Tom Sietsema's Online Chat

[Hannah]

Ok, you know it's getting bad when the food references in the Post's pop music chat are better than the ones in Sietsema's.

I heard it on the run: REO Speedwagon belongs in the Hall of Fame like Twinkies belong on Citronelle's menu.

[mdt]

Ok, you know it's getting bad when the food references in the Post's pop music chat are better than the ones in Sietsema's.

That probably gave Michel an idea. I for one would enjoy seeing his version of a Twinkee.

[porcupine]

I agree -- 21st century version of Yalies trying to get fake letters published by Ann Landers. <snip> My friend doesn't like to eat meat with anything green on itpoof!

You may not believe this, but I have a friend who would do that. He is the most food fussy person I've ever met and I have seen him send food back if it was not exactly as he requested. Though to be fair he is unfailingly polite about it. But yes, people like this do exist.

[Camille-Beau]

Tom Sietsema: Breaking news (but I'm sworn to secrecy): One of the Washington area's finest talents is poised to become one of Food & Wine's "best chefs." This is a very big deal for the chef and for Washington. We're talking magazine cover and national exposure -- plus a really, really fun trip to Aspen. The formal announcement will be made next Tuesday by the magazine, I'm told.

Well, let the guessing begin.....

From the NY Post: WE HEAR . . . THAT Food & Wine will name David Chang of Momofuko Noodle Bar and Jonathan Benno of Per Se as Best New Chefs at a party tonight at the Battery Maritime Building . . .

So now we know of two of the other chefs joining our local mystery chef

[Sthitch]

Well, let the guessing begin.....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

From the NY Post:  WE HEAR . . . THAT Food & Wine will name David Chang of Momofuko Noodle Bar and Jonathan Benno of Per Se as Best New Chefs at a party tonight at the Battery Maritime Building . . .

So now we know of two of the other chefs joining our local mystery chef

Also according the Philly Inquirer Christopher Lee of Stripped Bass is also going to be on the cover.

[DonRocks]

Also according the Philly Inquirer Christopher Lee of Stripped Bass is also going to be on the cover.

Speaking of well-oiled PR machines...

[Sthitch]

Speaking of well-oiled PR machines...

I have also been rather underwhelmed by Mr. Lee's work.

[Spiral Stairs]

So what happened last night? There doesn't seem to be any announcement or news anywhere about the DC honoree. (If you search for "best new chefs" in Google News, however, you will find that most of the other honorees got immediate coverage in their local papers.)

Do I have to wait for the TomChat to find out?

[dcfoodie]

So what happened last night?  There doesn't seem to be any announcement or news anywhere about the DC honoree.  (If you search for "best new chefs" in Google News, however, you will find that most of the other honorees got immediate coverage in their local papers.)

Do I have to wait for the TomChat to find out?

Read this...

edited to say:

Ugh. I should read more carefully.

[Jacques Gastreaux]

I know who it is, but I got my information from a confidential source and am sworn to secrecy. If the announcement has already been made but the magazine's PR people are lame, it may be that the vow of secrecy no longer applies. See if you can figure this out: CARE.

[mdt]

I know who it is, but I got my information from a confidential source and am sworn to secrecy.  If the announcement has already been made but the magazine's PR people are lame, it may be that the vow of secrecy no longer applies.  See if you can figure this out: CARE.

Oh yeah, that is really difficult to figure out! Did you find this out eating a hogshead burger?

[jm chen]

Tom did indeed wait to announce it on the chat. It's Cathal.

(For those who did not get JG's generous hint.)

[qwertyy]

I'm always surprised at the vehemence with which people react to bad service. I get bad service, eh, I probably won't go back. But these folks "vow to never return" and "swear to never set foot near the place again."

My goodness people are grumpy, huh?

[Waitman]

I'm always surprised at the vehemence with which people react to bad service. I get bad service, eh, I probably won't go back. But these folks "vow to never return" and "swear to never set foot near the place again."

My goodness people are grumpy, huh?

I loathe bad service. I loathe it worse than bad food.

Bad food is like being punched in the nose: it sucks, it's over, nothing personal, you go home.

Bad service is like a migraine that you can't get to go away...and I take it completely personally.

[Heather]

I loathe bad service.  I loathe it worse than bad food. 

Bad food is like being punched in the nose: it sucks, it's over, nothing personal, you go home.

Bad service is like a migraine that you can't get to go away...and I take it completely personally.

Didn't stop you from patronizing BdC though, and that lunch we had there was spectacularly inept.

I would like to think that people can tell the difference between an institutional problem, and a server having a bad night. But reading Tom's chats does not give me hope.

