Criticizing the Critics

[deangold]

write something negative if you feel something is worthy of criticism... but if a significant gripe occurs at any restaurant it seems only fair to bring it to attention. but significant doesn't mean a limp fry or no spinach in the to-go box or something that is nether systemic or the norm. everyone makes gaffes in life and its important in all reaches of society to distinguish between gaffes and major issues.

Seems to be a contradiction here.... I can see that I would feel different about a limp french fry if it was served for $.99 at the aforementioned Burger King or for $9 at Firefly or if I had a $20 plate of Patate Fritte at Enotecca Pinch Your Money in Firenze*. But if I go somewhere and the French Fry issue sticks in my craw, I will mention it.

I have been taken to task at length online for one dish in a rather large meal in a review where the poster really liked the restaurant. But he went on and on about our crostini, getting the ingredients wrong etc. Sure I would have loved it if he went on at the same length on the 5 or so dishes they had that they loved! Or that he would have talked about his many return visits. But we get what we get and I am thankful to get feedback on line or in print.

* a totally made up on the spot imaginary restaurant, never minding the similarity of its name to any other restaurant, real or imaginary (that I have not been to incidentally- send donations to send_dean_to_italy.com!), in Firenze.

[ol_ironstomach]

Why only talk about the good? Makes me think that anything I read is complete BS. I think negative experiences can and should be reported, even on day one of being open to the public. Of course, the poster should note, or temper the comments realizing that the the place just opened. Openly trashing a brand new place serves to provide very little credible information.

(emphasis mine) Once again, mdt has nailed the bullseye on this one. Some teething pains can be expected to go away with time and experience, while others aren't likely to go away until somebody applies the hot needle of inquiry. But with a new place, it's hard to paint anything as an 'established' trend, as you could with an older restaurant.

I'd also like to suggest that once the first poster has broken the ice with a negative review, those who have been biting their tongues should be judicious about crossing the line between having their say, and piling on...for an example I'd suggest reading the Agraria thread, pre- and post-Tom-and-Derek, which I think speaks more to our community's optimism for the place, rather than any actual, radical overnight change in the restaurant's character.

[smiller]

[TMartin, I'm going to insist that you back this claim up with some specifics, especially since you're new here and are posting under a fake screen name. What, exactly, don't you like about PS7? How many times have you been, and what have you had there?

I mean welcome to dr.com and everything, but sheesh!

Cheers,

Rocks]

I have eaten at PS7 two times. Both times I walked away disappointed and feeling like I overpaid for a meal that was just ok. I agree with everything that Sietsema wrote about in his review and I feel that 1 1/2 stars is an accurate rating.

[crackers]

I have eaten at PS7 two times. Both times I walked away disappointed and feeling like I overpaid for a meal that was just ok.

Just curious: what compelled you to return after your first disappointing meal? Any ordering suggestions for those trying it for the first time?

[jparrott]

I have eaten at PS7 two times. Both times I walked away disappointed and feeling like I overpaid for a meal that was just ok. I agree with everything that Sietsema wrote about in his review and I feel that 1 1/2 stars is an accurate rating.

I have triple-spaced on DonRockwell.com two times. Both times I walked away emasculated and feeling like I overindulged on castor oil, which is definitely not OK. I agree with everything that Rockwell wrote about in his review of your review and I feel that 1 1/2 more sentences is not any more accurate in describing your experiences in the restaurant.

More seriously, you didn't add anything. Specifics, please.

On a further point, what do people think of the concept (stipulating its proper communication to the diner, which is not necessarily the case at PS7's)?

[Camille-Beau]

Love it every time? Every single thing ever? Maybe I am cynical, but I don't believe that's possible.

It is.

[Jonathan]

It is.

restaurants are like marriages...some end badly...within 5 years...and some you love forever, despite their little flaws and imperfections.

[Heather]

restaurants are like marriages...some you love forever, despite their little flaws and imperfections.

Yes, but apparently only if you never acknowledge any of the "little flaws and imperfections."

[Al Dente]

restaurants are like marriages...

This thread, I think, is like a shark. You know? It has to constantly move forward or it dies. And I think what we got on our hands is a dead shark.

Apologies to Woody...

[DLB]

restaurants are like marriages...some end badly...within 5 years...and some you love forever, despite their little flaws and imperfections.

That's why I move around:) There are to many restaurants to try, I have no loyalty and I want to try them all.

[Camille-Beau]

Yes, but apparently only if you never acknowledge any of the "little flaws and imperfections."

Perhaps there aren't any actual flaws or imperfections of any significance that merit complaint. Helps if one does not always look for something to criticize.

