Jump to content

Kliman Online, Todd Kliman's Chog - Tuesdays 11-12 AM on Washingtonian.com


Meaghan

Recommended Posts

It hardly matters either way, since the nature of the Internet is that readers don't read all that carefully and the information, in the end -- the sheer information, not whether it is true or false, rumor or not, honest critique or public relations -- is ultimately what is retained in the great collective memory.
[/i]

I take great exception to the comment that "the nature of the Internet is that readers don't read all that carefully." All internet readers? And why is that any more true of internet readers than of any other kind?

I personally thought Kliman's words were insightful and accurate, especially his noting the reality that all information on the Internet is automatically published like authoritative knowledge regardless of veracity. We love the Internet because anyone can be published, but we should read with cynicism for the same reason.

I can see, though, why some here might take offense to being described as ones who don't "read all that carefully." Most DR posters and lurkers are certainly motivated to read carefully, and more importantly, also happen to be surprisingly well-informed on their subjects compared to many discussion boards (ever read a college sports recruiting board? Every high school band geek and work-avoiding accountant seems to be an expert on why some four-star running back in Arkansas is destined to go to Penn State). While we're all drawn here by the general comity (unless you're discussing Rachel Ray) that happens to also surround a common interest, some people are real experts while others (like me) are here to learn. Active members and lurkers eventually figure out who's who, which might be the type of "care" that Kliman is hoping people exercised more of. But what if you're not an active member? How do you separate my comments from those by ol_ironstomach and mdt? See that Googlebot member constantly listed at the bottom of this board's front page? He doesn't rate our posts. When curious people simply Google a DC restaurant's name, they link to this forum without knowing what it is. Because Google doesn't think for them (yet), they'll have their perceptions colored by anonymous posters whom they don't know and maybe shouldn't trust. This probably goes beyond Kliman's remarks, but an interesting idea to consider when trying to assess the effect of this group.

Maybe these ideas resonated with me so strongly (that I continue to babble) because my job takes Kliman's fears to a frightening extreme: Every day I work with kids who are supposedly so tech-savvy but the real story is how frighteningly information illiterate they are. Sure, they can smack the CTRL-F keys and Copy-Paste with the ease that most of us use while turning a book's page, but reading that information? Synthesizing that information? Evaluating that information? Puh-lease! It's my to help them manage these tasks, but I can't say I feel very successful often (I love the gasps from the third of kids who don't get the joke at http://malepregnancy.comwithout explanation). I hope most adults trying to decide between Clyde's and Corduroy function at a higher cognitive level than my MySpace-obsessed teenagers, but maybe Kliman's right and they don't deserve such credit.

OK, nobody cares this much so I'll finally stop blink.gif

pax,
Brian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am still not convinced that internet readers are less well-informed and careful than readers of the Weekly World News, or the Washington Times. :lol: And don't blame only the internet for information illiteracy - schools, television, electronic games, and especially parents that don't read all have a part in that. Yes, there are timewasters like Facebooks and MySpace on the web, but there are also wonderful, credible, resources such as the Library of Congress.

And it's not 100% certain that just because a food critic (or movie critic, or book reviewer...) has an editor that s/he can't be as full of shit as your average reasonably well-educated Joe Donut discussion board member. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally thought Kliman's words were insightful and accurate, especially his noting the reality that all information on the Internet is automatically published like authoritative knowledge regardless of veracity. We love the Internet because anyone can be published, but we should read with cynicism for the same reason.

I'm always mystified by the assumption that people who stumble across this, or any Internet resource, are credulous rubes who accept everything posted as holy writ. I'll bet most of them are just as smart, and just as capable of critical reading and reading between the lines, as we, The Elect, are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think overall, he made some valid points. But I think what was rough was that 1. he didn't even really answer the question posed by the chatter, which implies he might have had his own agenda in his rather meandering response

2. he made rather unkind summary statements that the board was full of floggers and provided little to no useful information.

As a "journalist" it did not seem like he really provided a balanced response. Of course there are those people who flog their own "sacred cows." That's the nature of people. If you go to a restaurant frequently enough, the staff will begin to notice, and they become your friends. Of course you will only want to say nice things about your friends. While some might make that quasi-insider relationship a priority, I think those people are a small percentage of the board population.