[Michael Landrum]

I'm always surprised at the vehemence with which people react to bad service. I get bad service, eh, I probably won't go back. But these folks "vow to never return" and "swear to never set foot near the place again."

My goodness people are grumpy, huh?

Believe it or not, that same vehemence is sometimes expressed by people who have never even been to the restaurant they disparage repeatedly!!!

[qwertyy]

I loathe bad service.  I loathe it worse than bad food. 

Bad food is like being punched in the nose: it sucks, it's over, nothing personal, you go home.

Bad service is like a migraine that you can't get to go away...and I take it completely personally.

And I agree with you completely.

Maybe it's just the bastardization of the language and carelessness with words that makes people think that slow service on a busy night should elicit a blood oath.

Or maybe the rest of the world is more melodramatic than I?

Or maybe, when the plural of chef became "chef's," I should have moved to a non-English-speaking country because at least they'd have an excuse.

(I don't mean you, Waitman. I love your writing. )

Believe it or not, that same vehemence is sometimes expressed by people who have never even been to the restaurant they disparage repeatedly!!!

Quelle drag! Especially so for those restaurateurs with welcoming, neighborly public personas!!!

[JPW]

Granted that I couldn't pick Mark Furstenburg out of a police lineup, but Michel Richard's picture has been in the Washingtonian at least 3 or 4 times in the last year alone.

[bookluvingbabe]

Granted that I couldn't pick Mark Furstenburg out of a police lineup, but Michel Richard's picture has been in the Washingtonian at least 3 or 4 times in the last year alone.

I thought that was great story! I've been to Bobby Van's once and had flawless service but was with someone who lunched there daily. Very clubby.

[Waitman]

See -- it happened. Tom let all those posters whine in his column, and now even culinary celebrities are doing it to -- not finding a manager, not giving the restaurant a "chance to make it right," possibly even (if you believe management) taking a minor inconvenience and blowing it all out of proportion becuase Washingtonians are self-important boors. I blame Sietsema.

[Principia]

Granted that I couldn't pick Mark Furstenburg out of a police lineup, but Michel Richard's picture has been in the Washingtonian at least 3 or 4 times in the last year alone.

The guy was being an asshat, but that having been said: why should the host of a restaurant in New York City be expected to recognize two Washington chefs on sight?

I think Mark & Michel's point was not that they were affronted because they weren't recognized (and thus not treated as celebrities), but rather that the host shouldn't be treating any customers that way. I imagine Tom's point in posting the complaint was to say "See, it happens to guys like us too."

I would also question what the GM thought the utility was of calling the host to tell him to serve the customers coming in the front door, thus preventing the host from, well, serving the customers coming in the front door. And why the relationship between the host and the GM is (was?) such that the host didn't feel he could tell the GM to hold while he helped out two customers.

[Keithstg]

See -- it happened.  Tom let all those posters whine in his column, and now even culinary celebrities are doing it to -- not finding a manager, not giving the restaurant a "chance to make it right," possibly even (if you believe management) taking a minor inconvenience and blowing it all out of proportion becuase Washingtonians are self-important boors. I blame Sietsema.

I disagree. A response like "you'll have to wait", if delivered in the manner suggested, would have elicited the exact same response from me. A simple answer, and a trip out the door. No need to be dramatic about things, but that attitude from the maitre'd goes beyond what would deserve a chance to make it right. I don't know where the manager suggested that the incident was a minor inconvenience - he seemed to think it was a very poor display on his restaurants behalf. Say what you will about people whining in Tom's column, but in this case I think the complaint had merit.

[Keithstg]

The guy was being an asshat, but that having been said: why should the host of a restaurant in New York City be expected to recognize two Washington chefs on sight?

Although there is a Bobby Van's in New York, there are also two in the District, where this episode ocurred.

[DLB]

See -- it happened.  Tom let all those posters whine in his column, and now even culinary celebrities are doing it to -- not finding a manager, not giving the restaurant a "chance to make it right," possibly even (if you believe management) taking a minor inconvenience and blowing it all out of proportion becuase Washingtonians are self-important boors. I blame Sietsema.

It sounds like they were expecting some kind of special treatment. Why did they go to Tom first? I would think they should have contacted the restaurant first, to give them the chance to explain the situation. It's obivous that they two guys were trying to get the host fired

[Sthitch]

I can't see that they were seeking special treatment. I am sure that if they would have called Van's it would more likely lead to some sort of punishment being handed out to the host. But what is different from this statement from the others that are posted on this forum is that the chefs had their real names connected to the complaint.

[Principia]

Although there is a Bobby Van's in New York, there are also two in the District, where this episode ocurred.

