Rene Redzepi, chef/owner of Noma in Copenhagen, is one of the world’s most influential chefs.
Rene Redzepi was 25 years old when he opened his first restaurant, Noma, in Copenhagen, and 32 years old when it was crowned the best restaurant in the world. Noma, which stands for
nordisk mad, or Nordic food, held that title from 2010 to 2012, serving a scrupulously seasonal menu of local and foraged ingredients
including sea buckthorn, ramson flowers, puffin eggs and ants—a far cry
from the meatball platter at Ikea. Redzepi is singlehandedly
responsible for putting Nordic cuisine on the map, but after ten years
at Noma, his influence extends much further than that. He has used
his worldwide celebrity as a platform to promote innovation in food,
from new culinary techniques developed at the Nordic Food Lab to shifts in food policy discussed at the MAD Symposium, an annual gathering of chefs, farmers and food professionals. In 2012,
Time magazine named him one of the 100 most influential people in the world—and just last week anointed him a “god of food,” alongside his friends and fellow chefs Alex Atala and David Chang.
Tonight, Redzepi speaks at a Smithsonian Associates event about his new book,
A Work in Progress,
which documents one year behind-the-scenes at Noma. We asked the chef
about creativity, the role of food in society, and the state of female
chefs in the restaurant industry.
The new book includes a copy of the journal you kept in
2011, your daily recap of how things were going at Noma. What was your
process in writing that journal?
It was quite a painful thing. In an everyday life that’s filled
with so much discipline—waking up and cooking breakfast and lunch for
the kids, and then going to work and being organized and being
disciplined, and then coming home—you really just want to have a drink
and go to sleep. But then you had to be disciplined again. I never
intended it to be a book, actually. I did it for myself, to see if I
could find some sense of who are we, why are there good days, why are
there bad days and what type of restaurant are we, basically. Then my
book editor read parts of it, she liked it and then it became a book.
At the same time, it was also a weird experience because I’m used
to working in teams, and doing this thing, you’re all alone. It was a
very lonely thing to do. It’s tough, standing there at the end of the
night, looking at a screen, just waiting for the words to come out. But
it really did give me a lot of new insight. This idea of coming home and
being able to distill the day, understanding what made it a good or bad
day, really has given me a better understanding of why I do the things I
do.
You’ve said that you felt “restricted”
after Noma was crowned the world’s best restaurant and that this
journal was a quest to understand creativity and where it comes from.
What were some of the conclusions you drew from writing the journal?
One of the conclusions is that success is a fantastic, smashing
thing, especially accolades—but the accolade is not the mountaintop.
It’s not the highest thing to achieve. That was what I needed to shed
off in the process of writing the journal—that it’s a great
stepping-stone, something you can use on the way. But if your only goal
is to achieve accolades, you will quickly find yourself out. I thought
maybe we had reached that mountaintop. That’s what people were telling
me: “What now?” And there I was, 32 years old, thinking, “What do you
mean, what now? I’m 32 years old!” To me, it wasn’t the mountaintop that
everyone was telling me . But it confused me for a while. So writing
the journal, the conclusion was let’s just play around again, be
fearless. There’s nothing to lose; don’t get attached to the thing.
That’s the most important thing I got out of it—just being open to
breaking the mold that made your success.

Pickled and smoked quail egg, served at Noma. Photo by Flickr user cyclonebill
How do you stay creative on a day-to-day basis?
Today it’s very much team-minded. Before the journal, it wasn’t
so much; it was mostly decisions that I made all the time. But in trying
to understand the process, I could see that the team was a good way of
exhilarating everything. You’re also making it easier, if you have
people to rely on and sort of comfort you at bad moments. It’s very much
built on team effort now—conversations, brainstorm sessions. And, of
course, ever-changing seasonality and weather—that’s also a big guiding
force.
How would you describe your management style in the kitchen?
I used to be a control freak. I grew up thinking that as a cook,
you are the big control freak who doesn’t care about anything besides
the prosperity of your kitchen—and anybody who doesn’t follow along,
just fall behind and leave. But once you go back and read everything
during a year, you can see that what really makes the good days good is
when you actually
feel good. When there’s fun involved. And the
bad days are always the ones where you don’t handle situations well.
There will always be bad moments. There will always be big failures. But
you just need to deal with it well, as opposed to being a little angry
idiot. So the journal
made me change my management
style quite a bit. It was a big step to me, from being trained in a very
old way of cooking and stepping into a new thing. But it changed the
restaurant, and I could never see myself going back to the traditional
kitchen style.
You have a lot of career changers on your
staff—an ex-banker, a Hollywood dropout, a lawyer and others who didn’t
come in with culinary experience. What do they bring to the table?
There are so many fantastic aspects to gain from people who are
somewhat involved within food culture. Right now, in the Nordic Food
Lab, we have a graduate of the Yale Sustainable Food Project.
It’s certainly not cooking, but his understanding of issues that
surround the meal adds different layers to the research and to our base
understanding of what food can be. It makes our restaurant better. The
way I understand innovation today is that the more we are open to new,
valuable information, the more we study history, memories or these new
experiences, and bring them into the now—that’s when something new
really happens. I try to be as open to all these factors as possible.
Food seems to be everywhere these days—in TV, politics, symposia like your own. Is it possible to take food too seriously?
No. I don’t think we take it too seriously at all. On the
contrary, sometimes the discussion is a little bit stupid and not
serious enough. But the thing is that food is not just food. If you want
to say that, you’re kidding yourself. It’s a bit of an old-fashioned
statement, even—a classic, Westernized, Protestant statement food as
sustenance and please don’t try to make it anything more than that. If
that’s the level we choose to look at it, then what do you really need?
