Criticizing the Critics

[Mark Slater]

Just finished reading "Turning the Tables", the Steven Shaw book (hey, it was $6 on bookcloseouts) and although most of it was entertaining and/or informational, i'm not sure i agree with this little passage:

Obviously, with Restauranteurs participating on this board, there is some level of familiarity between the informal critics (us) and them. But I'm not sure I agree at all about formal restaurant critics having close ties with owners/chefs, or, more importantly, on the nature of the "primary function of restaurant criticism". I think the vast majority of customers would prefer a completely unbiased review of the food: indeed, a "prosaic" evaluation of the quality of food that an average diner would receive. It's certainly a tough line to toe, in any case. Thoughts?

Speaking of Fat Guy/Steven Shaw, did you see this: Take a Rat to Dinner ?

[Jacques Gastreaux]

There is, to my mind, absolutely nothing wrong with a critic have ties--close ties--to the community about which he writes. In my opinion, it is preferable from a standpoint of providing the best possible coverage.

This deserves some analysis.

[edenman]

This deserves some analysis.

I think it mostly tripped my bullshit-ometer for a few reasons:

1) it sounds like covering your own ass: "sure, i hang out with restauranteurs, but it's totally in the interest of the public. and it's all about journalism."

2) also, to me, the idea of journalism targeting just the upper class seems a bit elitist. Like "hey the readers should be able to tell that i'm being a little biased here, right? you're never going to have this meal, but you should know how awesome special treatment is!"

[jparrott]

Like "hey the readers should be able to tell that i'm being a little biased here, right? you're never going to have this meal, but you should know how awesome special treatment is!"

Well, let us not assassinate Fat Git further than the truth. He has spent plenty of ink trying to teach people how to become a regular and how important it is to be a regular. If his readers implement his suggestions with a surfeit of obsequiousness (or otherwise make like complete asses trying to inveigle themselves), we can't ascribe that all to Mr. Shaw.

[edenman]

Well, let us not assassinate Fat Git further than the truth. He has spent plenty of ink trying to teach people how to become a regular and how important it is to be a regular. If his readers implement his suggestions with a surfeit of obsequiousness (or otherwise make like complete asses trying to inveigle themselves), we can't ascribe that all to Mr. Shaw.

Fair enough. I think my objection was mostly to the assertion that you need to be a regular to appreciate food and food journalism. I'd argue that the average non-regular diner (or "tourist", as he calls them/us) still deserves an accurate description of a restaurant's food. Restaurant reviews should ideally be accessible to the spectrum of restaurant diners, although I imagine that is a bit difficult to pull off: being both incredibly astute and promoting the chefs that truly excel at their craft....but also giving useful information to the "hey how is a cheeseburger here" crowd (of which i am most certainly a member, as cheeseburgers are totally delicious).

ETA: how did you correctly spell obsequiousness and inveigle but somehow change his name to Fat Git? Is this an inside joke?

[JPW]

To my mind, Shaw's argument has always fallen apart by comparing a meal with an audience of one to a show/essay/painting/whatever that cannot be tailored to an individual. A showing of Cats is the same show to the well-known reviewer as it is to the passel of blue hairs from Passaic. A meal served to a friend of the house is not necessarily the same as that served to those same ladies.

The name of the NYC restaurant escapes me at the moment, but in Garlic and Sapphires, Ruth Reichl re-runs the dual review of a tony restaurant where she went in as one of her characters and was most likely not recognized and when she went in with the express purpose of being recognized.

[jpschust]

To my mind, Shaw's argument has always fallen apart by comparing a meal with an audience of one to a show/essay/painting/whatever that cannot be tailored to an individual. A showing of Cats is the same show to the well-known reviewer as it is to the passel of blue hairs from Passaic. A meal served to a friend of the house is not necessarily the same as that served to those same ladies.

The name of the NYC restaurant escapes me at the moment, but in Garlic and Sapphires, Ruth Reichl re-runs the dual review of a tony restaurant where she went in as one of her characters and was most likely not recognized and when she went in with the express purpose of being recognized.

