JAMES JOHN CAFÉ doesn’t make sense. At least not the kind of sense found in a typical restaurant, arranged around a theme or guiding principle. Here, it’s more a state of mind, with all the wonder and occasional confusion that entails. James John is also unassuming—a hole in the wall in St. Johns—and there’s an oddness to it, the type that develops when people disregard the expectation of what they are “supposed to be doing.” The cooking is homey, yet there is great attention to detail and craft. If chef Aaron Solley—who trained with the legendary Takashi Yagihashi as well as pastry luminary Michael Laiskonis—has a vision, it’s a personal one. Given the quality of the food, it’s one we all might want to share.
Known for a successful brunch and the occasional four-course dinner, James John has recently started opening four nights a week. Solley seems to have extended his brunch-time passion for curing, brining, and smoking ingredients to a new degree of mania, and pretty much everything that can be done in-house is—from pasta to smoked fish, to horseradish and hot sauce. The menu consists of half a dozen main dishes, a few more small plates/starters, and sides. (The menu itself is written on a chalkboard and placed on a chair by the table, a procedure I’ve personally never been fond of.)
There’s a willful idiosyncrasy to the proceedings—the food is Southern-leaning to the extent that pimento cheese tea sandwiches are offered as sides, yet a typical salad Niçoise and an open-faced turkey sandwich also make an appearance. The meal begins with a cup of popcorn. In other words, there’s no logical path. Just follow your appetite.
I tried the Netarts Bay oysters with house-made tomato gin granita ($3 each). I don’t usually like toppings interfering with the fresh taste of a good oyster, but the granita was like a good smack inside the mouth, the acid of the tomato balancing the salinity of the oyster. Also excellent was a plate of trout ($8), delicately smoked so that the nuttiness of the fish flesh wasn’t overpowered, while the accompanying horseradish sauce was flavorful but not dominating. The crackers, like everything else on the plate, were made in-house (it’s probably time to give up mentioning this).
James John’s food is at its best when the natural flavors are allowed to shine, as in the panzanella salad ($8), which was alive with tomatoes, cucumber, olives, and parsley (the café’s vegetables are grown in its own garden), while a main course of pork carnitas and pinto beans ($11) had a perfect melt-in-the-mouth consistency and was moist without being watery. The BBQ shrimp and grits ($13), meanwhile, were agreeably juicy, but the sauce was on the sweet side; in this case the balancing act didn’t quite work (though the grits were thick and rich). There was a mishap with a roasted red pepper risotto that was way over-salted; hopefully that was just a slip up—it was the only serious fault in half a dozen visits.
And the tea sandwiches? A plate of four sides is available for $12, so we tried the tasty pimento cheese and olive cream cheese versions, their bread cut into bite-sized pieces and the crusts properly removed. We supplemented this with spaghetti squash (buttery, lovely texture) and a slab of Spanish tortilla (crispy topping, not too heavy). Did it make sense? No. Did it matter? Not a bit.
The décor, much like the menu, is quirky, with still-life reproductions, taxidermy, and a religious figurine that lights up when the kitchen requires service—elements that might seem gimmicky or overdone in shinier parts of town, but here seem like a heartfelt reflection of personality. The room, though an open plan with a lovely high tin-plate ceiling retained from the building’s earlier life as a bank (the first in St. Johns), is cozy once the candles are lit. Service, while casual, is as helpful and friendly as always.
One area that does need improvement is the wine list (cocktails, by the way, are excellent). It’s not varied enough. And while Espiga is great for quaffing at home, it’s not what I want with a good meal. Then again, we were told that they are still working through the wines left over from their occasional dinner series, and are planning to add others. They’ll get to it when they’re ready, it seems.
Dinner: Wed & Thurs 5–9 pm, Fri & Sat 5–10 pm. Brunch: Sun 9 am–2 pm

If you have never had a meal at John James Cafe, you are simple letting the best in life pass you bye, that said, I must take exception with this review. I am painfully aware of the fact that most food reviewers must make snarky comments with glib references that elevate their street cred. First and foremost, don’t do that, it just makes you look small minded and shallow. John James Cafe, and by extension their real customer base, is not impressed by your ham handed attempts at relevancy by shitting on hard working small business owners that actually get it, by delivering a great product at a fair price. Pay attention, I am educating you…you really need to dig deeply into the story before you pass judgement and make a buffoon out of yourself.
Great review for a great business! Love them!
Wtf are you referring to dwts? Did we real the same article? All I recall is how delicious they sound and how good for St Johns they are….it’s a positive review.
Dwts is reading a review in a paralell universe: in that universe, it’s called the John James.
DWTS is dead on. This was one big offhanded compliment, like saying, “those shoes look nice…on your nasty feet”. My problem with this article is that if you don’t like a place you’re reviewing then just say so, don’t bash it on the sly; that’s just weak.
To show what I mean here are some of the highlights that especially stuck out from the article. The author used the following words to describe the place;
‘unassuming’…’hole in the wall’…’oddness’…’mania’…’willfully idiosyncratic’,
The author also insulted at the décor, the location and the menu;
Saying about the menu
“…there’s no logical path, Did it make sense? No.”, and “The menu itself is written on a chalkboard and placed on a chair by the table, a procedure I’ve personally never been fond of.”
And about the décor
“The décor, much like the menu, is quirky”
And about the wine list
They’ll get to it when they’re ready it seems
And what is that bit about the location having been a bank (who the fuck cares, Portlanders will wait in line to eat pizza out of what looks to have been a garage if it tastes amazing.)
Luckily the type of person who creates something as astounding as James John Café could give two shits what someone who doesn’t have a clue how much an investment a wine selection is and how much money it costs to replace a whole inventory, thinks.
What I don’t get is, this person doesn’t seem to like food very much. Why are they writing a food article.
So: the bulk of the review was positive. What little criticism it contains is quickly discounted as not a very big deal. She liked it, and said so.
The thing about it once being a bank was not a slam. This is a good review for a restaurant maybe lots of people might not have previously heard of. It apparently contains some words two of you (one of you?) dislike for reasons that mostly seem to come down to reading comprehension.
Yeah yeah with yer dislike, Employee of the Month.
“I am educating you…you really need to dig deeply into the story before you pass judgement and make a buffoon out of yourself.”
I can’t tell if this is an example of expert trolling or just standard issue douchebaggery. Either way, bravo! It’s people like you who make me smile the most.