Shrimp Doughnuts and Everything Bagel-Crusted Spring Rolls? At This Thai Restaurant, It's a Yes.
When Jeanine and Kate Royce, partners in business and life, first signed the lease on this space at 238 W. 56th Street and Eighth Avenue, on the border of Hell's Kitchen and Midtown West, they didn't exactly know what they would do with it — other than serve Thai food.
The couple had already owned and operated a Thai place up in East Harlem; they are connected to the city's Thai community; they had a name all set, BKK New York (the airport code for Bangkok); and they quickly signed on an experienced Thai chef for the project, Teerawong 'Yo' Nanthavatsiri, previously owned the (now-closed) restaurant Pinto in the West Village for a decade.
It wasn't until Yo clocked all the food carts in Midtown that the final concept for the menu clicked into place. Basically: Spin a bumping NYC remix to the Bangkok street food favorites of his youth. It's the latest entry in a wider trend of New Yorkified Thai food that's emerged over the past couple of years, beginning with Little Grenjai's smash burger in 2023, followed by a Thai burger stand from Zaab Zaab, and the pop-up Tawan last year.
The design and welcoming spirit of BKK New York amplify the street party vibe, with private dining partitions that evoke corrugated steel panels of Bangkok's dining shacks. The facade opens to bar chatter while uptempo pop spills onto the street.
For seventy years, this address was home to Fuji Sushi, an office-worker staple that was one of the very first sushi restaurants in the city. But with all the huge new residential towers on the block, BKK New York seems poised to become a neighborhood go-to for locals as well.
The prices are doable (for 2025), the menu is filled with big-flavored crowd-pleasers, and the lively atmosphere feels right for just about any occasion. So go! And when you do, here's what you should get.
There are a bunch of familiar, traditionally prepared Thai dishes on the menu (including, yes, a shrimp pad Thai for $26, and a chicken pad see ew for $22), but most of the fun at BKK New York happens in the remixes. My favorite thing I've eaten here is the brisket sandwich dip ($26), a beefy beast with melted American cheese, spicy Thai mayo, and a rich broth for dunking. Jeanine told Eater that it was 'inspired by nam tok, a Thai soup my wife Kate loves.' If I lived in that luxury high-rise across the street (lol), I'd pop by all the time for one of these beauties.
Another satisfying solo dining option, perhaps while perched at the bar knocking back an $18 pandan paradise rum cocktail, is Yo's BKK hot dog (also $18), a fat, porky Chiang Mai sausage served on a brioche bun with both pickled vegetables and two kinds of fries —those green chive-y one are excellent — on the side.
Or maybe go the more traditional Thai route for your solo adventure? The difficult-to-share mama tom yum ($28) is a big soupy bowl of instant noodles absolutely loaded with charred shrimp, slabs of sweet, crispy pork, meaty mushrooms, and a raw egg thrown in for luck, all swimming in a fiery orange broth. Chef Yo told us that this dish is everywhere in Bangkok — and it's delicious. Dinner for two
Split the above sandwiches, and tack on a trio of Yo's terrific 'doughnuts' ($18), made from a blend of shrimp, chicken, and pork, densely packed and pressed into a doughnut shape, fried until the exterior gets a nice crunch, sprinkled with salted egg yolk, and served with a tangy dipping sauce. The oversized fried chicken skin chips ($12) are good, too.
If sandwiches seem too casual for whatever you've got going on that night, the wagyu kra pow ($32) feels both fancy and fun, a jumbo beef patty plopped atop a mound of sticky jasmine rice, plenty of Thai basil, garlic, and chiles bringing some pep to the party, the whole thing served in a hot stone bowl and mixed tableside. The goong koe rae ($32), a half dozen shrimp drowning in a sweet and spicy red curry sauce, also adds a sense of occasion to your meal.
Dinner for three, four, or more
BKK New York's unique spring rolls, which come wrapped in an 'everything bagel crust' ($12), make for an enjoyable addition to the meal for larger parties. And though the pork-two-ways kao moo deng moo krob skewed too sweet for my tastes, Yo is a big fan of the dish. 'Every single Thai person that eats here says this is the best version they've ever had,' he said. 'It tastes like home, and not many places serve it.'
Either dessert — mango sticky rice, or coconut ice cream — will make you happy. So do what we did and just get both.