Wasn't it Le Bernadin? I forget the name- but the title of the chapter is "The King Of Spain Waits" or something like that.

[Mark Slater]

Wasn't it Le Bernadin? I forget the name- but the title of the chapter is "The King Of Spain Waits" or something like that.

Le Cirque.

[jpschust]

Le Cirque.

Good call. That said, I ate at Le Cirque in Vegas a few months ago and it was one of the most outstanding meals I've ever eaten in Vegas.

[Jacques Gastreaux]

Did anyone attend the soft opening last night? We couldn't but are hoping to hear good news. Thanks

Commenting in public on soft openings, regardless whether the experience was good or not so good, generally is frowned upon. The very nature of a soft opening suggests that the establishment is still trying to work any last minute bugs out of their service and kitchen. The Majestic will be open this evening if you'd like to try it. Some here resist the temptation to post about a restaurant during its first few weeks/months to give the restaurant a chance to settle into an eventual rythem.

[DLB]

Commenting in public on soft openings, regardless whether the experience was good or not so good, generally is frowned upon. The very nature of a soft opening suggests that the establishment is still trying to work any last minute bugs out of their service and kitchen. The Majestic will be open this evening if you'd like to try it. Some here resist the temptation to post about a restaurant during its first few weeks/months to give the restaurant a chance to settle into an eventual rythem.

I think it's ok to post if the experience was good. What is the harm?

[jpschust]

I think it's ok to post if the experience was good. What is the harm?

I think it's even fine to post if it's not good as long as it's tempered with some understanding of what the situation is with it being a new opening.

Back on topic, I'm going there tonight with Robyn, so I'll throw something on here about what we had, what the menu was like and whatnot.

[Jacques Gastreaux]

I think it's ok to post if the experience was good. What is the harm?

First, I said "generally" suggesting that there might be exceptions. Pesonally, I would not provide comment even if the experience was good because someone else who was at the same soft opening might not have had the same experience I did and might feel a need to balance the discussion. I think it's just better to refrain from commenting at all. The only exception I might make is if the proprietor specifically asked me to post, regardless of the experience.

eta: Isn't there a thread on this somewhere else?

[JPW]

I think it's ok to post if the experience was good. What is the harm?

Because it's practice and the experience when they open for paying customers may be entirely different. Dishes will be changed, menu design may be service patterns may be changed, hell they may even re-paint the bathrooms.

To each their own, but I don't think it's proper to comment publicly on a soft opening.

That said, of course, there will be restaurateurs who invite certain people specifically to get buzz going, but that's another topic...

[giant shrimp]

That said, of course, there will be restaurateurs who invite certain people specifically to get buzz going, but that's another topic...

yeah, like what tom sietsema does on wednesdays and it winds up on the front page of the web site of an offshoot mexican restaurant long before the first paying customer even gets to taste a taco.

[Waitman]

Posting on a soft opening or newly-opened restaurant is perfectly fine as long as the poster makes the situation clear and has reasonable expectations. Open is open, people are curious and restaurants whose openings pass unnoticed tend to die off quick.

[Heather]

Posting on a soft opening or newly-opened restaurant is perfectly fine

There's a difference, though, between a "friends and family" opening (like the Majestic Sun-Mon) and a place that throws its doors open to the general public. I wouldn't comment on the former, but might on the latter.

[crackers]

eta: Isn't there a thread on this somewhere else?

Yes. Upthread, starting --->here.

Same song, same verse, different party.

[Poivrot Farci]

...left with a somewhat unpleasant taste in my mouth...at a restaurant of this caliber...

...left a bad taste in my mouth... not acceptable for a restaurant of this caliber, I expect more...

Lofty expectations of service standards befitting to a monarch for 9 tardy people at a fledgling restaurant and notions of self-entitlement in a crowded bistro on Saturday nights are cute...but don't confuse factory-new steel and mass appeal with “caliber” and consider after-dinner mints before shooting from the hip. Fine marksman “caliber” diners - rather than sawed-off shotgun yahoos- might aim for off-peak hours/days when the staff has an opportunity to be attentive to a guest's larger target of satisfaction.

