Dueling Bloggers: How Much Is it Worth It To You? (Part II)

You are a very effective counselor, counselor. Your arguments are persuasive and succinct, your logic airtight. The problem is your argument fails to pass the common sense approach favored by the esteemed jurists of this internet site. If you had one night in San Sebastian, your argument would be good enough for summary judgment. (Sorry folks, trying to justify going to law school.)

But you do not have just one night. Assuming you will catch a morning train to San Sebastian and spend two nights there, that gives you conservatively eight separate feedings (figuring lunch, tapas, late night dinner, breakfast, lunch, tapas, dinner, breakfast next morning). Ok, take breakfast out of the equation, that is a sucker's meal. So six meals in one of the world's greatest food cities, and you are going to spend all of them eating sardines on toast?

I'll counter your argument with a rhetorical question. If someone came to New Orleans for six meals would you tell them to eat only po boys? A two day gumbo only odyssey? Two days of just Mandina's,  Liuzzas's and Frankie and Johnny's?

Look, I know it seems that while Lindsay and I were in Spain we Michelined our way around Catalonia barely stopping for anything not served on bone china. In fact, there were numerous meals in small tapas spots that we enjoyed thoroughly. One of our favorite spots, Mosquito (above), which we went to two or three times, was a beer bar the size of your office with an extensive menu of Chinese snack food. Plump dumplings, tender noodles, and spicy shredded beef anchored a menu built for drinking beer. There was nothing fancy about it. Just honest cooking and community, two hallmarks of any great meal. Plus there were peeps wearing skinny jeans - you and The Pope would have fit right in. We loved the flavors and vibe at Origens and the energy of the meals in the snack bars of the Boqueria. There is so much good food out there at every price point.

All that said, the two meals we remember the most were lunch at Sant Pau and dinner at Commerc 24. There was just something equal parts excitement, execution, and pampering about both. Now, people will say, "You are just paying for the art on the walls, the expensive china, the 20,000 bottle wine list." Yes, that is true. My counter to that is at more casual spots, you are not paying for highly tuned service, impeccably sourced ingredients, or a 1 : 1 staff to guest ratio. It is a trade off on both accounts.

Plus, there is an even better reason to set aside one meal and do it big. You are a busy man, the Folk Singer is probably busier. You aren't getting any younger or less busy, unless you win the Powerball. It will do your body good to set aside two to three hours and be pampered at the table. Consider it a couple's massage without the tantric spa music and a stranger's hands all over you. Traveling is all about experiencing different and new things to learn what you like sort of like college. How will you know if you prefer traditional tapas to upscale modernist cuisine if you don't try both?

I recommend you go to Arzak or wherever you choose for lunch. Most Big Boys in the dining world are open for lunch and dinner in order to make their numbers work. Lunch is usually less expensive, but no less good, and you get the benefit of being blissful in the afternoon. Take a long, luxurious lunch at one of the world's best restaurants. Drink plenty of wine. Be spoiled by a staff whose only concern is your happiness. Go home and nap. When you wake up, the tapas spots will be waiting for you.

Dueling Bloggers: How Much Is It Worth To You? (Part I)

Rene: Got your reservation at Arzak yet?
Peter: Yeah, but probably going to cancel.
Rene: Don't. You will regret it.

I have never been one to wince at spending a few dollars on a fine meal. During law school summer school in Lyon, I made it to 4 out of the 6 restaurants run by Paul Bocuse, including his flagship in Collonges. I celebrated my second to last semester in law school by dining at The French Laundry during the week before finals. (Wow, those pictures are awful.) And when I tally up my expenses every year for my tax return, The Folk Singer usually has a few comments about how many starving children in Africa that we could feed with the amount of money that I spent on food in the previous calendar year.

In anticipation of our upcoming trip to Madrid and Basque country, months ago I began the ritual of research and debate as to where we would be dining during our week long journey. My first stop is always whichever episode of No Reservations features Bourdain's visit to our area of travel, and any certified fan boy of Tony immediately knows that his not-so-secret dream is to be adopted into the family of Juan Mari Arzak. So while we would have counted ourselves lucky to eat at Mugaritz or Akellare, we have decided on Arzak for our blowout meal of the trip.