Sign up for our newsletter.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
38 minutes ago
- USA Today
WorldPride comes to the nation's capital
WorldPride comes to the nation's capital Good morning!🙋🏼♀️ I'm Nicole Fallert. I can't stop watching the "Wicked: For Good" trailer ✨ Get ready for Thursday with the news: At WorldPride, queer community vows to be heard 'The WorldPride stage is in front of the Capitol building at a time when they are trying to silence us, put us back in the closet, make us feel ashamed, take away so many of our freedoms, pull back DEI. And we are like: 'Oh no no no! We are going to the nation's capital; we are going to be louder than ever. You can't take this away from us. We are going to be ourselves.'' ~ Brooke Eden, a country singer/songwriter who will be performing in Washington, D.C., at WorldPride − a global festival that promotes LGBTQ+ visibility and awareness − at a historic juncture: When the queer community's rights are increasingly in hostile crosshairs. Trump launches Senate lobbying blitz for his tax bill President Donald Trump's second-term legislative agenda is on the line as the Senate gears up for a four-week sprint, during which they will seek to pass something that can also get through the House's narrow margins and onto the president's desk for signature into law. It won't be easy. As in the House, the Senate has fiscal conservatives who are concerned that the bill will add to the federal deficit and moderates who have problems with the potential impact on Medicaid health coverage. Deficit blues : Several senators have said they're worried about the massive price tag of the legislation. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the bill would add more than $3 trillion to the federal debt over the next 10 years, adding to the country's already massive $36.2 trillion debt. : Several senators have said they're worried about the massive price tag of the legislation. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the bill would add more than $3 trillion to the federal debt over the next 10 years, adding to the country's already massive $36.2 trillion debt. Musk is fanning the flames . The Tesla CEO argues the legislation's price tag undermines the work that he did leading the Department of Government Efficiency cost-cutting project. . The Tesla CEO argues the legislation's price tag undermines the work that he did leading the Department of Government Efficiency cost-cutting project. Meanwhile, American health care is on the line: New analysis shows about 11 million Americans would lose health insurance coverage under Trump's bill, and experts say the uninsured might delay care and accrue more medical debt. More news to know now What's the weather today? Check your local forecast here. Families scramble to find loved ones – and answers – after massive ICE raid in Florida Family members and friends of the more than 100 construction workers detained in what was deemed Florida's largest immigration raid this year say they are having trouble locating their loved ones. Some of the laborers were sent to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facility in Baker County, while some went to Miami's Krome Detention Center. Others were quickly flown to El Paso, Texas, and were still there awaiting removal as of June 3. And some are already in Mexico, just five days after being detained and bused away from their job site in Tallahassee. But others are still silent, and their friends and family are worried and waiting for a call. Trump bans Harvard from admitting new international students In an executive order issued Wednesday, President Trump declared that Harvard University's admission of international students represents a threat to the United States. In his new order, Trump listed a litany of grievances against the university, which he accuses of failing to protect Jewish students from pro-Palestinian protesters. He also noted that Harvard has long used race as a factor in admissions, which led the Supreme Court in 2023 to strike down race-based admissions policies nationwide. Trump's order applies to new students who would be arriving to study at Harvard, and asks Secretary of State Marco Rubio to consider whether to also revoke the visas of current international students Today's talkers Meet the million-dollar creators of the Bop house They fly on private jets to the Super Bowl, own Porsches and Lamborghinis and rack up $4,000 dinner bills on a night out. It's all in a month's work at the Bop House, a content creator mansion where eight Gen Z OnlyFans creators produce content for their combined following of nearly 90 million users across social media platforms. But teenagers, particularly young girls, who see TikToks showcasing the content creators' opulent lifestyle, may get the impression that being an OnlyFans star is aspirational. While creators in the Bop House spoke openly with USA TODAY about their hardships growing up — and say they're not trying to be anyone's role model. Photo of the day: Checked! The Edmonton Oilers started the 2025 Stanley Cup Final on Wednesday the same way they started their last run to a championship - by winning Game 1 in overtime. Check out the best moments of the final so far.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
As a Florida teacher, I must navigate education restrictions with integrity
