Most people think Moosewood is hit-or-miss and I must agree. While I appreciate that it's an institution, and a founding father in the vegetarian restaurant world, it has much room for improvement, if it wants to stay relevant.
For one thing, it's an old-school 1970s "vegetarian" place, meaning it's not actually vegetarian (it serves fish) and isn't overly vegan-friendly by any means. Menu offerings change daily, and what they serve tends to be international in focus; this sounds great, except that stews, dals and dishes of that kind are today so mainstream and ubiquitous, that they hold little appeal, in my opinion.
I started with a guacamole appetizer ($6) which was tasty, but pricey.
I had a Moroccan stew ($15) for my main course, sadly, at it was the only vegan dish available the day I visited. It consisted of potatoes, zucchini and green onions in a vegetable broth, and was served with a chunk of dry corn bread. It also came with a simple house salad covered in a miso-ginger dressing (which was excellent). The stew was pretty lame, though, and way too basic to be worth $15. It lacked any real flavor or zing.
This might have been acceptable vegetarian fare in 1975, but it doesn't pass muster in an age of soy ice cream, Gardein chicken and Daiya cheese.
Why can't Moosewood make its own seitan sandwich? Or a tofu taco or home-made burger? Or, if Moosewood looks down on mockmeats, why not try to replicate some of the smart, gourmet dishes offered by places like Horizons (in Philadelphia) or Millennium (in San Francisco)?
Ultimately, Moosewood can't really compete. It's not vegan-friendly enough to cater to modern vegans and vegetarians accustomed to better, heartier, smarter fare; and it's not sophisticated enough to do battle with really upscale vegetarian and vegan restaurants that have internationally-renowned chefs. It sits in a tepid middle ground, and is hopelessly trapped in the 1970s.