Or did we? Once we settled on where the main event would be held, I began scouting potential locations for the undercard rounds. You know, the other 12 meals that we will presumably eat in Spain. And a funny thing happened during my research: I became more excited about the hundreds of tapas and pintxos bars that I read about than I did anticipating what could be the meal of a lifetime at Arzak. And I started to wonder: With only 2 days in San Sebastian on the agenda, was I willing to sacrifice precious tapas crawl and general exploration time to spend a significant amount of time and money on one meal?

The answer to that question is still to be determined. The Folk Singer has vowed to go with the flow, though she is perfectly happy with drinking cava and eating jamón ibérico de bellota and patatas bravas for 6 days. Rene's opinion is encapsulated in the opening paragraph - a once in a lifetime meal is just that, so embrace the moment while you can. (He will offer his thoughts tomorrow in Part II.) And as I said before, I am still undecided.

But in the process of weighing my decision, I have come to a few conclusions on how to measure the "value" or "worth" of a meal, based on my past experiences.

First, unlike women's shoes and handbags, price is not the determinative factor. I have paid $10 for meals that were better values than spending $150 on foie gras and roasted venison, and that's not because the more expensive food sucked. Certain eating experiences just fit when it comes to the mood of the parties, the reason for celebrating, the expectations, and numerous other factors. A dozen raw oysters and a cold bar can be the most fulfilling dining experience man can ever want, if a dozen raw oysters and a cold bar is what man so desires. On the flip side, a high price tag brings high expectations, and one cannot help but determine value in terms of dollars spent. Will a meal at Arzak be 8 times more fulfilling than an evening of munching on croquetas and pulpo al ajillo and drinking bottles of txakoli?

Second, "once in a lifetime" applies to meals at every price point. The chances of me having another opportunity to eat at Arzak are the same as me having another opportunity to eat tapas at La Cuchara de San Telmo a few blocks away. The unknown factor is the same for both - my only knowledge of either comes from accounts produced by other people. So who is to say that I would not receive more joy from one than the other? The potential level of regret, however, would be much higher for a restaurant like Arzak, which has been lauded and anointed by the wise souls at Michelin. After reading a number of the "I Ate At El Bulli Pieces", I got the sense of what "once in a lifetime" really meant, at least to the authors.

It's a tough decision, and one that will likely not be made until a few days before we make the drive from Madrid to San Sebastian. So I ask: WWBORD? How much is it worth to you?

Dueling Bloggers: The Past, Present, & Future of Fine Dining

Photo courtesy of Listverse.

Peter - I think fine dining is slowly losing ground and will never catch back up. Gone are the days when people were willing to pay higher prices for "luxuries" like white table cloths and a dedicated bus boy to refill your water glass after every sip. No one wants to pay $160 for a bottle of California cabernet to pair with a ribeye when they can find the same bottle for $50 on Vinfolio, pickup the same cut of beef from Rare Cuts and throw it on the Big Green Egg at home. Granted, diners will always be willing to pay for food which they lack the tools and culinary skills to cook for themselves. But as every chef authors a cookbook and hosts his or her own TV show, Joe Q. Foodie learns a little bit more about cooking and loses a little more interest in dining out.

Rene - This is one of those paradoxes that are really enigmas wrapped in puzzles. As people get more knowledgeable about food, their desire to eat out and experience more types of foods increases. They pick up the New York Times and read about a chef in Brooklyn or a restaurant in Salinas, California and say, "Man I want to check that out." As far as I know the French Laundry or Daniel still have full reservation sheets night in, night out. While the proof is certainly out there that casual dining has supplanted fine dining in terms of sheer numbers of restaurants, if the economy picks back up, I think we will see a return of special event/fine dining. It is like that commercial for New York Life; "There will always be weddings, always be births..." When people want to celebrate milestones, a casual place with linoleum on the floors and the chef's meatloaf will not fit the mood.