Yes there are people who don't read carefully, but, I would say given the quantity of responses on any given topic on this board, you might receive more information and at least some varying points of view. Plus, I would also point out that the frequency of posting here versus the updating of reviews provides better or at least more recent information.

Somehow he seems to be missing a paragraph in there that says:

Some of these people are people who just like to eat good food. The quality of their opinions may, of course, vary. But it can be useful for getting the feel of a place.

Let me add an edit here:

Yes they expect too much. or No they expect just the right amount. Or... It varies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And some of these people are quasi-insiders -- people who are fond of a chef or restaurant and who then become fans or, if you will, groupies of that chef's place. People who want to be on the inside. Special treatment invariably follows, which in turn leads to gushing posts on the message boards, which in turn creates a buzz about a place."

Hmmm, nobody on this board like this is there? :lol:

I agree with Heather that there are a bunch of other folks that use this board for things other than dining out. Can we really expect him to know/care about that part of the board?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm, nobody on this board like this is there? :lol:
Oh yeah. And I suspect that anyone who posts here regularly knows who has those tendencies.
I agree with Heather that there are a bunch of other folks that use this board for things other than dining out. Can we really expect him to know/care about that part of the board?
Well, no, but it might be nice if he did and didn't just imply that we're all shills, dupes, or groupies.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember that he wasn't talking specifically about DR.com, but rather these types of boards in general. Of course it is more fun to take it all personally.
The questioner mentioned DR.com specifically. I assumed he was talking about eGullet, Chowhound, Mouthfuls, Opinionated About, etc., not just DR.com. Tar 'em all with the same brush, no matter what the differences between the sites are. :lol:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm always mystified by the assumption that people who stumble across this, or any Internet resource, are credulous rubes who accept everything posted as holy writ.
That's what I always find weird about these assumptions as well.

I think Kliman's criticism that there are regulars at some restaurants who receive special treatment and then publicly fawn over the restaurants on this (and other) site(s) is accurate. But, as others here have pointed out, I generally know who those folks are (at least at this site). I know there is no reason to read person X's review of restaurant X, because it's going to be more about how the owner was so gracious to them and they had the same wonderful food and service and gee, isn't restaurant X great?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, there's probably a lot of "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all" going on too. There is for me, but I am picky and a bit of a crank, and can find fault with things most normal people don't notice. Many of my meals don't get written up because the board doesn't need yet another spleen-venting post from me. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm always mystified by the assumption that people who stumble across this, or any Internet resource, are credulous rubes who accept everything posted as holy writ. I'll bet most of them are just as smart, and just as capable of critical reading and reading between the lines, as we, The Elect, are.

Rubes, certainly not, but how do you know who to listen to if you're not a member of the community? No matter how critical a reader you are, first encounters are hard to interpret, especially in this virtual world without body language or knowledge of personal connections, who can help you by saying, "Don't listen to that Brian guy. He's an ass." Knowledge is socially constructed and constantly negotiated in both the real and virtual worlds. How can anyone, whether normally considered part of the arrogant Elect or a humble and better-informed part of the the Proletariat, readily filter out the crap from the truth if their connection to the converstation is merely tangential?

Pax,

Brian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was today's chog supposed to be a chog? It's got some brief commentary, and no questions. I used to enjoy Todd's chog because I like his style and felt like I could participate more than with Tom's chat (which I enjoy as well). But the chogs are painfully slow to the point that I can't help but think he's losing a lot of readers. Why the archane system for his chog?

*rant over* :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was today's chog supposed to be a chog? It's got some brief commentary, and no questions. I used to enjoy Todd's chog because I like his style and felt like I could participate more than with Tom's chat (which I enjoy as well). But the chogs are painfully slow to the point that I can't help but think he's losing a lot of readers. Why the archane system for his chog?

*rant over* :o

I do not think there were any questions answered today. The website says:

"Sorry folks, Todd will be unable to host a chat today due to unforeseen travel circumstances but will return next Tuesday to answer your questions. Until then check out the Best Bites blog for the latest in restaurant news."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not think there were any questions answered today. The website says:

"Sorry folks, Todd will be unable to host a chat today due to unforeseen travel circumstances but will return next Tuesday to answer your questions. Until then check out the Best Bites blog for the latest in restaurant news."

I thought I must have been missing something here. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought I must have been missing something here. Thanks.

There seems to be a separate "Q&A" article posted, in addition to the chog. See here. Perhaps you were looking at that?