As I prepare to teach a new literature course at Palm Beach State College (PBSC) this term, I find myself hesitating over something that, until recently, would have been routine: selecting the works I assign to my students. The anthology adopted by our department includes powerful selections from African American, Latino, Asian American and LGBTQ writers — voices that capture the richness, contradiction and struggle of the American experience. These are voices I have taught for decades. But now I ask myself: Am I allowed to? Florida's 2023 legislation — most notably, Senate Bill 266 — prohibits instruction that espouses theories suggesting systemic racism, sexism, or privilege are inherent in the institutions of the United States and that they were created to maintain social or economic inequities. The language is broad, and the intent seems clear: to restrict the way educators discuss identity, history and power. But what is less clear is what this means in practice for teachers like me, particularly in college classrooms. I am a lifelong educator. I spent 36 years in the New York City Board of Education as a teacher, department chair and supervisor. For the last 12 years, I have taught English literature at PBSC. My passion has always been to encourage students to read deeply, think critically and reflect honestly — especially about the kind of country we live in and the lives we each bring to the table. That requires a broad and inclusive literary canon. It requires teaching James Baldwin and Langston Hughes not only for their artistry, but for the searing truths they offer about race and belonging in America. It means examining the cultural double-consciousness in Sandra Cisneros, the generational trauma in Ocean Vuong, the gender defiance in Audre Lorde. Literature becomes real when it speaks both to and through the student reading it. That is the essence of education. Opinion: Bipartisan support suggests better sex ed in FL schools. It's the opposite. But now, when I consider assigning those same texts, I worry: will presenting such works — even neutrally, even for discussion — be seen as violating this law? If I ask students to consider the historical roots of injustice in a work by August Wilson or Toni Cade Bambara, could that be construed as 'promoting a theory' rather than simply exposing students to a reality reflected in literature? Worse, the chilling effect has begun to erode the classroom itself. Faculty colleagues increasingly wonder whether they should self-censor — not out of agreement with the law, but out of a desire to avoid trouble. This is the real damage: when fear begins to replace curiosity, and when silence replaces speech. I do not seek to indoctrinate my students. I never have. I seek to challenge them, to open doors through literature that lead into the complicated, layered, and sometimes uncomfortable questions that make up life in a pluralistic democracy. That is not political. That is educational. Opinion: As a professor, I see how universities are failing. We need a new approach. Let us be clear: removing or discouraging the inclusion of marginalized voices in the classroom does not eliminate discomfort. It only eliminates understanding. If our students cannot engage with difficult truths in college classrooms, where are they to encounter them? If we cannot safely present a range of American experiences through our literary heritage, what remains of our intellectual freedom? I do not write this out of defiance, but out of love — for teaching, for literature and for the role education plays in shaping thoughtful citizens. The danger of this legislation is not only in its enforcement, but in its ambiguity. It turns teachers into second-guessers. It turns students into cautious bystanders. And it risks turning Florida's classrooms into places where only the most neutral, safest voices are heard. But the world is not neutral. Literature is not safe. And education, at its best, is a form of illumination, not erasure. Carmine Giordano is an adjunct lecturer in English at Palm Beach State College. He lives in Lake Worth Beach, and wrote this for The Palm Beach Post. This article originally appeared on Palm Beach Post: FL law could silence Black, LGBTQ voices in the classroom | Opinion
Time Magazine
an hour ago
- Time Magazine
The History of Music Copyright—Before (Taylor's Version)
Taylor Swift wrote a letter to her fans announcing that she had finally secured ownership of the original master recordings for her entire catalog. It's the culmination of her efforts to gain full control of the copyright in her work. Rights to her catalog—including hugely successful albums like Fearless, Red, and 1989 —were purchased by a music industry mogul without her consent in June 2019. Although her legal team was unable to stop the sale, Swift won the high ground in the court of public opinion by arguing that such an action was morally wrong. In the process, she has achieved something unique in the history of American popular music. The pop star's efforts to control her master recordings has been an element of her ongoing advocacy for artist rights. The intricacies of publishing, licensing, and rights ownership in the modern music industry are quite complex. Though copyright may be law in one sense, public perception and popular opinion effect how the law is enforced in practice. The history of American popular music shows that the degree of agency an unsigned artist has to negotiate terms with industry representation can be profoundly affected by their class, race, and gender. Very few artists will ever reach the level of popularity and profitability that Swift enjoys, but by raising public discourse about music copyright she has helped to reinvigorate conversations about the value of music. Copyright protection for 'Authors and Inventors' is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, which highlights the importance the framers placed upon encouraging creativity and innovation. Congress passed the first copyright act in 1790 protecting