An example: Lunch at a high-end NYC restaurant on Saturday. Of many spectacular dishes, the Scottish Langoustines with caramelized sunchokes, pickled grapes and tarragon-langoustine broth served on a bed of sunchoke puree was a clear favorite. Was the dish delicious? Yes!!! The slight smokiness of the broth gave the langoustines a flavor reminiscent of having been chargrilled instead of sauteed (no sous vide -- woohoo!!!) A truly amazing dish that I would order repeatedly. If looking for a reason to criticize, one langoustine had the 'vein' still in evidence. A 2-second flick of the knife removed it. Was that a flaw? To someone, perhaps yes. Did the dish suffer because of it? NO! Should the restaurant be criticized for such an oversight? In my opinion, NO! To someone else, however, this may have been the one and only thing they wrote about the langoustine course instead of writing about the creaminess of the sunchoke puree and the slight sweetness of the grapes that perfectly complemented the smoky broth. Would that keep someone from either patronizing the restaurant or ordering that dish? I would hope not, but you never know.

One person's 'flaw' is another's 'so what'

ETA: dined at a local restaurant for dinner the same day (yes, we are gluttons) and any of the dishes could have easily been switched between the two restaurants and no one would know the difference. From quality of ingredients to flavor to presentation, I doubt anyone could tell which chef created each dish. Nice to have such talent available locally.

moo.

[Ferhat Yalcin]

The eggs had barely any lobster flavor

eggs are supposed to taste like ......... eggs . ?? Right

(just joking)

[Poivrot Farci]

...since you are pressing me... a foodie...ok...flavorless...worse than the preceding...undrinkable...disgusting...barely any lobster flavor...less successful...utterly mediocre...equally abysmal...not noteworthy... flavorless...bland and uninspiring... yummy...flavorless...unseasoned... Is that specific enough for you??

Not really.

More of an ouroboros.

Would make a good crossword puzzle or junior jumble for malcontent diners suffering from ageusia.

[Heather]

This thread, I think, is like a shark. You know? It has to constantly move forward or it dies. And I think what we got on our hands is a dead shark.

Dunno, Mike, is it possible to beat a dead shark?

Discussions like these aren't a complete waste of time. They help me decide which board members are worth reading. Someone who posts gushing reviews about the same places over and over again is inherently less interesting, (and, I don't know, less trustworthy?) than a poster who is willing to say something critical if warranted. That's when the "ignore user" setting becomes useful.

[Camille-Beau]

Snarky reviews are delicious

Discussions like these aren't a complete waste of time. They help me decide which board members are worth reading. Someone who posts gushing reviews about the same places over and over again is inherently less interesting, (and, I don't know, less trustworthy?) than a poster who is willing to say something critical if warranted. That's when the "ignore user" setting becomes useful.

And the same is true of those who always have something negative to say about every dining experience.

[Heather]

I think I should clarify that I am not addressing anyone personally. This would be a more interesting site with less cheerleading for the same few places, IMO.

[DLB]

They don't play by the "rules" in NYC. They take on restuarants before they even open. Gordon Ramsay at the London

[DLB]

Perhaps there aren't any actual flaws or imperfections of any significance that merit complaint. Helps if one does not always look for something to criticize.

An example: Lunch at a high-end NYC restaurant on Saturday. Of many spectacular dishes, the Scottish Langoustines with caramelized sunchokes, pickled grapes and tarragon-langoustine broth served on a bed of sunchoke puree was a clear favorite. Was the dish delicious? Yes!!! The slight smokiness of the broth gave the langoustines a flavor reminiscent of having been chargrilled instead of sauteed (no sous vide -- woohoo!!!) A truly amazing dish that I would order repeatedly. If looking for a reason to criticize, one langoustine had the 'vein' still in evidence. A 2-second flick of the knife removed it. Was that a flaw? To someone, perhaps yes. Did the dish suffer because of it? NO! Should the restaurant be criticized for such an oversight? In my opinion, NO! To someone else, however, this may have been the one and only thing they wrote about the langoustine course instead of writing about the creaminess of the sunchoke puree and the slight sweetness of the grapes that perfectly complemented the smoky broth. Would that keep someone from either patronizing the restaurant or ordering that dish? I would hope not, but you never know.

One person's 'flaw' is another's 'so what'

ETA: dined at a local restaurant for dinner the same day (yes, we are gluttons) and any of the dishes could have easily been switched between the two restaurants and no one would know the difference. From quality of ingredients to flavor to presentation, I doubt anyone could tell which chef created each dish. Nice to have such talent available locally.

moo.

Can you let us know what restaurants you are talking about here?

[jparrott]

The union issues there may be debilitating--one report notes that patrons calling for later reservations are being given hard-and-fast cutoff times for their tables.