I don't think that message about the travel problems was posted for most of today's expected Chog-time. Or, I was too stupid to notice it despite multiple reloadings.

(How did I turn into such a loser?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that message about the travel problems was posted for most of today's expected Chog-time. Or, I was too stupid to notice it despite multiple reloadings.

I do not think it posted up until after noon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kliman asks up front today (in a Q&A with Chef Todd Gray of Equinox) why shad and shad roe are "rarely" seen on menus in local restaurants, "despite a lot of well-meaning talk from chefs about their fondness for market-based cooking."

This has been a pet issue of Todd's since his City Paper days. But is it just me, or is shad roe pretty well-represented around town these days? All of the major seafood destinations feature it (Johnny's Half Shell, Oceanaire, Hank's, to name a few). Shad itself is understandably less prevalent, but has been featured at Oceanaire, CityZen, and I'm sure y'all know of some others. Cannon's in Georgetown was sold out of shad last week (thanks to this article) but not shad roe. Plus, local fishermen are banned from catching shad since the stocks are low due to pollution and over-fishing. Nearly all of our shad locally comes from the Carolinas. So what are you pushing for, Todd? Shad at McCormick and Schmicks? Illegal harvesting of shad locally? I don't get it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bah humbug to the grump who's been complaining publicly about his one bad experience at Citronelle for months now (think he's already aired it months ago in the Post chat). And double bah humbug to poo pooing at some much deserved recognition for Mark & Chef Richard.

As a young person I'm sympathetic to concerns that young diners might be treated with less than full respect at fine restaurants (no one - not even folks who like their meat well-done deserves this), but I also hate to see these folks who insist on continuing to bash somewhere after one bad experience. This is the behavior that gives online posters a bad name.

Congratulations to all the well-deserving Beard Award winners and nominees!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a young person I'm sympathetic to concerns that young diners might be treated with less than full respect at fine restaurants ....

I used to think my wife and I were getting this treatment at Kinkead's always stuck upstairs in the corridor to the bathrooms. Then I realized that was the only place they had two-tops! I stopped taking it personally after that, and just enjoyed myself. :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Went for the 1/2 price oysters last night. Beer selection is pretty poor, but we made do with Wild Goose IPA and Bass on top. Would it hurt to have something along this lines of rogue or Dog Head or Mendo Brewing company?

Onto the Oysters. First off at regular price of $21.05 a dz, OEG is one of the lower priced oyster places in town. But from 3 to 6 it is a steal. First up was an oyster sampler: 2 of each. We settles in on our favorite three: Wellflleet, Island point from Massachusetts and Pickering Point from Washington. The last were very meaty and dense in flavor. The Wellfleets had lots of briny flavor. The Island points were briny and very bright, our favorites. We polished off 8 of each.

Still a little bit hungry, we ventured onto the menu and had an order of Buffalo wings. As always, do not eat the food at Old Ebbitt. Do not eat the food at Old Ebbitt. Repeat: Do not eat the food at Old Ebbit. We could have had another 9 oysters for the price of underdone, flavorless wings in mundane hot sauce served with what tasted like Sysco blue cheese dressing with one, count it, one celery stick.

getting some play today in Todd Kliman's chat:

http://www.washingtonian.com/chats/kliman/index.html

not all agree, apparently, that you are entitled to dislike the wings....... ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Kliman tries to deflect things by saying, "It doesn't end with his signing his name and affiliation, as you've indicated." Look up a few posts, it was signed as indicated.
I'm not so sure if he was trying to deflect it or was just confused as to what was in the sig vs. the profile information. I've seen Dean's posts many times and I had to look a post up to see where that information came from. It wasn't part of the text of the post; it was the signature below. (Or is the signature implied as part of a post? I don't know the etiquette on that.)

I thought Todd subsequently did a good job clarifying what Dean obviously meant with his comments: "He's not saying don't go for the food -- even if that's what it says he says. He's saying that, apart from the terrific oysters, the rest of the food isn't worthwhile." And then Todd goes on to say he doesn't necessarily agree with that. I thought he handled it pretty well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not so sure if he was trying to deflect it or was just confused as to what was in the sig vs. the profile information. I've seen Dean's posts many times and I had to look a post up to see where that information came from. It wasn't part of the text of the post; it was the signature below. (Or is the signature implied as part of a post? I don't know the etiquette on that.)