Peter - I agree that things are cyclical and things will pickup as soon as the Dow does. But I also think that there is going to be a polarization of the dining scene. Consider that a high number of food fanatics are young people who make decent money but their incomes are not high enough to afford a regular meal at Stella! or Gautreau's, so instead they gravitate toward spots like Boucherie and Green Goddess and Cowbell where you can enjoy higher level cuisine in a lower level environment. Now, common wisdom will tell you that eventually these young people will grow up, have children, and hopefully make more money. But they will also have less time. So what I foresee is that large group of people then shifting away from spreading there minimal amount of dollars across a greater number of meals, to a higher amount of dollars across a lower number of meals.

Rene - According to Scott Boswell the more he makes Stella! a fine dining destination (by removing seats to serve less people, increasing cooks, upping the crystal budgets, etc...) the more revenue it brings in to the restaurant. Everyone right now is zigging towards casual, so those who are zagging stand out. People still will occasionally crave an indulgent or at least attentive evening out. About your young people, the question is when people do have the time to go out to eat what is the occasion. For instance, if you are taking a client or business contact out to dinner. Are you going to go to a Cowbell or an Herbsaint? Get a babysitter one night a month, are you going to waste that on pizza or spend that time on a pampering meal? Look I think it is great that I can go to a chef run, casual restaurant and have solid food. But a few weeks ago, Lindsay and I went to Domenica, had a great meal, some apps, a bottle of wine, a dessert. Bill with tax and tip came to $200. That is a little steep for "casual."

Peter - Special occasions will always mandate stepping up your game, but how many of those occasions occur every year? As for the proliferation of casual, chef-run restaurants, I think those are economic considerations rather than a signal of a shifting dynamic. Butcher and Tru Burger and Ancora are just a piece of the respective empires of Link, Burgau, and Garcia.  Those chefs did not need to open those restaurants to survive. But they certainly enjoy the supplemental income that those restaurants provide, and expansion allows for new opportunities for young chefs without a waterfall of responsibility. Plus, I think people will always enjoy and be able to afford a burger, pizza, or pulled pork sandwich.

Rene - Of course, economically it makes sense to downshift for those chefs in this economy. First of all, it is a way to reward members of their companies by installing them as chef-partners or managers. Second of all, they help support the motherships, which as a general rule lose money. It is a well-unkept secret that el Bulli lost money. If we ever get out of this malaise, the non-restaurant group affiliated casual restaurants may find it hard to get by as people look for dining to be special again. I have nothing with casual spots, but I find that I want something more from dining than the majority of new restaurants are opening can give me. I want a tablecoth every now and then. I want a waitstaff whose wardrobe isnt't designed by American Apparel. I want a plate of food that I can't make at home. I want more from restaurants. I want fine dining to start trending again. 

Dueling Bloggers: Reservations

Back by popular demand, Dueling Bloggers returns after an extended hiatus. Next up for debate: reservations versus walk-in only.

Peter - Perhaps I am comfortably numb from a lifetime of waiting in line for breakfast at Camellia Grill or for a sno-ball at Hansen's, but I just don't have any issue with restaurants that don't take reservations. There's something about the wait that helps build anticipation, and as long as the food delivers, then the overall experience is that much better. And if the food is not worth wait, then I just won't go back.

Rene -You probably expect me to disagree with you on this and I can't say I do 100%. Certain places don't need reservations. Hanson's, downstairs at Galatoire's, a burger restaurant that is only open 4 hours a week (tongue in cheek), those types of establishments don't need a book. But you know who does? New restaurants who don't have their feet under them and want to have a No Reservations policy in order to build hype. Talk about setting yourself up for disaster. Waits compounded with the sometimes rocky starts of new restaurants can turn the next hot restaurant into a sinking ship in no time.