Ahhh. Turning your back on a customer to continue a phone conversation is just rude, no matter who the customers are. I'm guessing if he'd stayed facing them then there wouldn't have been an incident.

I'll point out that Tom is the one who decided he needed to post publicly about what sounded like a private bitching session. He does seem to love the drama.

[Barbara]

I recently learned that another chef in town went to BV's and was deeply unimpressed, according to my source.

Just consider this as taking one for the team. There are much better steaks at better prices to be had elsewhere with much better service.

[Pete]

Ugh....today's chat was equivalent to listening to fingernails on a chalkboard.

[crackers]

Washington, D.C.: Does the Per Se customer have a single son who happens to be my age? Just wondering...

Tom Sietsema: Hey, me first!

He was really out there today.

>pun intended<

[JPW]

Let's see, 9 course menu at $110 per (an eminently reasonable price(not that I can do that very often at all))x 2 = $220.

Leaving $230 on 2 half-bottles of wine and tax (or does VA? You can see how closely I look at my restaurant bills), or ~$200 on the wine alone. Read the prices on the wine list before you order or don't bitch about the price ya doofus.

[mdt]

Let's see, 9 course menu at $110 per (an eminently reasonable price(not that I can do that very often at all))x 2 = $220.

Leaving $230 on 2 half-bottles of wine and tax (or does VA? You can see how closely I look at my restaurant bills), or ~$200 on the wine alone. Read the prices on the wine list before you order or don't bitch about the price ya doofus.

Too bad those doofi (plural) don't post their real names. How in the hell can you bitch about the cost when it is known to you before you order?

Not to mention the talk of not being wowed. I guess some people do not appreciate quality ingredients prepared very well. I guess most of it is because of all the new press. Being at or near the top always brings out the whiners.

[Sthitch]

Not to mention the talk of not being wowed.  I guess some people do not appreciate quality ingredients prepared very well.  I guess most of it is because of all the new press.  Being at or near the top always brings out the whiners.

The person who responded to the original question with what amounted to a tantrum appeared to be an imprudent child with that ranting response. I would be embarrassed if I had sent such a thing, and even more so if someone published it.

[slarochelle]

I was wondering if today's Restaurant Eve bashing came from people who wanted to feel superior to Food and Wine and their naming of Cathal Armstrong as Best New Chef. I suspect they were thinking “Food and Wine awarded him Best New Chef. I ate there and only though it was so-so. They must not know what they are talking about”.

[qwertyy]

I was wondering if today's Restaurant Eve bashing came from people who wanted to feel superior to Food and Wine and their naming of Cathal Armstrong as Best New Chef.  I suspect they were thinking “Food and Wine awarded him Best New Chef.  I ate there and only though it was so-so.  They must not know what they are talking about”.

Is Eve so consistent and transcendent that all its dishes appeal to all its customers at all times?

[Michael Landrum]

I was wondering if today's Restaurant Eve bashing came from people who wanted to feel superior to Food and Wine and their naming of Cathal Armstrong as Best New Chef.  I suspect they were thinking “Food and Wine awarded him Best New Chef.  I ate there and only though it was so-so.  They must not know what they are talking about”.

Having recently had several bad-to-lame-to-mediocre meals at restaurants of "distinction" in NYC I can only say what a treasure Restaurant Eve is and how truly, truly fortunate we are to have Cathal, Todd and Meshe, as well as the whole crew, working their asses off for us and providing the highest quality, best-prepared, and intelligently and thoughtfully created food I have had--Tasting Room, Cafe or Bar--in longer than I can remember. (I haven't been to CitiZen yet--schedules don't match).

What was lost in Tom's chat and the resulting discussion of prices is how ridiculously hard Cathal works to provide astonishing value in all of his offerings--so far beyond what a lesser chef and person of lesser character with some degree of hype and trumped-up success to his name would ever even bother to do. An example to us all, and a true lagniappe considering the excellence of his work which makes such value unnecessary.

Ignorance reveals itself most when confronted with real quality.

[jparrott]

Is Eve so consistent and transcendent that all its dishes appeal to all its customers at all times?

Maybe, maybe not. But my experience with the kind of passive-passive-aggressive complainer such as the one in question is that nothing appeals to them more than a chance to pop off with no ramifications.

As for bill sizes, I think a lot of guidebooks are culprits here, either by listing only main course prices, or prices with no or lowest cost wine or excluding service or whatever. A meal at the Tasting Room with aperitif and wine relevant to the food quality will be at least $450 for 2 with 5% tax and 20% tip (which adds $60-70 to the bill before wine is even considered, and remember that a $75 bottle of wine is almost $100 after factoring tax and service--which is often the real burner when it comes to wine pricing).