any 'map, chart, book, or books,' which allowed authors the sole right to profit from the sale of their work for a limited time after which it would enter the public domain. Congress expanded copyright in 1802 to account for new advances in print technology and visual mediums. Interestingly, sheet music, which had existed for centuries, was not added to the list of protectable mediums until 1831. In truth, there was relatively little music generating revenue for copyright to protect in early America. That began to change when a 20-year-old Stephen Foster composed 'Oh! Susanna' in the late 1840s. The song was an unprecedented hit, selling well over 100,000 copies in multiple editions. Foster failed to properly register and protect his interests and made next to nothing off the song. Despite enjoying numerous fair and favorable contracts throughout his career. Foster never learned how to capitalize financially on the public success of his songs and he died penniless in 1864. The popularity of Foster's songs demonstrated that there was money to be made in American music, and publishing houses observed how songwriters could be easily taken advantage of in the process. Beginning with Tin Pan Alley at the turn of the 20th century, the music industry professionalized rapidly. Composers and songwriters, despite creating the product that generated income, became increasingly separated from the business of music. Record label executives, music publishers, lawyers, agents, and other professionals handled the paperwork and managed the money. While some songwriters like Irving Berlin also learned the business side of music, such cases were the exception, not the rule. Consider the career of Berlin's contemporary Woody Guthrie. Guthrie did not have access to the kinds of industry support more mainstream artists had, but he did have access to his local library. In 1937, he researched the copyright registration process on his own, sent in the required documentation along with a one-dollar fee to register 'California!,' and even asked the Copyright Office to send guidance about registration best practices. The Copyright Office responded promptly with an official registration certificate for 'California!,' several blank application cards, and instructions for how to optimize future registrations. This process was time consuming, however. Guthrie's transient lifestyle and prolific output meant that much of his catalog was not registered or managed properly. The copyright claim in Guthrie's most famous song, ' This Land is Your Land,' has been contested by artists and content creators looking to use the song in new ways. Rather than to maximize profitability, Guthrie's heirs have used copyright primarily to keep the song from being appropriated by commercial and political interests that are in direct opposition to his worldview. The key ethical question of copyright, like so many areas of the law, is not just about what rights are granted. It is about how the power granted by those rights gets wielded in practice. Over the course of the 20th century, many popular musicians like Chuck Berry and John Fogerty signed away their rights early in their careers, missing the full financial rewards when they later made it big. For many, accepting unfavorable terms had been their only option to break into the industry. Fogerty was famously sued by his former label and bandmates for sounding too much like himself when he went solo in 1972. Fogerty recently announced that, at the age of 80, he will be recording a (John's Version) album of his Greatest Hits, in a nod to Swift's success with the strategy. Before Swift's triumph, Prince is probably the artist who most skillfully used cultural influence to leverage their rights. When his label claimed a trademark in the rights to his name and all music marketed under it, he changed his name to an unpronounceable symbol until his contract with them expired in 2000. Similarly, much of Swift's success has come from relying more on public relations than litigation to assert her ownership. Inspired by a viral social media post from Kelly Clarkson, Swift began the process of rerecording her early work in November 2020. But that strategy only worked because she was also able to motivate her fans to choose (Taylor's Version) albums on streaming platforms and even to repurchase her rerecorded work on CD, cassette, and vinyl. Including bonus material and other incentives was certainly part of the strategy, but the level of fan involvement in policing the (Taylor's Version) transition has reached levels that are difficult to explain by marketing tactics alone. Swift's efforts to take legal control of her songwriting catalog have significantly raised the level of discourse about copyright law in popular culture. They have also provided a high-profile challenge to the trope of the struggling artist that has creative abilities but lacks savvy business skills. Swift's management of her career has been touted as a model to reduce the structural inefficiencies in music licensing and broadcasting, to promote equity sharing with record labels, and to give artists in general more control over their creative work. After her rerecording venture was so successful, some major labels have sought to add language to future contracts preventing that outcome. But to do so, they will have to navigate the fact that artists are more aware of the value that they bring in the post-(Taylor's Version) Era. Jason Lee Guthrie is an Associate Professor of Communication and Media Studies at Clayton State University in Morrow, GA. His research explores the intersections of creativity and economics, with a focus on copyright in the creative industries.