To me, food is one of the things that makes life most livable—just like
having a comfortable place to live in. Do we really need it in order to
stay alive, in the same way that we just need to food to sustain us?
At the same time, there are so many critical issues, such as
sustainability and agriculture, that surround food all the time. I think
we are also realizing, more and more, how important the meal is. I know
that now that I have a family. It’s easy to come across as some sort of
romantic, when you talk about the importance of the meal and the family
aspect, but I really believe that it’s important and I can see that it
is.
So I don’t think it’s a bad thing that you take food seriously.
When it’s treated as a fashion or as a way of generating huge revenue
through bad TV programs, then it’s probably a bit too much. But putting
food in a cultural light and valuing it as an important part of our
cultural upbringing, I think that can’t be taken too seriously. I think
it’s a good thing.
What are some of the ideas and innovations in the food world that you’re most excited about right now?
In the past five years, the exploration within fermentation is
definitely the most exciting thing. That’s going to continue for a long
time and maybe just become a natural, integrated part of any cuisine in
the future. We forget bread and brewing coffee are fermentation. There
are new explorations happening that might give us some new flavors on
par with those.
I want to ask you about the Time magazine story in which you were named a “god of food.”
Yeah, I haven’t even seen it yet!
But you’ve heard the criticism?
No, I haven’t! Ever since I arrived in America, people have been
talking about it. But it’s a typical American thing that everybody in
America thinks that everybody understands what’s happening in America.
But no, I haven’t. I actually saw on the airplane coming here. I
arrived here yesterday and then this morning somebody said that there’s
been criticism of it. But in Denmark they didn’t even talk about it,
nobody wrote about it. What’s going on? I’d love to understand what’s
going on.
Basically, the article profiles important leaders and
innovators in the food world—people who are changing the way we eat and
think about food worldwide. The controversy is that only four of the
people profiled are women, none of them chefs, so people are asking,
where are the female chefs? I know you weren’t involved in writing the
article but—
I didn’t even know they were going to put us on the cover! They
don’t tell you these things. They say, “Ah, we can see you in town at
the same time, can we take a picture of you? We’re writing about
friendship.” And then, two months later, you’re on an airplane and
somebody tells you you’re on the cover of
Time magazine.
Which female chefs do you think should have made Time’s list?
I can tell you that I met yesterday, for the first time, Alice Waters. I was totally starstruck. I was almost—I didn’t know what to do. To me she is a definite food “hero,” food…god, if you will.
But there are so many extraordinarily powerful women who deserve credit and attention. Last year at the MAD symposium, we had Vandata Shiva , but of course she’s not a cook. Then there’s Margot Henderson, who runs very quietly a restaurant called Rochelle Canteen in London, but she gave a very powerful talk. And I read the memoir by Gabrielle Hamilton but I’ve actually never visited the restaurant.
Every time I come to America, it’s always an in-and-out trip. . . . If
there’s one girl who will be in the future, it’s my pastry chef, Rosio Sanchez , who’s from Chicago but of Mexican descent. She’s extremely good.
When I started 21 years ago, women in kitchens were a total
novelty. Now, 8 out of 24 chefs in our kitchen are women. I’ve stopped
thinking about it so much. Although if there are periods where we get
too male-dominated in the kitchen, I always try to create a balance and
get more women in the kitchen.
Because they add something different?
Yeah, there’s no question about it. It’s very important, that
balance. In many ways the style of cooking that we do fits more with the
sort of delicate touch of a woman as opposed to this big, rumbling male
with his big, clumsy hands. I’m exaggerating here, but you know what I
mean. And the sensibility in flavor—women are a bit sharper in finding
these small, delicate tones here and there, when tasting stuff. Kitchens
are also notoriously macho. It’s a good thing to have more females in
the kitchen to add balance and to take that a bit away, not to soften
things up but to bring the discussion to a more serious tone.
Do you think there are more women now because the culture
in the kitchen has changed, or because there are more opportunities for
women? Why do you think it’s changed so much in your lifetime?
I don’t know. I think there are more opportunities. It’s not so
much of a blue-collar trade that it used to be, ten years ago. When we
started operating Noma, it wasn’t unusual that at least once a year,
somebody would come to me and say, “Hey, I’m not coming to work for the
next six months, I’m going to jail.” It sounds crazy, but that’s the way
it was. It was like seeing one of those old-fashioned movies of steel
plants, where men were working with fire and shouting dirty jokes at
each other, fighting and drinking. Not that long ago, kitchens were very
much like that. I think things are slowly changing—from guys leaving to
go to jail, to having a Harvard dropout in our cuisine. So I think the
whole environment has become more friendly—for anybody, really. It used
to be you’d become a cook because you can’t be anything else.

Redzepi delivers a TED talk in London in 2011. Photo via Flickr, © Sam Friedrich/acumenimages.com
Now that you’ve met Alice Waters, do you have any other food heroes that you still want to meet?
One that made me very sad that I never met was Charlie Trotter . I
never got to meet him; I only texted with him. That’s another thing
about the trade that we’re horrible at—celebration of icons and people
who really did something. If they don’t have the latest, freshest new
thing, then they just get forgotten. I remember in the 1990s there were
two things you read. One of them was
White Heat, by Marco Pierre White. The other was books by Charlie Trotter.
Where will you be dining while you’re in the U.S.?
I’m going to Alinea for the first time. and I are actually
old-time pals, but we never visit each other’s restaurants, so I’m an
Alinea virgin and I’m really looking forward to it.
Redzepi will speak at the S. Dillon Ripley Center on
Thursday, November 14, at 6:45PM, with book signing to follow. The event
is sold out, but tickets may become available. Visit smithsonianassociates.org for more information.