From Vanity Fair: Tyranny–It’s What’s for Dinner

Tyranny–It’s What’s for Dinner --The reservation was nearly impossible to get. The meal will cost several hundred dollars. The chef is a culinary genius. But in the era of the four-hour, 40-course tasting menu, one key ingredient is missing: any interest in what (or how much) the customer wants to eat.

Something to think about. I have wanted to go to Alinea but what is holding me back is the length of time and not being able to pick out what I want to eat. I do not want to sit anywhere for four hours no matter how good. I do not want to eat organ meats or raw stuff, or any of the few other things I find unpalatable. I am sure these restaurants will be around for a good long time but maybe there will be a trend change here. I would rather spend half that time in a restaurant and have a menu to order off of rather than having things I do not want. Also seems like too much food...even if small plates, so many of them.

My interpretation: Pedantic old foodie from a city with no great restaurants misses his Trotter's reservation by some hours, still gets served full meal despite acting like a an entitled critic. Later, he dismisses 2 generations of chefs who took cuisine out of the 19th Century from the US, Spain and Scandinavia because they made their art their business. Pines for the Belle Époque, writing in the media equivalent of Chez Paul. I like the old fashioned oddness of VF same as I did Chez Paul, but much of what was served was dreck.

The reason we were initially denied dinner at Trotter’s, we later learned, was that it didn’t suit the cooks to have us start late. They were making all the courses for all the tables at exactly the same time, and didn’t want to break their lockstep pace to accommodate the inconvenient exigencies of customers.

If someone arrived halfway through Messiah, I wouldn't want to get back up and sing Comfort Ye again for them, either.

Some exclusively tasting menu places are (at least to themselves) concerts, offering particular art at a particular time and pace, and even with tickets these days, from Next to Rick's pinstriped arse in Cascabel. That's not generally the service I, personally want from a dining experience - unless it's Medieval Times - but I can see where they're coming from. I think the reviewer missed the program notes. I look forward to the many issues with this analogy.

toria wrote:Something to think about. I have wanted to go to Alinea but what is holding me back is the length of time and not being able to pick out what I want to eat. I do not want to sit anywhere for four hours no matter how good. I do not want to eat organ meats or raw stuff, or any of the few other things I find unpalatable. I am sure these restaurants will be around for a good long time but maybe there will be a trend change here. I would rather spend half that time in a restaurant and have a menu to order off of rather than having things I do not want. Also seems like too much food...even if small plates, so many of them.

There are about 6000 restaurants in Chicago. Guessing that you might find more than a few that would satisfy your need to not sit for 4 hours, order off a menu and eat whatever interests you. Not sure why the half dozen or so that vary from this format need to close for you to do that.

I don't happen to share toria's predilections, but I also don't think that that post said anything about those half-dozen or so restaurants needing to close. Did I miss something?

toria wrote: I am sure these restaurants will be around for a good long time but maybe there will be a trend change here.

Perhaps I misinterpreted or exaggerated her meaning but I see no need for a "trend change" and thought the idea was kind of silly. There are thousands of places you can order small plates (also called appetizers) off a menu. Probably fewer than a dozen places serving exclusively long form tasting menus. Sorry if it offended.

Yes and I agree and that is why I have not gone to Alinea as of yet. Was not implying that these needed to close. I just wish they had kept the smaller menu with not so many courses. The thing I regret is not being able to really go to a outstanding place like that just because I can not sit for four hours and probably eat that much food. Like I said, they will probably be around for a long time. Different opinions here and there.

How ridiculous - though I can only assume the author hoped to achieve Pete Wells notoriety or something. Focusing on Trotter and Adria etc just seems so outdated and ... dull.

There are so many types of restaurants these days from the culinary chef led tours of tasting menus to revived diner food and all kinds of new flavors and directions, its too bad VF gave this piece space especially for an author who seems downright paranoid. The entire discussion of chefs controlling food costs as if that were some kind of tyranny for example really takes the cake.