Peter - New York Times restaurant critic Sam Sifton is obviously prejudicial toward restaurants that don't take reservations. I can't tell you how many times I have read through a seemingly glowing review from him, only to reach the last paragraph where he delivers a one liner about how waiting for a table sucks before stamping a single star. Just read his review of The John Dory Oyster Bar ("All this greatness comes at a cost, which is the time and dignity lost waiting for a table") or in last week's review of Colonie, which he said "with all its strengths, would do well to embrace that realization and with it a truth John Cheever milled for years in his short stories set in Shady Hill: After Daddy’s off the train, he does not want to wait for dinner." If you don't like waiting for a table with the rest of us shlubs, that's fine. But you knew that going in, so why cry about it later?

Rene - Who talks like that? Sam Sifton is more obtuse than a dusty black tinted window on a stagecoach hiding a Texas Ranger during a Midwest thunderstorm. A few years ago, there was an article on how Italian restaurants in New York City knew to have extensive offerings of Soave (an Italian white wine) in order to better find their restaurant in Frank Bruni's good graces. It seems the Soave of Bruni has been replaced by the No Reservations bait for Sifton. If he hates waiting so much, why go? But there is probably something more sinister working here and that is in a down economy a restaurant may not want to pay the money to hire a theater major with a minor in painting to man the phones for 8 hours a day. Plus, add in the puzzling blend of timing reservations, jugging regulars and newcomers, making sure tables are available for walk-ins, etc..., and not taking reservations is just easier for a new restaurant. Hey, it works for Mondo.

Peter - You know what's worse than no reservations? Waiting to be seated when you have a reservation. We all know that nightly service is fluid, and you never know if the 6-top showing up 10 minutes late for it's 6:00 table will somehow snowball into an even longer delay later in the night. The no reservation system is the greatest form of local democracy since Dollar Bill was convicted and Nagin's term ended. If one person waits, then everyone waits... or pays someone to stand in line for them.

Rene - Peter, as the preeminent authority on Seinfeld's impact on pop culture, I can't believe you missed an opportunity to quote Jerry, although he was talking about rental cars and not restaurants. Here is the other reason not taking reservations is important for a restaurants bottom line: the bar. So you and The Folk Singer walk into a restaurant and they tell you, "It'll be a 20 minute wait." What do you do? Why you go into the bar and order a round of drinks. Boosting the bar sales helps the bottom line, helping the bottom line means know instead of hiring that reservationist they can start having a bar bites menu for you to snack on while you wait. Not taking reservations is genius, really.

Dueling Bloggers: Tipping

Photo courtesy of the New England Wedding Blog.

Peter: I'll be honest - I have no concrete notion of what is proper tipping etiquette.  Some people (maybe most?) calculate gratuity based on the pre-tax total. I have always based gratuity on the bottom line total including tax, and I don't know exactly why other than because that's how my Dad always did it. I usually tip 18% unless I am constantly trying to get the waiter's attention away from his iPhone to refill my water glass or futily searching for him while he is on a smoke break, in which case the tip gets knocked down to 15%. For higher end restaurants, I usually bump it up to 20%.

Rene: Daddy Warbucks and his pocketfuls of greenbacks over here. You probably spend a good amount of time tipping everyone and anyone who looks your way. Two things, first I usually tip on the pre-tax dollars. Real misers tip on the pre-tax and pre-drinks amount, but that seems a little cheap to me. Also, I try not to judge tipping by the location or style of a restaurant. Consider the humble breakfast waitress. She gets up at 4 a.m., refills coffee near endlessly, makes sure your eggs are scrambled softly, fetches you an extra biscuit, and snags the Sports page for you. All of that work and the bill is $12. I was always told and try to follow (when I do eat breakfast out) to tip breakfast waiters and waitresses over 30%. Maybe I am just more considerate and appreciative than you, Warbucks.

Peter: Here is an interesting question emailed to us by a faithful Blackened Out reader named Kelly: Is it customary to tip on take out? I always tip on takeout, but usually only to the tune of a few dollars. My rationale is this: If the bartender handles take out orders, and the bartender makes a living on tips, then throw him a couple of bucks. Here is another question for you, oh King of Corkage: When you bring a bottle of wine to a restaurant, do you calculate gratuity solely on the corkage fee or do you calculate based on the value of the wine that you brought in?