[Heather]

Lofty expectations of service standards befitting to a monarch for 9 tardy people at a fledgling restaurant

Sorry, but that's bullshit. I didn't read this:

The biggest issue was getting the waitress to come by to allow us to order, which was shocking since she was obviously was mad that we weren't there earlier to order. We waited for a long time to place our original order and our wine glasses were empty most of the night. We managed to order five bottles of wine for the nine of us, but we would have easily ordered two or three more if she was ever around to see how things were going. She also missed out on a round of coffee and after dinner drinks for the same reason. Other than that, the dishes came out at awkward times, some appetizers came right away, others took a while, and we had awkwardly long pauses between each course. Bread was brought once and was not replenished even after asking them to do so at least two times, the lack of water made me feel like I was in the desert.

and get the sense that they expected royal treatment. Regardless of their tardiness (and they made it clear that they were ordering drinks during that time) their server did not give good service by any standards.

ETA that I would like to hear both sides of that story.

[baczkowski]

Michael, I think it's a fascinating topic and I appreciate your willingness to talk about your own experiences with candor. As I interpret your post(s) about RTC, you explain (or imply an explanation of) RTC's menue and restaurant evolution as a responsible adaptation to its surrounding community that the restaurant serves. As one who has lived in Silver Spring for only the last few months, I'd appreciate you explaining this a little more in depth b/c I am one who actually preferred the original path on which RTC started. Now, don't get me wrong, RTC is still a great place and the one place in downtown SS that I enjoy the most (when I got a new job, my father-in-law took me to RTC to celebrate). But when RTC first opened, I was EXCITED by everything I saw: ridiculously cheap but amazingly varied appetizers of superb quality, affordable and delicious entrees again with impressive breadth, and astoundingly good desserts which included my all-time restaurant favorite dessert--the seasonal Peach Charlotte. Mind-blowing quality for cheaper-than-Bethesda-average prices. ANYPLACE would benefit from such a restaurant, but Silver Spring--IMHO--NEEDED such a restaurant. I couldn't wait to tell others to start heading to SS.

On my return visits, I felt a pang for the variety within the courses that I experienced in my initial experiences. The price increases I expected, but it's the variety and up-classed Southern cooking theme that I really missed. Yes, you can now get 47 billion different preparations of many different cuts of great beef, but I miss the biscuits. I never got to taste the fried chicken. Maybe the variety and value proved unsustainable. But those changes always felt like changes made by management to adapt to a change in personnel as well as difficulties in maintaining an efficient chicken [ETA: I meant "kitchen"!!!] (e.g. refer to your explanation on why you pulled the fried chicken). I did not, however, think these changes were made to adapt to the SS community that the restaurant serves. Prices are now higher but there's less menu variety and options. I wouldn't think that a still growing downtown SS would benefit from those changes, but I'm a newbie to the area and not in the restaurant biz. So I appreciate your willingness to expand within the context of your own experiences. But feel free to preserve your career by excluding damning personal details/decisions.

Sorry this is so specific to RTC even though the thread is meant to be a general discussion of restaurant review timings. But I thought this board might appreciate the indulgence in specifics that inform a larger discussion.

Thanks for going out there on a limb, Michael.

Pax,

Brian

[Barbara]

If there is one thing I have learned from Mr. Landrum, it is that if you aren't both a superb chef as well as a businessperson, your restaurant is likely to fail. I have no doubt that the changes made to the RTC menu (and yes, I miss that peach charlotte) are because of unsustainability. Given the overwhelming success of both RTS and RTC and Landrum's ability to be as generous in his charitable pursuits as he is, his judgment shouldn't be up for debate. I feel for people who read the early reviews and look forward to things that are no longer available. Kudos to him for even mentioning this whole subject, as fascinating as it is to the non-industry types among us. I just haven't been there to try that chopped steak, yet. A failure undoubtedly to be corrected after the Georgia trip. (Can you say IHOP? )

[DonRocks]

[Michael Landrum]