I thought Todd subsequently did a good job clarifying what Dean obviously meant with his comments: "He's not saying don't go for the food -- even if that's what it says he says. He's saying that, apart from the terrific oysters, the rest of the food isn't worthwhile." And then Todd goes on to say he doesn't necessarily agree with that. I thought he handled it pretty well.

I think the poster expected his ersatz outrage to be validated, to which Kliman did not satisfy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He also let stand the insinuation that the poster to the chog is the same donrockwell.com poster that put up the now deleted post about his bad experience at Dino. Very surprising.

I thought he handled the Old Ebbitt Grill question as diplomatically as he could. It's not his job to referee posters with axes to grind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He also let stand the insinuation that the poster to the chog is the same donrockwell.com poster that put up the now deleted post about his bad experience at Dino. Very surprising.

I thought he handled the Old Ebbitt Grill question as diplomatically as he could. It's not his job to referee posters with axes to grind.

Actually, it was not I (deleted poster) who submitted to Kilman. Sorry to disappoint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I noticed that Todd Kliman, at the beginning of today's Chog, had a very different opinion of My Karma in Lorton (based on his initial visit) than Eve Zibart did in her review published this past Friday. Overall, Todd had a negative opinion while Eve Zibart had a very positive opinion of My Karma. Todd and Eve both mention the chicken kathi roll, rogan josh, and a korma dish. Assuming they tried the same korma dish, neither was impressed by it, but they had differing takes on the kathi roll and rogan josh.

Kathi roll

Todd says: "kathi roll that declines to use a real, hot roti -- it substitutes a generic wrap -- and passes off dry slices of tandoor chicken."

Eve says: "The lamb (or chicken) kathi roll is a yogurt-dressed tortilla wrap that is thinner and lighter than the more familiar kebab in flat bread, and it is served slant-cut and set upright like a giant sushi roll." She doesn't specifically say that it was good, but the tone of the description sounded positive.

Rogan josh

Todd says: "The curries lacked the complexity I look for (a korma was creamy but oddly punchless, while a dish of rogan josh offered up tough cubes of lamb in a gravy that had yet to incorporate its tomato sauce). ..."

Eve says: "Malai kebab, slow-marinated tandoori-grilled chicken in a gossamer glaze of cream cheese and powder-ground cashews, is a stunner: rich and slightly sweet but not cloying. The classic lamb curry, rogan josh, is so thickly sauced with a tomato and minced onion gravy that it seemed some of the meat itself had dissolved. And the baingan bhartha was an indulgent slick of eggplant, not of oil."

I'm not sure if she thought dissolved meat was good or bad, but because that sentence is in the same paragraph as the positive discussion of the malai kebab and baingan bhartha, the context makes it sound like a good dish.

I thought it was interesting to see the different takes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I noticed that Todd Kliman, at the beginning of today's Chog, had a very different opinion of My Karma in Lorton (based on his initial visit) than Eve Zibart did in her review published this past Friday.

That would seem to document a lack of consistency, except as you might expect in the kathi roll. And there, I'd have to side with Kliman's opinion - it should be made with a proper roti, not some ersatz flatbread. It's street food, for crying out loud; how much simpler could you make it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't read the "chog" anymore because I don't like the words chog or chogger, and he uses them in every chat. This is my own petty pet peeve, but those words just grate on my ears.

Kliman definitely has an affinity for neologisms, which I think are kind of fun. When I read his chog, my ears hear a relatable food critic who loves a dive and a white tablecloth restaurant equally. I like his reviews and news in the Washingtonian too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Todd was unnecessarily snippy with DonRocks in yesterday's chat (I too dislike 'chog') regarding the complaint about the parker house rolls at Cityzen. Don made an excellent point about the rolls -- there is a separate bread service so the parker house rolls come out as a complement to a main course, much like truffles, foie gras, etc., and the fact that these diners were so upset that they didn't receive seconds was, frankly, absurd. "...The bread never came, and no one spoke of it again. We felt uncomfortable, confused, and ignored..." Uncomfortable?? Confused?? geez...

-Camille

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Todd was unnecessarily snippy with DonRocks in yesterday's chat (I too dislike 'chog') regarding the complaint about the parker house rolls at Cityzen.

