells a joke that you don't like. Whereas if someone made a dish that you don't like if you went to a restaurant, you would either try another dish or you just don't go back to that restaurant. But you don't say like, "I did not like the hamburger here. This restaurant should be shut down. It should be banned from making hamburgers. No one else should have these hamburgers." And everyone else is like, "No, you wouldn't do that."
A city can only be reconstructed in the form of urban quarters. A large or a small city can only be reorganized as a large or a small number of urban quarters; as a federation of autonomous quarters. Each quarter must have its own center, periphery and limit. Each quarter must be a city within a city.
In New York City, they have their own way of doing things. Every city and every region should do its own thing.
We try to respond as closely as we can to the nature of each city, to the traditions, to their expectations. I don't believe that architects should be imposing their style or their plans on every city in the world.
Since the whole city has one end, it is manifest that education should be one and the same for all, and that it should be public, and not private - not as at present, when every one looks after his own children separately, and gives them separate instruction of the sort which he thinks best; the training in things which are of common interest should be the same for all. Neither must we suppose that any one of the citizens belongs to himself, for they all belong to the state, and are each of them a part of the state, and the care of each part is inseparable from the care of the whole.
I hate to say 'chain restaurant,' but we're sort of a corporation now. How do we defy that concept, where people assume each restaurant can't be good?
The design of a restaurant should embrace the identity of the chef, the nature of the cuisine, and the context of the restaurant itself.
I'd propose that each central-city child should have an entitlement from the state to attend any school in the metropolitan area outside his own district - with per pupil funds going with him.
That's the great thing about the 'Sin City' movies. Each little slot is incredibly meaningful, and each character has their own moment.
Does the owner of the restaurant own his restaurant? Or does the government own his restaurant?
In nature everything is valuable, everything has its place. The rose, the daisy, the lark, the squirrel, each is different but beautiful. Each has its own expression. Each flower its' own fragrance. Each bird its' own song. So you too have your own unique melody.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!