Michael, I think it's a fascinating topic and I appreciate your willingness to talk about your own experiences with candor. As I interpret your post(s) about RTC, you explain (or imply an explanation of) RTC's menue and restaurant evolution as a responsible adaptation to its surrounding community that the restaurant serves. As one who has lived in Silver Spring for only the last few months, I'd appreciate you explaining this a little more in depth b/c I am one who actually preferred the original path on which RTC started. Now, don't get me wrong, RTC is still a great place and the one place in downtown SS that I enjoy the most (when I got a new job, my father-in-law took me to RTC to celebrate). But when RTC first opened, I was EXCITED by everything I saw: ridiculously cheap but amazingly varied appetizers of superb quality, affordable and delicious entrees again with impressive breadth, and astoundingly good desserts which included my all-time restaurant favorite dessert--the seasonal Peach Charlotte. Mind-blowing quality for cheaper-than-Bethesda-average prices. ANYPLACE would benefit from such a restaurant, but Silver Spring--IMHO--NEEDED such a restaurant. I couldn't wait to tell others to start heading to SS.

On my return visits, I felt a pang for the variety within the courses that I experienced in my initial experiences. The price increases I expected, but it's the variety and up-classed Southern cooking theme that I really missed. Yes, you can now get 47 billion different preparations of many different cuts of great beef, but I miss the biscuits. I never got to taste the fried chicken. Maybe the variety and value proved unsustainable. But those changes always felt like changes made by management to adapt to a change in personnel as well as difficulties in maintaining an efficient chicken [ETA: I meant "kitchen"!!!] (e.g. refer to your explanation on why you pulled the fried chicken). I did not, however, think these changes were made to adapt to the SS community that the restaurant serves. Prices are now higher but there's less menu variety and options. I wouldn't think that a still growing downtown SS would benefit from those changes, but I'm a newbie to the area and not in the restaurant biz. So I appreciate your willingness to expand within the context of your own experiences. But feel free to preserve your career by excluding damning personal details/decisions.

Sorry this is so specific to RTC even though the thread is meant to be a general discussion of restaurant review timings. But I thought this board might appreciate the indulgence in specifics that inform a larger discussion.

Thanks for going out there on a limb, Michael.

Pax,

Brian

I didn't intend for this to be a discussion of Ray's: The Classics, except as a somewhat paradoxical example of the downside of early reviews to both the restaurant and the diner, and to introduce the notion that too-early reviews are detrimental to the dining scene in general, regardless of whether the attention is positive or negative. Truth is, Ray's: The Classics is a rather benign example, and I am the last person to have any reason to complain. But I agree with Don that you raise valid points that deserve explanation.

First, however, let me address the comment regarding prices. Over the course of a year, when the wholesale cost of beef has risen upwards of 30% (beef prices track energy prices but slightly exponentially and don't really come down), we have raised the price of our steaks by $1--one dollar--a piece, on average that's like maybe 4%. More importantly, and contrary to your perception, we have increased the net value to the diner by offering complimentary sides rather than salads with entrees (a nominal value of $5 per guest rather than $3, the $2 difference offsetting the meager $1 price hike and sides being an item of more universal interest than a starter salad) and by offering smaller-cut options which I initially did not see as appropriate to a table-cloth setting, but now see as an important part of fulfilling our mission to best serve our local community.

Which leads to the main point: the overwhelming feedback from our local community is that they were overwhelmingly put off by "clever" food and made to feel unwelcome due to the domineering presence of the "high-status" crowds that overran the restaurant in its early days. That same high-status and status-driven crowd, while monopolizing our reservations book, overwhelmingly took advantage of the varied cocktail food offerings solely as inexpensive entree options. Not to mention that a full third of those fried chickens went out on a Saturday night as split entrees to the people, reviews clenched in fists, whose S-Class I had just paid to valet. It's as simple as that, conspiracy theories aside: if you can't serve two masters, which we initially and misguidedly attempted to do, than you have to chose which master to serve.

Ironically, beyond that, it is the tremendous value offered by our entrees that made our cocktail food format unviable--very few guests were interested in much more than a cup of soup or simple salad if in anything at all before digging into their steaks or six-bone, 16-ounce rack of lamb with mashed potatoes and creamed spinach.