[Jonathan]

They don't play by the "rules" in NYC. They take on restuarants before they even open. Gordon Ramsay at the London

his blog does not have the following nor the readership of the actual NYTimes. Its proabably the equivalent of Tom's chat.

Bruni, if he goes to a restaurant when it first opens, will usually comment on it in his blog, and then after several more visits, write a reveiw. Much like Tom and his weekly dish.

[Waitman]

his blog does not have the following nor the readership of the actual NYTimes. Its proabably the equivalent of Tom's chat.

Bruni, if he goes to a restaurant when it first opens, will usually comment on it in his blog, and then after several more visits, write a reveiw. Much like Tom and his weekly dish.

And a policy issue is different from a food or service issue -- one can expect food and service to improve as the staff gets used to working together (though, hopefully, it's pretty good from the start) but policies don't change once the restaurant gets its rhythm.

Unless, of course, a prominent critic takes a dislike to it, gets jerked around a bit when making inquiries, and decides to put it on line.

[DLB]

his blog does not have the following nor the readership of the actual NYTimes. Its proabably the equivalent of Tom's chat.

Bruni, if he goes to a restaurant when it first opens, will usually comment on it in his blog, and then after several more visits, write a reveiw. Much like Tom and his weekly dish.

I think his blog has a pretty large readership actually. There were over 100 comments on this one subject, and Gordon coming to New York is a pretty big deal in the city. I understand what he is doing. but it was not a postive blog entry for a place that's has not opened yet. Was this fair?

[jparrott]

This speaks particularly to getting a reservation (which they are doing), so I think this is basic journalism, not acting as a restaurant critic.

[DLB]

Unless, of course, a prominent critic takes a dislike to it, gets jerked around a bit when making inquiries, and decides to put it on line.

He really did a number on them. They have back down Ramsay Revisited

Someone is reading his blog:)

[Jonathan]

i think its fair; they have been taking reservations for awhile now...and he is telling his followers what they can expect. chances are he was emailed by irrate people who were baffled and confused by GR's policies, and he felt like he had to address it.

[DLB]

i think its fair; they have been taking reservations for awhile now...and he is telling his followers what they can expect. chances are he was emailed by irrate people who were baffled and confused by GR's policies, and he felt like he had to address it.

If that's fair, then it's also fair for a paying customer to "tell the story" good or bad during opening night. As I am sure will hapen on the NYC boards when GR opens next week.

[jparrott]

If that's fair, then it's also fair for a paying customer to "tell the story" good or bad during opening night. As I am sure will hapen on the NYC boards when GR opens next week.

The difference here is that in the reservation story, Bruni did an exhaustive job of reporting the story, whereas reporting one first-week experience is merely experiential and doesn't capture the whole story.

[Jonathan]

If that's fair, then it's also fair for a paying customer to "tell the story" good or bad during opening night. As I am sure will hapen on the NYC boards when GR opens next week.

i believe i said that i think its fair that customers post on websites about their experiences, and have no reason to wait. just as another customer can go to a restaurant once and proclaim his/her opinion. i dont think its right for a paid food critic, who has a far greater readership and also a job to help promote his/her cities food, to review a restaurant based on the first few weeks of opening as well as after only one trip.

[DLB]

The NY Times restaurant critic is the most influential and high profile food critic in the country (no disrespect to Tom), and I am sure Frank knows this. He did not like the reservation policy so he wrote about it to let Gordon Ramsey know that he was watching and got the policy changed ...all in a days work. I am not sure how much he was actually looking for the readers with this one

[jparrott]

But it's clear here he was acting as a reporter here, not a critic. Tough to wear both hats, but he did (more successfully than usual) here.

[Stretch]

The difference here is that in the reservation story, Bruni did an exhaustive job of reporting the story, whereas reporting one first-week experience is merely experiential and doesn't capture the whole story.

An exhaustive job? He dialed their freaking number a couple of times. Move over Edward R. Murrow.

And how can a restaurant review ever be other than experiential?

[jparrott]

Synthesizing several experiences is, I suppose still experiential. But it's more experiential .

As for Bruni's exhaustive reportage, I think we can conclude that, for this story, his actions constitute exhaustive reportage. Not a very complex story.

Care to share some war stories from your former life, Stretch?

[Barbara]

Is that specific enough for you??

Yes, Thank you. Now I won't have to have another over-priced, not-worth-it meal. Maybe the chef will do an overhaul. Or not.

[mdt]

Yes, Thank you. Now I won't have to have another over-priced, not-worth-it meal. Maybe the chef will do an overhaul. Or not.

So you are going to skip a visit based on one anonymously posted review here?

[alan7147]

So you are going to skip a visit based on one anonymously posted review here?