[erikv]

What was lost in Tom's chat and the resulting discussion of prices is how ridiculously hard Cathal works to provide astonishing value in all of his offerings--so far beyond what a lesser chef and person of lesser character with some degree of hype and trumped-up success to his name would ever even bother to do.  An example to us all, and a true lagniappe considering the excellence of his work which makes such value unnecessary.

Ignorance reveals itself most when confronted with real quality.

Agreed 100%. I've yet to had the opportunity to go to the tasting room, but saying the Lickety Split Lunch is a steal doesn't do justice. If the same quality, service, and atmosphere are applied to the Tasting Room the poster to Tom's chat should serious look into some medication.

Frankly, Tom's chats seem to have deteriorated into a gripe fest and provide little value other than providing me a means to become flabergasted at how ignorant, selfish, and nitt-picky people can potentially behaive.

[qwertyy]

I've yet to had the opportunity to go to the tasting room, but saying the Lickety Split Lunch is a steal doesn't do justice.  If the same quality, service, and atmosphere are applied to the Tasting Room the poster to Tom's chat should serious look into some medication.

But you've never been to the Tasting Room. I've never been to the Tasting Room either, but is it presumptuous to think we should reserve personal attacks on critics of the Tasting Room for people who have actually eaten there?

Frankly, Tom's chats seem to have deteriorated into a gripe fest and provide little value other than providing me a means to become flabergasted at how ignorant, selfish, and nitt-picky people can potentially behaive.

I agree with this part 100%!!

[Waitman]

I wonder if places like DR and eG etc., help set the unreasonable expectations with their tendencey to print utterly uncritical reviews that are taken too seriously by the culinarily credulous.

Frankly, no restaurant could live up to a lot of the postings on these sites, because no restaurant can cook meals as perfect as those described. So we start moving into a binary world (help me on this metaphore, Matt!) where a diner gets one course on one night that falls flat and the places drops from a 1 to a O in the diner's mind, from True Love to Utter Contempt.

Admittedly, I'm a crank -- though I like to think that I just have a nuanced palate -- but two "wows" out of five courses is a pretty good meal for me (as long as one isn't the cheese course) and I can't recall ever batting a thousand. But you read some of the posted reviews and you think that the first course is going to be better than sex, the second better than drugs and the third better than rock and roll. Realistic reviews might set more realistic expectations.

That being said, the guy did sound like a dick.

[jparrott]

I think we as a group are more critical of individual dishes/execution than the mainstream critical media (or, frankly, the complainer in question). However, we also are more willing to positively consider the overall experience, because we have become friends with people who work for the house, or we are dining with particularly good and engaging friends, or just because we do not subscribe to what appears to be the prevailing attitude of so many American diners, that going out to dine is an opportunity to be disappointed.

[JPW]

I wonder if places like DR and eG etc., help set the unreasonable expectations with their tendencey to print utterly uncritical reviews that are taken too seriously by the culinarily credulous.

Frankly, no restaurant could live up to a lot of the postings on these sites, because no restaurant can cook meals as perfect as those described.  So we start moving into a binary world (help me on this metaphore, Matt!) where a diner gets one course on one night that falls flat and the places drops from a 1 to a O in the diner's mind, from True Love to Utter Contempt.

Admittedly, I'm a crank -- though I like to think that I just have a nuanced palate -- but two "wows" out of five courses is a pretty good meal for me (as long as one isn't the cheese course) and I can't recall ever batting a thousand.  But you read some of the posted reviews and you think that the first course is going to be better than sex, the second better than drugs and the third better than rock and roll.  Realistic reviews might set more realistic expectations.

That being said, the guy did sound like a dick.

I think that you have a very good point, Waitman. Combine it with jparrott's that we (the consumers here) have become friendly with employees and owners at several of these places and you definitely have a bias to boosterism. The flip side of this bias being the tendency to not post on any negative experiences.

But the crank in me thinks that the fault lies beyond our oft engaged boosterism -- Why would people uncritically accept the reviews of people whose tastes and abilities are completely unknown to them? That have no editorial barrier between writing and publishing? That may have undisclosed relationships with the people in the restaurants they are posting about? That have no institutional reputation to uphold?

In short, if the "culinarily credulous" believe the hype, it's their own damn fault. I do, however, have a bridge to sell them...

PS -- what are courses 4 and 5 better than?

[Heather]

I think that you have a very good point, Waitman. Combine it with jparrott's that we (the consumers here) have become friendly with employees and owners at several of these places and you definitely have a bias to boosterism. The flip side of this bias being the tendency to not post on any negative experiences.