So the real world value is greater and options, although fewer, are the right options for our guests' dining needs. A quick tour of the restaurant at 9 o'clock any night of the week will tell you how well the face of the community is reflected in the face of the restaurant, and how well that community is served.

Given three months, through hard work and responsive attention, all of these things would have figured themselves, or worked themselves, out before any review. As it was, things that were readily apparant as not working by the fourth week or fifth week were forced into place once Tom made his initial visit and then shortly thereafter were established as the public's perceptions and expectations. And to save professional face as much as possible in the eyes of a demanding public, and to stave off, or rather delay, the inevitable--ahh that word--backlash from critics and consumers alike, an unsuccessful format and unsuccessful programs were maintained for a consciously determined six months after opening, despite the continued disservice to our immediate clientele and despite the delay of the start of truly fulfilling our mission here.

The genius of Ray's is the ability to avoid disaster and so I, perhaps and hopefully not alone, have survived to tell this tale. Though at the same time as I make the argument for more time before being held to judgement, I don"t seek to shirk resposibility for misjudgements, errors, faults, short-comings and mistakes made, which I can lay claim to in spades, even revel in. How else would I get the chance to be brought low and then learn something new?

The point being, to make this relevant, is that opening a restaurant of even the humblest of ambitions involves tremendous risks, insane levels of blind, truly blind, faith and inadvisable degrees of experimentation, and only that process of experimentation will let you know when, or if, you have it right.

This process of trial and error can not be accomplished in under three months.

[Mark Slater]

Great post Michael. You should probably have a plate splitting charge, or make your portions smaller. I know this goes against your grain. Or, you could just tell people that they have to order an entree to sit in the dining room. It may not be popular with some people, but, hey, it's a business.

[jasonc]

I tend to agree with you Michael, that there should be a substantial amount of time between a restaurant's opening and review. Unfortunately, where I live there isn't a dominant paper like the Washington Post that can afford to wait it out. There are two daily newspapers and several weekly rags that all employ somewhat popular restaurant critics. As a result, three for four of them will often publish "reviews" of a high profile restaurant that opened a week ago. One can only assume that these reviewers visited on opening night or a couple of days afterwards. None of them want to be "scooped," and it leads to reviews that are helpful to no one. As you say, restaurants evolve and this is an extreme example. I doubt a single meal in the first week of operation is ever a reliable sample, indicative of what is to come. Then there is the other issue of none of these papers having a budget that allows multiple visits.

I hate it but it's a product of the market here and I don't see it changing anytime soon.

[RWBooneJr]

Maybe I state the obvious, but far to many "foodies" put far too much stock in reviews, and I am not particularly moved when they, or restaurateurs, complain about reviews, grandiose expectations of the "restaurant experience" based on these reviews, or perceived slights when these unreasonable expectations are not met. Both contingencies depend on these reviews, and both, obviously, exploit them (hence the topic “review season,” which implies some kind of a “bait and switch,” which, in most other industries, they would call “fraud.”)

Restaurants reviews are snapshots. A picture may tell a thousands words, but none of them can ever describe how things taste or how they feel. That is why we depend on the opinions of others. Others like Tom Seitsema of the Washington Post or Todd Kliman of Washingtonian. They have great taste, are great writers, and we are lucky to have them chronicle dining in our city (VERY LUCKY). But their reviews are only guidelines; a far more educated version of a trusted friend giving you a restaurant tip.

Restaurant reviews aren't anything more than snapshots of what someone experienced on a handful of occasions, sometimes before a restaurant, which is a crazy, organic, ever-changing thing, settles in or decides what it wants to be. And sometimes, as previously discussed, a favorable review is the result of a veteran restaurateur gaming the system (I'm not heaping criticism on Michael -- I've never been to one of his restaurants due to geographic and practical limitations, but I think I may finally make it to one or both this month -- and I absolutely can't wait) (And Michael, if you want to take me at RTS today -- Saturday -- and tell me I'm an idiot and to shut up, I'm in town and have no plans -- and I will, actually, shut up).