Rene: I do tip on take out, but usually only by adding a dollar and rounding up to the next whole dollar. So let's say the bill is $27.39, I would tip $1.61. This is stupid and it doesn't really make sense. No one is actually serving me anything, consider it a guilty conscience. Also, I must add that the growing proliferation of restaurants that take credit cards and print a receipt with a gratuity line has created an almost Pavlovian reaction to tipping. Listen up, dry cleaners, Walgreens, liquor stores, if there is a gratuity line, 9 times out of 10 you can trick me into leaving a tip.

As for corkage, I usually just add a base line amount to the regular tip based on how the wine service went. For instance, when we dined at Meson 923. The wine, a White Burgundy, was constantly taken from the table and placed in a wine bucket across the room chilling it and destroying the almond cream and mushroom aromas. Now despite my repeated requests to stop doing that, I may have been able to let it slide. If, and this is a HUGE if, I didn't have to get up and traipse across the room to retrieve said wine each time our glasses were empty. For that wine "service" I added $5 to the tip. For anything approaching competent service I'd probably do 20% of the cost of the wine to me added to regular tip.

Peter: If it takes forever to get your food, do you discount the server's gratuity even if the problem is most likely attributable to the back of the house? What about if the restaurant is understaffed (through no fault of the server), and therefore the server is spread too thin?  The service industry is a tough way to make a living, and the front of the house gets the brunt of the complaints because they are the ones dealing face to face with the customers. The back of the house gets paid the same no matter if the food is good or bad. Such is not the case with servers, but I try not to punish a waiter for problems outside of his control.  The only service issue which has the potential too drastically discount gratuity is if I am waiting an extended period of time to either get my check or run my credit card.

Rene: This brings up a very interesting argument. As we have talked about before, in Europe and elsewhere service is included in the price of the meal. In America, is tipping a way of passing the cost of service from the restaurant owner to the consumer? I say yes. But that this is not a bad thing. The number one thing we hear from friends and reader (they are pretty much mutually exclusive) is service complaints. If prices were higher and service was included, people would complain that they are paying for a service that doesn't please them. This way the patron decides the value of the server's wages. However, it should be the role of management and the kitchen to ensure the waitstaff is in the best possible position to make the most amount of money. When that happens, regardless of the restaurant, everyone wins.

Dueling Bloggers: Service

Peter: When dining at a restaurant, the food is the end all be all for me. If the food sucks, then I don't care if Brooklyn Decker is spoon feeding me while I drink from Waterford crystal. That being said, I do believe that average food can be elevated in the mind of the diner if the service is superb. I have dined at two 3 star Michelin restaurants: Restaurant Bocuse in Collonges, France and The French Laundry in Yountville. The high level of service was a major, integral factor in those dining experiences. I will never forget when the captain rolled out the cheese cart at Restaurant Bocuse or the grandious presentation of the white Alba truffles in a jewel box at TFL. The food at each restaurant was superb, but would the Oysters and Pearls or Scallop of Foie Gras tasted as exquisite had they been served without all of the bells and whistles? Probably not.

Rene: If service didn't matter all restaurants would serve food out of a window carved out of an abandoned building. There would be no waiters, food would be served on paper plates, and the wine would gush out of a hose into a slightly cleaned Anti-Freeze canister. About 20 months ago, Tim and Nina Zagat were in town to release their eponymous guide. During the presentation, Mr. Zagat mentioned that the number one comment or criticism from respondents across the board, be it a Stella! or Liuzza's, concerns service. A restaurant is a complete package in my book, there needs to be a level of service that matches the food and ambiance. When all of those things are in harmony, a restaurant can truly shine.

Peter: Where I take issue is how Michelin and other notable restaurant raters only reward their highest ratings to fine dining establishments. It' unfair to rate all restaurants by a singular scale, especially if you take into account service. Po-boy shops should be rated against other po-boy shops, while Antoine's, Arnaud's, and Galatoire's should be lumped together with their peers. If expectations are adequately disclosed to prospective diners, I don't see why 9 Roses, Parkway Bakery, and La Boca can all earn the same number of stars/beans/smiley faces in their respective categories.