Nah, I thought so at first too, but we've written each other about it - Todd was in "rapid-fire chat mode" at the time. We're having dinner this week so it's not like we aren't friends. I do disagree with his 'it's just bread' stance, but I think he makes good points in terms of what the average diner might expect.

The problem with one-hour chats is that you can't really get a dialog going - if we had gone back-and-forth a few times (like we did via email) we would have understood each other better. No worries... off to pick up Matt ... little turd is probably going to pelt me with a snowball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How did Kliman know that the person that wrote to him was not the same person that complained here?
I was wondering the same thing. It was either the same person or someone else in the party.

I found Todd's basic response amusing. Whether he was intending it as a putdown to the questioner or not, saying that hard core foodies would understand the rolls are a gift from the kitchen but regular people can't tell a gift from the kitchen from the bread service because bread is just bread to them...ouch.

I believe it was Mark who commented on the CityZen thread that those rolls are baked off for each party. With a fairly large party, if this was at a bad time of the night, maybe it really wasn't feasible to prepare another box of rolls on request.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the person that complained here actually did receive another set of rolls. Also I found the person on the chat a little less complain-y.
Ah, you're right. They did get more rolls. I just looked at the post again. So is CityZen having an epidemic of people getting upset about having a hard time getting more rolls? I hope that doesn't mean they'll discontinue giving them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the person that complained here actually did receive another set of rolls. Also I found the person on the chat a little less complain-y.

"We felt uncomfortable, confused, and ignored. And frankly, for the price per person, ripped off. My partner wrote a letter of complaint to the manager shortly after our visit. That was also ingored. For a little bit more money, we decided that the Inn at Little Washington might have been a better choice. We have no plans to return to CityZen, and have discouraged friends from going there."

That's less "complain-y?" And if the bread was so damn important, why didn't they just politely inquire again, instead of letting themselves get so saaaad.

Ignoring the letter was bad form, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I were Kliman I would have said "If you felt ripped off after eating the kind of meals that I've had at Citizen I would not eat at restaurants in this part of the world." I think far too often the moderators on the chats allow people with an axe to grind a public forum that has the stamp of approval of one of the major critics in this area. The person who posted here got an appropriate response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This whole issue illustrates the reason why in Silver Spring I had to stop serving until recently, among other things, either the Tiger Butter (in warmer months) or hot chocolate (in colder months) as our version of the presentoir--two of the most loved features of Ray's: The Steaks in Arlington.

Demands for refills and arguments as to why a full (but free) course could not be made out of these designed-as-grace-notes treats turned these simple gestures of hospitality into an occasional liability and source for complaint, criticism or, in one unfortunate incident, worse. (Similar to how in Tom's recent review of Ray's: The Classics, the replacement of the never very much enjoyed relish tray as our version of the amuse with the much more requested and enjoyed spiced cashews--and trust me, cashews are much much more expensive than string beans, if you know what I mean (or so I've been told)--is presented with implied criticism, without the cashews being mentioned).

Our current battle with generosity backfiring and becoming a liability: red-faced, spittle-spewing rage at why our "Date Night Special for Two" (soup or salad each, Chateaubriand for two with mushrooms, onions, brocolli, mashed potatoes and creamed spinach at $57.95) is not available on larger parties.

My response? Unless you've got pictures and are hot enough for me to want to see them, you ain't gettin it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Check out the first post in today's Kliman chat (I refuse to use the word in the title of this thread) for some more snark related to the ongoing Parker House Rolls controversy.

I suppose if the Lord's Prayer were revised to include "and give us this day our daily Parker House Roll," it would be a moot point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Todd Kliman reports that Gordon Ramsay is "all but certain" to be directing the kitchen here by way of one of his proteges.

According to a well-placed source, Gordon Ramsay appears all but certain to take over the kitchen at Maestro, ending months of speculation about what restaurateur and/or chef was going to assume control of one of the region's best restaurants. The negotiation at this point is simply over money. Another source had told me, weeks ago, that the Ritz-Carlton was divided over who should command the kitchen; one faction was pushing hard for Roberto Donna, the other wanted someone outside the city, someone who could come in and make a splash.

Don't expect hurling imprecations, throwing plates and other made-for-TV theatrics. Ramsay himself won't be coming, although he will have total control. A hand-picked protege (a woman, according to the well-placed source) will lead the revamped Maestro. ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...