I've eaten at many of these restaurants with people who have dietary restrictions and food idiosyncrasies and almost all are perfectly accommodating as long as you call ahead or better yet, ask when you make the reservation. If you are offal-phobic, just call and ask. I think the real problem here is the trend towards restaurants like Schwa or Blanca where you can't call and ask because their customer service is so minimalistic.

But it's interesting, one time I needed to meet an older relative after going to a tasting menu and I said I'd meet her at 11 PM. She said "Isn't your dinner starting at 6 PM? What are you doing during all that time????" It's hard for her to imagine eating that long. But if you think about it being also a social time with your friends with intermittent snacks, it doesn't seem so nonsensical.

mgmcewen wrote:But it's interesting, one time I needed to meet an older relative after going to a tasting menu and I said I'd meet her at 11 PM. She said "Isn't your dinner starting at 6 PM? What are you doing during all that time????" It's hard for her to imagine eating that long. But if you think about it being also a social time with your friends with intermittent snacks, it doesn't seem so nonsensical.

I think you've hit on something, which is that the article is not really an attack on "that kind of restaurant"--it's a veiled attack on the kind of restaurant patron who likes that kind of restaurant. The argument many have made here is so sensible as to be irrefutable, namely, that there are many normal restaurants for people to choose, so what's the harm in having a handful of the The French Laundry type? If the author's beef were really with these restaurants, there'd be no article, because even the author would have to acknowledge the validity of that. Therefore, what the article really is, is a stealth attack on the pretentiousness and foolishness and masochism of the restaurant-goers who put up with these restaurants, disguised in the sheep's clothing of an attack on a few celebrity chefs so as not to directly offend.

Please don't misunderstand me to be saying that I believe such restaurant-goers are pretentious and foolish and masochistic, because I don't. But I think the author does, and I believe that's what's driving the article.

How ridiculous - though I can only assume the author hoped to achieve Pete Wells notoriety or something.

Corby Kummer has been a food writer and restaurant critic since 1981. He's the recipient of FIVE James Beard awards. Of him Julia Child said: "I think he's a very good food writer. He really does his homework. As a reporter and a writer he takes his work very seriously." I hardly think he aspires to be Pete Wells.

yeah, a google search reveals that Mr Kummer is indeed Quite A Big Deal. How dare Charlie Trotter not accommodate his desires?

Actually I think it was stupid for the author to plan the way he did. Making the reservations and flying in to a big metropolis like Chicago and think he could just blow into the restaurant without a hitch and everything would go fine. If it was so important to him he should have come in the night before. I would never do anything as ill planned as this. Of course anything could happen anytime. And I am sure legions of people have done this without a hitch but you never know. He should have flown in, had a Chicago style pizza or Italian beef the first night, had a nice day the next day and planned for a relaxed dinner the next day.

I know who Kummer is, but don't know his writing very well, so it's hard for me to judge his intentions or underlying predilections. That said, I find riddlemay's interp. pretty persuasive. A tiny handful of restaurants operate in this way because it suits what the chefs want to do and how they want to present it. It suits some potential clients and not others, who are free to go anywhere they like better. So, in the end, what's the point of the piece?

sundevilpeg wrote:

Corby Kummer has been a food writer and restaurant critic since 1981. He's the recipient of FIVE James Beard awards. Of him Julia Child said: "I think he's a very good food writer. He really does his homework. As a reporter and a writer he takes his work very seriously." I hardly think he aspires to be Pete Wells.

I was thinking more that Corby was looking to create controversy a la Wells since how else to explain an article so outdated and rather pointless. It was far from award winning writing brilliance.

On some points, I can kind of understand where he's coming from - I've generally felt ill at the end of 10-course tasting menus, and my alcohol tolerance generally means wine pairings are wasted on me - but it's just plain stupid to call this 'Tyranny'. His entire argument here is something straight out of a freshman humanities class where everybody gripes about how oppressive it is that the free market forces you to work for a living in jobs don't want to do. Like, if you want a fine dining experience, you're just forced to pay for this massive tasting menu.