Rene: Well then it is a good thing we invented the Blackened Out Rating System, which adapts golf scoring to restaurants. Great segue for a plug, Peter! I'll tell you what I have a problem with: the homogenization of restaurant service on the fine dining side. Michelin, the New York Times, and other guides are looking for a specific set of criteria when awarding the big beans. Who makes the China? What is the staff to guest ratio? Is the Captain conversant in the winemaking techniques of Chile? Does unobtrusive, yet pleasing violin music whisper in your ear? Mario Batali has said before, "The three stars make sure rich people can eat the same food in the same setting anywhere in the world."

Personally, I enjoy variances in service and ambiance from the familiar, hustle and bustle of Galatoire's, the scholarly sophistication of Stella!, the calm professionalism of Herbsaint, and yes, even the raucous "Let's take a shot" of Jacque-Imo's. Again a restaurant to me is like a beautiful women. She should resemble other dames but have a style, grace, and substance that sets her apart from all the rest.

Peter: What the question boils down to is a diner's expectation of value. If you are paying a lot of money for a meal, then you expect and deserve a certain level of sophistication in service. But I don't need white table cloths and plush leather chairs. Give me excellent food, and the surroundings and service fall out of focus unless either is markedly terrible. Snark and/or arrogance will never be tolerated, but if the kitchen puts out an exquisite seared duck breast then I don't care if I had to ask twice for my water glass to be filled. Table settings are even further down the line as determining factors in my level of satisfaction. And I don't think that I am the only one who feels this way. Just look at the Le Fooding movement and food truck phenomenon. In today's dining world, pomp and circumstance are no longer as important as what's on the plate... or wrapped in white butcher paper...or plastic serving basket.

Rene: I've been reading a lot lately. A lot on Thomas Keller, by the way do you still have all those Ruhlman books I lent you? Anyway in one telling passage of Soul of a Chef, Ruhlman asks Keller where his drive for perfection comes from. Keller relates how every morning he had to clean his bathroom to his mother's exacting standards. Eventually, you get to a point he says, where you carry that over into everything. You do everything in the best possible manner as that is the only way to ensure a result that will even approach perfection. So to answer your point, I find it hard to believe that a restaurant whose front of the house staff can't execute the basics could sear a duck breast perfectly. Which would be on medium-low heat for about twenty-five minutes, skin side down, skin scored and seasoned 12 hours prior, then flip to flesh side for a few moments. Now of course, anything is possible, but I like restaurants to pay attention to details. If the kitchen is going to the trouble and expense to source ingredients and cook them with soul, waiters need to know that and show pride and ownership in the meal they set in front of a diner. The hallmark of a great dining experience is whether or not the server, be it a Diner Darling or High End Hank makes you feel welcome and well taken care of. End of story.

What say you readers?

Dueling Bloggers: Customer Customization

Thanks for all the comments on last week's debate. While we aren't positive (our historian is checking), rumor is it was the first meaningful discussion on the internet that did not detour into a mudslinging, nasty name calling affair. You guys and broads brought up insightful, intelligent points that we hadn't even thought about and greatly contributed to the discussion. So congrats, dear readers. We made history. The issue of cash vs. credit cards has no correct, definitive answer, much like which Olsen sister is hottest. Now onto another topic, diners who customize their orders.

Rene: The worst person in the world to eat with is Legend. Doesn't really matter where you go: high-end temple of gastronomy, cozy bistro, or fast food chain, he will customize his order to fit what he wants. For example, "I want the steak, but the potatoes from the fish, the sauce from the chicken, and the dessert from the place across the street." I can't stand this. At most restaurants, a diner should only be able to customize their order when asked. For instance, you may answer "medium rare" when asked, "How would you like your steak cooked?" Or you may tell the waitress how you like your eggs cooked. Eating with a picky, customizing orderer makes me want to crawl under the table. Just order the dish as it is on the menu. And remember, dressing on the side is about as cool as a bag of Robert Peytons. No matter what anyone says, you are going to eat the whole damn mini-tub of ranch anyway.