Dunno, I've looked over my own posts and it seems if I have nothing nice to say it goes on dr.com. I must come off as a complete crank.

I think you're right about boosterism...is it harder to come on and say you had a bad meal, service, whatever, if you know the owner/chef/server is reading? I would say yes.

[Jacques Gastreaux]

I think that you have a very good point, Waitman. Combine it with jparrott's that we (the consumers here) have become friendly with employees and owners at several of these places and you definitely have a bias to boosterism. The flip side of this bias being the tendency to not post on any negative experiences.

But the crank in me thinks that the fault lies beyond our oft engaged boosterism -- Why would people uncritically accept the reviews of people whose tastes and abilities are completely unknown to them? That have no editorial barrier between writing and publishing? That may have undisclosed relationships with the people in the restaurants they are posting about? That have no institutional reputation to uphold?

In short, if the "culinarily credulous" believe the hype, it's their own damn fault. I do, however, have a bridge to sell them...

PS -- what are courses 4 and 5 better than?

I disagree. I once posted that I thought the crostini at Firefly were the consistency of space shuttle tiles. Needless to say, I got the "hairy eyeball" from Wabeck the next time I went in.

[Waitman]

In short, if the "culinarily credulous" believe the hype, it's their own damn fault. I do, however, have a bridge to sell them...

PS -- what are courses 4 and 5 better than?

oint taken. But it is generally assume that flames are taken literally and hurt restaurants. These same halfwits who -- it is assumed -- won't dine somewhere because virulently negative on-line, may be reading the uncritical gushes, as as well, coming home disappointed and then posting somewhere. It's all well and good so sell bridges to the culinarily credulous, but if their impact on restaurants is a concern, one should be concerned consistently.

PS -- soft wimmen and hard liquer

[JPW]

Point taken.  But it is generally assume that  flames are taken literally and hurt restaurants.  These same halfwits who -- it is assumed -- won't dine somewhere because virulently negative on-line, may be reading the uncritical gushes, as as well, coming home disappointed and then posting somewhere.  It's all well and good so sell bridges to the culinarily credulous, but if their impact on restaurants is a concern, one should be concerned consistently. 

Logically, I agree with you.

My overly optimistic rejoinder would be -- well, people should be able to evaluate the resulting post in context of what they know about the people who posted it.

Yeah right. Who am I kidding? It's amazing how many people still believe anything they read on the 'net, whether positive or negative, is true and valuable.

Solution? I don't know. It'd be interesting to get the numbers and see if we can find any causal factors between posts (negative and positive) and restaurant revenue. One problem with Tom's chat format is that it doesn''t give him the time to give the well-thought out answers that he might otherwise give in his weekly piece (for example), or at least the implants aren't working and he hasn't been giving the answers that we want him to give.

I'll think about it more later, but right now I've got a Peanut to pick up.

[Escoffier]

Is Eve so consistent and transcendent that all its dishes appeal to all its customers at all times?

Nope, now and then they slip from extraordinary to simply great.

ETA: Hint: unabashed boosterism alert! (even with one unfortunate incident, it's still one of my favorite restaurants and one I recommend wholeheartedly to anyone who will listen)

[Michael Landrum]

is it presumptuous to think we should reserve personal attacks on critics of the Tasting Room for people who have actually eaten there?

Interesting concept. To do otherwise, now that would be presumptuous.

[slarochelle]

Logically, I agree with you.

My overly optimistic rejoinder would be -- well, people should be able to evaluate the resulting post in context of what they know about the people who posted it.

That is exactly why random posts are, or should be, taken with a large grain of salt. Unfortunately, that is 50% of Tom's chat. Once you know who you are getting your criticisms from, then you can decide whether or not to listen.

I have learned to ignore the restaurant and movie suggestions of numerous friends.......

[jparrott]

Combine it with jparrott's that we (the consumers here) have become friendly with employees and owners at several of these places and you definitely have a bias to boosterism.

This wasn't exactly what I was trying to get at (though it's certainly easy to read it that way). Our familiarity with certain people allows us to sort of "go with the flow"--perhaps a better understanding of what a restaurant is trying to do in a given situation. Though that's probably a particularly fine shade of gray.

[Jacques Gastreaux]

This wasn't exactly what I was trying to get at (though it's certainly easy to read it that way).  Our familiarity with certain people allows us to sort of "go with the flow"--perhaps a better understanding of what a restaurant is trying to do in a given situation.  Though that's probably a particularly fine shade of gray.

Another facet of the prism through which this might be viewed is that when you get to know the chef and the staff at a place, fewer things tend to go wrong.