I didn't buy it when I was 19, and I certainly don't buy it now.

Independent George wrote:... it's just plain stupid to call this 'Tyranny'. His entire argument here is something straight out of a freshman humanities class where everybody gripes about how oppressive it is that the free market forces you to work for a living in jobs don't want to do. Like, if you want a fine dining experience, you're just forced to pay for this massive tasting menu.

Ha ha ha, I like that.

This is just a different business model skewed towards the talent as opposed to the consumer. A lot of it makes sense for the restauranteur, in particularly knowing how much of what food you're going to need on any given night, thus keeping waste to the minimum. Restaurants have historically low profit margins with waste being a key component. Suggest not supporting it if you don't like the terms that you know going in. There's plenty of other places to eat that will cater to your specific needs. Is it so horrible to not be able to have it your way everywhere everyday? If so, don't go. But if you do, you may even find that something you thought you didn't like tastes good prepared in a different way.

Jeff Ruby responds in the context of Chicago dining
http://www.chicagomag.com/Radar/Dish/Ja ... erability/

When I went to Elizabeth Restaurant, the eight people at my communal table were at the mercy of chef Iliana Regan for 24 courses, and I for one never felt tyrannized. I felt joy and excitement—even as I was told what, when, and how to eat. The only tyranny originated from us diners. We couldn’t let go of our iPhones and cameras, and we spent almost five hours on foodie one-upmanship and name-dropping—not even stopping when the soft-spoken Regan came out to explain what was on our plates. We were a bunch of starfuckers who couldn’t name one song by the person performing but still wanted to get backstage.

Yeah, I don't see much tyranny at work at these places, though I am admittedly frustrated (not emotionally, just literally) by a general lack of flexibility (even if I understand its basis). Fine dining should not always necessarily be an endeavor that requires months of planning, like a vacation (though it can be!), and as much as I've enjoyed many meals that stemmed from so-called tyrannical chefs or adhered to their rigid systems, it can be exhausting to run the gauntlet of no reservations, tickets, 4 hour commitments, etc. Cool for those who can cope, of course, but for a lot of folks what the author calls tyranny is really just further levels of exclusivity applied to already exclusive places, which makes them seem, I suppose, undemocratic or ... tyrannical.

Definitely suspicious that he reserves so much disdain for Trotter and Adria, who have closed doors. Also amusingly ironic that Trotter, a chef notorious for his libertarian philosophy, should be singled out for tyranny. But that's the dubious nature of libertarianism for you.

Vitesse98 wrote: Fine dining should not always necessarily be an endeavor that requires months of planning, like a vacation (though it can be!), and as much as I've enjoyed many meals that stemmed from so-called tyrannical chefs or adhered to their rigid systems, it can be exhausting to run the gauntlet of no reservations, tickets, 4 hour commitments, etc. Cool for those who can cope, of course, but for a lot of folks what the author calls tyranny is really just further levels of exclusivity applied to already exclusive places, which makes them seem, I suppose, undemocratic or ... tyrannical.

Agreed. Fine dining shouldn't ALWAYS be an endeavor requiring months of planning. Guess what--it's not always. I counted 15 legitimate "fine dining" non-steakhouse places that would be considered in close to or the same realm as the three places that have a ticketing reservation system, on---wait for it--OPEN TABLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Can't get much more egalitarian than that. Goosefoot. Grace. Tru. Spiaggia. Everest. Sixteen. I could go on. I think this is so tired. Yes the ticketing thing is new. Yeah, we get that some people don't like it, are frustrated by it, whatever. There are hundreds of places you can eat people. Complaining about this seems so silly. End of rant.

So how were the reactions of the people who commented at the VF website?



10 negative (e.g. "What an unpleasant and surprisingly outdated article.")

1 positive, I guess it's supposed to be ("He simply asks us to consider whether the current trend toward lengthy, inflexible tasting menus is really in anyone's best interest.")

El Diners Unido!

It's time to launch the Oppressed Tasting Menu Diners' Liberation Front ...to the Barricades!