Peter: Remember when I wrote that story about the Old Broads from Broad Street? You know, that cadre of waitresses who migrated from the original Ruth's to the new restaurant in the Harrah's Hotel? (No? Well, I couldn't the link online, so apparently that article doesn't exist.) Anyway, when I asked those girls what it was like to work for Ruth Fertel, they all echoed the same memory: "Ms. Ruth's philosophy was always: "Give the customer whatever they want.'" Some restaurants pretend as if it takes an act of Congress to get the kitchen to swap rice for potatoes with your fish. If Connie at Ruth's could hand crush peppermint candies to make The Pope's beloved peppermint ice cream (which had been taken off the menu much to the dismay of the 11 year old Ponitff), then I should be able to get bernaise instead of demi glace with my lambchops.

Rene: A restaurant, a good one at least, is a highly tuned machine. Any little change in cooking, plating, or ingredients can throw a kitchen out of sync. Which means your meal could suffer. To increase your odds of pleasurable dining, decrease your special requests. Recently I heard of a story in which a group went into a recently opened New Orleans restaurant and asked for a "tasting of curry." Note: This was not an Indian restaurant. Now, I will concede that if you have dietary restrictions or are a practicing Bloggletarian*, then you may request kindly that the kitchen do something special. But the carte blanche approach smacks of Veruca Salt , "I want this Mexican restaurant to make me German food with candy corn topping and snozzberry ice cream, Daddy." I'll let you customize, but only when absolutely necessary. Also, you have to remember the most important rule, "Dont be an asshole."

Peter: I have to agree, but only to a certain extent. I'll go back to my argument above re: it's not that f*cking hard for a cook to switch out sauces and side dishes, provided that the different ingredient is offered elsewhere on the menu. Funny story about that though. Christmas 2006. My entire family travels across the pond to visit my sister, who was spending her junior year in Paris. Dining out in a foreign country is difficult enough with the requisite language barrier, but my father's healthy eating habits made it even worse. Everywhere we ate, he desperately tried to customize his order by supplementing vegetables. My sister - at the time the only one of us who spoke any French worth a damn - refused to help my Dad, using the classical excuse, "They don't let you substitute like that in France." Pops was always polite and smiled when he said in this most awkward Frenglish accent, "Les vegetables?" The rest of us would cringe at this exercise in futility, and the waiter would just smile and look confused. Looking back, I have to thank my Dad for showing me exactly what NOT to do when dining out abroad, because when I returned that summer I felt like an old pro when it came to European restaurants.

Rene: You want customization? Been brainwashed to have it your way by Madison Avenue hucksters with catchwords, buzzphrases, and you are special dreams? Cook at home. There you can make a tahini and falafel gyro or delight in eggs benedict hold the Canadian bacon, add avocado. When I eat at restaurants, I want to taste the chef's food. I want an idea of how he cooks, how she thinks, or what her training is. This doesn't mean you have to agree with the chef's decision to place foie gras on top of a fried chicken, stuffed biscuit, but you should try it that way before disagreeing with it. When you customize at a restaurant it is like telling a girl, "I think you would be pretty if you lost 10 pounds." Finally, people love to say, "I love this or that restaurant because it feels like dining at someone's house." Well, most dinner parties I go to (read here: once - haven't been invited back), I have never had a say in the menu.

Peter: I agree with you - diners need to be more adventurous and trusting of chefs when it comes to uncommon combination of ingredients, flavors, and textures. But what if someone walks into restaurant, with a wallet full of cash (or credit) and willing to spend it, but they don't like beets? Does Donald Link allow a diner to order the braised pork rib without them? You're right, for the most part, chefs design a dish such that each ingredient serves a specific role in the overall composition. But, again, it's their money. Why shouldn't a restaurant give the customer without they, as long as it's within reason?


* Your friend and ours, Bloggle, has become a vegan or something like that. If you need him, he can be found playing in the drum circle at Panic Nolaween and trying to sell you a vegan burrito.