Regardless, these days “review season” never ends. The very existence of “DonRockwell.com,” as well as Tom's and Todd's chats/blogs, ensures that restaurants can't rest on their laurels, at least not with the “food literate” (some bad restaurants will do well regardless of how they are received by the food press or self-appointed few that try to keep the press “honest,” but those -- indeed most -- restaurants that rely on word-of-mouth or "buzz" will lose it if they lose the dedicated few). Big brother (or, in this case big reviewer) is always watching. Or maybe little brother (i.e. you and me).

[DaveBVI]

In fairness to Wash Post and Washingtonian, and keeping in mind that on-line reviews are the ones most consumers rely on, I was always glad to see the on-line ones updated after the "Fall Dining Guide" and "Top 100" are listed. But, if the on-line editors are reading, the smaller reviews/quick bites/cheap eats/best neighborhood winners "mini-reviews" should also be added at the end of or (if out of date) replace the five year old reviews. I know editors are pressed for time, but that is what summer interns are for

just my $.02

dave

[The Doctor]

Quick comment on dinner at Ray's tonight...

Food=good

Service=lousy

Overly grabby, "can I take that?"..."have you finished that?" and my absolute favorite, "Are you still working on that?" Why no, I'm not. I've already constructed a neat little sculpture with the mashed potatoes, I'm making a lawn with the spinach...

Cashews that are unceremoniously ripped from the table half full (half-empty?), being asked 20 times in 5 minutes if we're finished...blah!!!

Yes, but was the bistro special an option?

[Escoffier]

Yes, but was the bistro special an option?

I'm trying hard to even care....as crappy as the service was, we could have been eating in the old Trailways bus station on New York Ave...

[ruslev]

Quick comment on dinner at Ray's tonight...

Food: good

Service: lousy

Overly grabby, "can I take that?"..."have you finished that?" and my absolute favorite, "Are you still working on that?" Why yes I am. I've already constructed a neat little sculpture with the mashed potatoes, I'm making a lawn with the spinach...

The bowl of cashews half full (half-empty?) that are unceremoniously ripped from the table, being asked 20 times in 5 minutes if we're finished...blah!!!

I think the new place should be named Ray's the Classics of Clarendon. The expense report/business write-off people were out in full-force. None of the funky charm of the early incarnation, none of the personalized service (even if it was hurried), none of the indefinable something that made Ray's the Steaks what it was. The new place is a nameless, faceless place. Without Danielle at the front, I could have been in any of a thousand steak places in a thousand different cities and wouldn't have known the difference. I certainly don't want anyone to think that I don't wish Michael to succeed, the world should only have many more like him, I just don't feel any warmth or individuality in the new Ray's.

I have been going for years and that "hurry-up" attitude was a trademark to me. there was a certain charm of having servers circling around ready to snatch that plate from the table. it was like a frenzied madness that I assumed was dictated by Michael. Over the past year, much of that attitude had been lost, I am glad that the reins have been tightened up again.

[Waitman]

I have been going for years and that "hurry-up" attitude was a trademark to me. there was a certain charm of having servers circling around ready to snatch that plate from the table. it was like a frenzied madness that I assumed was dictated by Michael. Over the past year, much of that attitude had been lost, I am glad that the reins have been tightened up again.

You like bad service?

Not that I've ever felt rushed at any Ray's establishment (he hastened to add).

[Escoffier]

I have been going for years and that "hurry-up" attitude was a trademark to me.

You like lousy service? You like servers snatching plates off your table when you stop to take a breath? You like servers leaning across the table to put down the check only to return 30 seconds later to ask "Can I take that?" In all the years that I have been going to Ray's (and that started the week the original opened), I have never had a server reach across the table and attempt to take a half-full plate from in front of me..I've never had someone reach out and grab that miniscule bowl of cashews when it's half full, I've never had a server ask me if we plan on keeping the bread on the table 5 minutes after we've been seated. You definitely have a different idea of what constitutes hurried service versus what constitutes harried service. Amazingly, in all those years of going to the original, even though there was a unofficial 45 minute limit, I never had any of those things happen to me that happened last night.