If you look upthread there is more than one negative review. This, compounded with Sietsema's review would make me think twice about dining here.

[mdt]

If you look upthread there is more than one negative review. This, compounded with Sietsema's review would make me think twice about dining here.

And quite a few positive ones too. Sometimes you have to try it yourself.

[DLB]

And quite a few positive ones too. Sometimes you have to try it yourself.

Why waste money?

[Hannah]

You can be damn sure someone at Ramsay's is reading Bruni; according to this article Ramsay is well aware that a bad review from Bruni could kill his chances.

Also, speaking from experience, if getting through to Ramsay's reservation line in New York is half as difficult as getting through to Ramsay's reservation line in London, I'm willing to give Bruni the benefit of the doubt on how much "work" he's done.

[DLB]

You can be damn sure someone at Ramsay's is reading Bruni; according to this article Ramsay is well aware that a bad review from Bruni could kill his chances.

Also, speaking from experience, if getting through to Ramsay's reservation line in New York is half as difficult as getting through to Ramsay's reservation line in London, I'm willing to give Bruni the benefit of the doubt on how much "work" he's done.

What about Per Se? I have been trying for months to eat there. I am not sure it's worth it anymore. I think all these things should be considered when rating a restaurant.

[jparrott]

No one goes there anymore, it's too crowded.

[demandalicious]

They don't play by the "rules" in NYC. They take on restuarants before they even open.

That has been done in this forum.

That said, I'm not sure that I get the whole Gordon Ramsey schtick. Is his cooking *that* spectacular or is his draw the fact that he has that surly celebrity thing going for him. Does he yell at his staff, creating an ambiance similar to that in an episode of Jerry Springer? If the latter is the case, then it's something that I would criticize the sheep who flock to the "12 exclusive tables" for, rather than criticizing the reservation policy.

[Heather]

What about Per Se? I have been trying for months to eat there. I am not sure it's worth it anymore. I think all these things should be considered when rating a restaurant.

Consider it part of the mystique.

[Barbara]

So you are going to skip a visit based on one anonymously posted review here?

No, it conforms with what I have heard from other people who've been there.

[DLB]

That has been done in this forum.

That said, I'm not sure that I get the whole Gordon Ramsey schtick. Is his cooking *that* spectacular or is his draw the fact that he has that surly celebrity thing going for him. Does he yell at his staff, creating an ambiance similar to that in an episode of Jerry Springer? If the latter is the case, then it's something that I would criticize the sheep who flock to the "12 exclusive tables" for, rather than criticizing the reservation policy.

You know, I hate his show on Fox, however he is not such an ass on the program i watched on BBCA a few days ago.

[DLB]

Consider it part of the mystique.

Mystique creates high expectations, so if even one piece of silverware is out of place those expectations have not been met.

[Waitman]

Mystique creates high expectations, so if even one piece of silverware is out of place those expectations have not been met.

And since Per Se has been open for a year, and charges a god-awful price, take them to the woodshed if your expectations are not met. Though there is a subtle difference between holding a restaurant to the highest standards and making yourself miserable over small things.

[Hannah]

From my perspective, Per Se is entirely worth the hours and hours spent redialing trying to get a reservation - it's that damn good. I confess I didn't notice if the forks weren't properly aligned, but then that's not something that generally bothers me anyway.

Ramsay's food, at least at the flagship (Royal Hospital Road), is really pretty and tastes great, and the 3-star service is a delight, but it doesn't have the creativity of, say, Citronelle - you can tell the big cheese almost never sets foot in the kitchen and that the day to day staff isn't necessarily encouraged to experiment with ingredients or presentation. They're not out there on the cutting edge - for instance, they made a fairly big deal of the fact that one of the dishes was cooked sous vide - but I don't think they're trying to be.

As for Ramsay himself, the fact that his entire first restaurant staff, from chefs to dishwashers, went with him when he decided to open his own place, and the fact that he's established many of his sous chefs in their own restaurants where they're now very successful doing their own thing, speaks a lot more highly of him than the bleepfest that is Hell's Kitchen. As far as the shouting goes, it's very much a product of the kitchens he learned his trade in - if you believe half the stories told about chefs like Marco Pierre White and Albert Roux, Ramsay's warm and encouraging by comparison.

[Camille-Beau]

What about Per Se? I have been trying for months to eat there. I am not sure it's worth it anymore. I think all these things should be considered when rating a restaurant.

It is definitely worth it.

[DonRocks]

[Please either get back on topic or post your responses to the correct thread. Thank you!

Grinchola.]

[Poivrot Farci]

One is right to spite an establishment that is too busy to seat others promptly by never going there oneself, and to vehemently protest future patronage over noisy cash transactions.