[Sthitch]

Escoffier,

I fear that you will soon feel the wrath of the Ray's Mujahadeen. And of course, stand accused of a) causing the bad service, b ) being an a-hole for complaining about such bad service, or c) just stand accused uttering blasphemies. And don't expect anything that resembles an apology, I was told that a long time ago by one member of that group.

[Waitman]

Since you note that this was so out of the norm, wouldn't a quick and quiet comment to the manager have had a more positive effect (on your meal at least) than the rants here?

BTW, wasn't it a 90 minute time limit?

Rants are good. A forum like this is a mosaic of comments, good and bad (more of the former, one hopes). When good experiences are bruited about on-line and bad experiences exiled to quiet comments in private, the picture that emerges is necessarily inaccurate.

[Escoffier]

Since you note that this was so out of the norm, wouldn't a quick and quiet comment to the manager have had a more positive effect (on your meal at least) than the rants here?

BTW, wasn't it a 90 minute time limit?

Actually, I have no idea what the norm is in the new place. As this was my first visit to the new site, I have only my initial (not very favorable) impression of the service. That has now become my norm. I have no way of knowing whether this was usual or not. (and this wasn't a rant, you ain't ever seen a real rant from me )

[Escoffier]

Escoffier,

I fear that you will soon feel the wrath of the Ray's Mujahadeen. And of course, stand accused of a) causing the bad service, b ) being an a-hole for complaining about such bad service, or c) just stand accused uttering blasphemies. And don't expect anything that resembles an apology, I was told that a long time ago by one member of that group.

I have a hard time being an apologist for bad service. As Michael wasn't responsible for the bad service, I'm afraid those slings and arrows of outrageous fortune shall fall on fallow ground (and I think the people who do such things are hilarious and were probably strictly potty trained at a really early age)

[Walrus]

I can only share that although -- it being a new space with a lot of new staff -- there were a number of service glitches (one at our table, several at the tables around us) when we were there, we didn't feel rushed, pushed, or otherwise dismissed. I encourage those who have had a bad experience to perhaps wait until the first rush of customers has died down and the new staff have had a chance to acclimate themselves to this new space, particularly as I think we can all agree that the pressures at Ray's are different from those at many other restaurants, and to go again. I think you'll be happy you did.

[Escoffier]

I think we can all agree that the pressures at Ray's are different from those at many other restaurants

I'm not sure I can agree with this statement. The pressures at every restaurant are the same, make a profit, turn tables, satisfy your clientele and provide a satisfying experience. When any of service, food or atmosphere are lacking, it's hard to feel that you have spent your money wisely. There is no doubt that Ray's (especially in the old location) provided excellent value and excellent service and a funky "love it or hate it" atmosphere. The new site provides excellent value, lousy service (at least last night) and a rather sterile atmosphere. If you have to make an effort to find something to like in a restaurant atmosphere...

[mdt]

Rants are good. A forum like this is a mosaic of comments, good and bad (more of the former, one hopes). When good experiences are bruited about on-line and bad experiences exiled to quiet comments in private, the picture that emerges is necessarily inaccurate.

I have no problem with rants and posting of negative experiences. I was alluding to a recent post by starfish, I will find it later, about working with the restaurant to help to make the experience the best it can be at that time. Would it be any different if one was served a rare steak when the desired was medium and then coming on here and stating that the meal was terrible? They both have the potential to be corrected with a discrete comment.

Off to my cave until I am needed to fight again.

[alan7147]

Escoffier,

I fear that you will soon feel the wrath of the Ray's Mujahadeen. And of course, stand accused of a) causing the bad service, b ) being an a-hole for complaining about such bad service, or c) just stand accused uttering blasphemies. And don't expect anything that resembles an apology, I was told that a long time ago by one member of that group.

I believe the high priest of Sacred Cowdom and his trusty sidekick no longer post here.

[Ericandblueboy]

I believe the high priest of Sacred Cowdom and his trusty sidekick no longer post here.

Now I'm curious as to the identities of Ray's hit squad.

[Sthitch]

I believe the high priest of Sacred Cowdom and his trusty sidekick no longer post here.

I believe that I know who you mean, but the Cult of the Sacred Cow has many adherents, and especially this branch, but I have said my bit.

[Walrus]

I'm not sure I can agree with this statement. The pressures at every restaurant are the same, make a profit, turn tables, satisfy your clientele and provide a satisfying experience. When any of service, food or atmosphere are lacking, it's hard to feel that you have spent your money wisely. There is no doubt that Ray's (especially in the old location) provided excellent value and excellent service and a funky "love it or hate it" atmosphere. The new site provides excellent value, lousy service (at least last night) and a rather sterile atmosphere. If you have to make an effort to find something to like in a restaurant atmosphere...

See, I really liked the white banquettes and the reduced volume -- I could hear my dining partner without making my ears bleed, which is always a bonus for me. And I do that that the pressures are different for Ray's -- it didn't just move locations, it grew dramatically, both in size and in numbers of staff, so it can't really fairly be compared to the old location. I think the only thing that you can compare as apples to apples is the food, and in our experience, the food was actually maybe even superior to what we'd experienced at the old location. The other things -- servers, space, etc. -- are all very new and should be experienced as such. I just think that maybe you would have judged the service/staff in a brand new restaurant a little more leniently than you judged the brand new staff at Ray's. Or, at least, I did.

[Heather]

Thank you for all your support and as for NOLA CAINE.........well, sorry if few extra drops of olive oil will refrain you to explore better and future experiences at my restaurant or at the chef table: I was not aware untill now how difficult the olive oil free life is and I remain hopeful that in time you would be so kind and couragious to give us another try in our new carefully measured olive oil drizzled environment.

Chef, do you think that mockery will make NolaCaine want to try your restaurant again? It certainly makes me think twice about it - especially if I have the temerity to express my dislike for something there on a public forum dedicated to people's opinions about their dining experiences.

[giant shrimp]

putting olive oil on everything reminds me of the time prometheus tricked zeus by covering the bones with fat. but i do like it, and i hear you can even use it as a hair dressing.

[Enzo Fargione]

Chef, do you think that mockery will make NolaCaine want to try your restaurant again? It certainly makes me think twice about it - especially if I have the temerity to express my dislike for something there on a public forum dedicated to people's opinions about their dining experiences.

Mockery? I would call it sarcasm...that is who I am.......and NOla Caine is mostly welcome to come back to Teatro and I will personally greet the person and make sure will have a positive experience

After all this is a forum where you can express yourself.

I respect, but not necessarily agree with everything that people say. I accept it ........can you?

Thanks for your imput

Chef Enzo

[Heather]

Mockery? I would call it sarcasm...that is who I am.......and NOla Caine is mostly welcome to come back to Teatro and I will personally greet the person and make sure will have a positive experience

After all this is a forum where you can express yourself.

I respect, but not necessarily agree with everything that people say. I accept it ........can you?

Thanks for your imput

Chef Enzo

I am a fairly easy-going person (stop laughing, Charles) and can accept most things. It's more than a little offputting, though, that very often those who have the temerity to post a less-than-stellar review find themselves attacked not only by other members but also by the employees of the place they are talking about.

My mother often told me that you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. That was all I was trying to say.

(P.S. giant shrimp, EVOO makes a great deep conditioner, especially with a lemon juice rinse.)

[Waitman]

We're moving into "criticizing the critics" territory here but...

Having been bitched out by a couple for restaurant professionals on line I far prefer customer/proprietor battles to those fights where a restaurant's acolytes rise up zombie-like to overwhelm anyone with the temerity to tip over a sacred cow. Much more honest and informative.

And forget Enzo; when Landrum gets up in your grill, you know you've been bitten by a maddog.

[monsterriffs]

(P.S. giant shrimp, EVOO makes a great deep conditioner, especially with a lemon juice rinse.)

It's part of my daily regimen, followed by a tzatziki moisturizer.