I recall something that Chef Gloria Felix told our table the other night as reservoir, saying that people who haven't opened a restaurant of their own really can't say anything about what it's like. Sure, I can be honest and say that I've never been part of a restaurant opening. But just because I haven't worked full-time behind a stove or in the front of the house doesn't mean I can't make a comment on the final product.
I think about it this way: now that banks have been thrust into the spotlight of the national news, of how bank problems have affected the outcome of the US Economy, I'm not a direct part of the whole issue. I work as a Credit Analyst (by day..and yes this is my lunch hour) and have a direct affect on commercial lending in the Los Angeles/Southern California area. Businesses and consumers are affected by some of the analysis that I perform. Does that mean that consumers or people who don't know a lick about banking shouldn't say anything or complain when it comes to the current economy environment? If someone hurled: "'why the hell can't we can't a bank loan for our small business,' or 'It's all because of these greedy bankers who put our deposit money at risk.'" Can I really disagree with that? On one level, I can't because it's true. However, I wouldn't dare say, "you really have no idea what it's like working at a bank right now, or how commercial lending works, so why don't you just shut up about it." Or rather, "it's not really in your place to say anything about the banking industry, or the bank at which I work."
Bottom line, everyone has the right to say anything about the final product. Just like I can say what I want about a dish or service that I receive during dinner, someone can comment on my bank and try to find out why their loan was accepted or declined. I'm up for the same scrutiny as chefs, cooks, servers, and general mangers are up for at their restaurants. It's condescending to say that just because someone hasn't worked directly in a restaurant can't understand or even comment on the experience. Of course your word is definitely more valid if you have had that experience, but the final product is meant to be the common denominator, not past experience.
Wolfgang Puck recently commented that he has no clue about what internet writers as saying about his restaurants, but slyly remarked that he wouldn't say anything about the opera. Well maybe he doesn't frequent the opera, but I noted in the comments on Eater that if I were an afficionado of opera, if I understood opera from a consumer-standpoint, if I had attended dozens if not hundreds of operas, wouldn't I be valid in saying something about a poor or excellent performance? If I've been to easily over 200 restaurants in the past six months, drank over 300 wines, read as many as 10-12 pieces of food literature a day, and talked to dozens of working chefs, servers, and cooks in the same time, wouldn't I be valid in saying a word about my experience at a restaurant?
14 comments:
Even though customers might not be able to relate to certain aspects of launching and operating a restaurant, their opinions can still be valid. After all, it's the customers who decide the fate of a restaurant, and when a thoughtful, experienced diner like you makes a statement, Gloria should listen. In your case, it's constructive criticism. She doesn't have to agree or implement changes based on your criticism, but that's another issue.
Quite opinionated today ;)
Being more a "shades of gray" person myself, I'm still flushing over this issue in my head. I agree with you that everyone can comment however they feel about the final product; on the other hand, that's what make collaboratively-reviewed portals (umm... rhymes with "Help", amongst others) so unreliable, where any yahoo can chime in with their ridiculous remarks - so I can see how restauranteurs and chefs can get peeved.
I guess in the end, I'll have to take the Sandra O'Connor approach with a narrow, nuanced and "middle road" interpretation on this debate.
and I think the flaw is that both camps tend to be overgeneralizing and making sweeping remarks about the other side ~ chefs/restauranteurs tend to lump the whole blogosphere/Yelperocracy as if everyone's a ridiculous yahoos doing crazy "unqualified" reviews ~ while the other side of bloggers, Yelpers, etc. overplay that 1st amendment card even for outright slanderous and libelous remarks.
I have worked in a restaurant and cooked a bit professionally, but I don't think those experiences alter my criticisms as a diner (except for giving more leeway to servers if they are trying to handle too many tables on a busy night). Many of my friends have never worked in the industry or even know how to cook, but we all recognize good food, service and decor. I agree with your assessment that having a restaurant background may help you understand or give more weight to your critique, but relevant experience includes all you have tasted, not just what you have cooked. Wolfgang may not comment on Opera, but I'm sure he comments on the buildings that house his restaurants, and I don't believe he has ever built one himself.
Anyone who as ever eaten at a restaurant is more than qualified to comment on taste, service, and ambiance. One need not be a restauranteur to recognize the good and the bad of these things.
Josh: Good point about Felix not having to adopt all of my criticism. She more firmly disgreed about the price points of her wine list, but if that was the case, I think you'd get more people talking about it. If she wants to have more wine sales, they should educate their staff on being about to talk more about the wine and "sell" it instead of motivating people to bring their own.
HC: I'm on a streak :) You're right in that the restaurateur or chef typically overgeneralizes. It's all about being responsible and bloggers should lead the way rather than succomb to cheap shots under the veil of anonymity. It could be a lot worse.
Elaine: true, it's funny that Puck's commented on buildings but he's not an architect. "everybody's a critic" is the old adage.
Weezermonkey: it's funny, my friend told me he used to work at a coffee bar, and told me that I probably know more than 90% of the world's baristas about coffee. Not necessarily agreeing with him, but I will say that sometimes customers know more than employees. I don't know more about "food" than most chefs, but I still know something, and I think that counts.
I had a friend tell me once, that if you have not attended art school you have no right to critique art. I beg to differ, I still know what is aesthetically pleasing to my eye.
Ah the controversy that will never end. It is always easier to criticize than to create. However, so many people fail to consider that the process of writing criticism is creation in itself. Hence why there's a category for criticism for the Pulitzer.
I agree with what HC says about over-generalization on restaurants' parts in regards to all critics are the same. I think that to combat this stereotype, it's up to bloggers like us to show that there is an educated side to the Internet.
Btw, there are a few typos in the second paragraph.
Aaron: it's going to be a long debate as long as the internet wields influence on any industry. Everyone's gotta blame something. The movie industry's blaming the internet for sales when really they're just making crumby movies. The good ones still make tons of money. Funny thing is that they're not blaming critics, or at least ones on the blogs.
And yes, I have typos! haha, everyone does...right? That paragraph is fraught with grammatically questionable sentence structure. It's more stream of thought than anything. But yes, I'll make some minor changes to placate you "critics" :) jk man
300 wines in the past six months? I am envious.
It would be fine if you knew anything. But your blog is riddled with errors. I'm a chef, and I have no problem with knowledgeable (or even not-knowledgeable) people commenting on food. Especially when they state their opinion, and they make it clear that it's just that. However, when people like you use blogs to try and educate others about something you really don't have a good grasp of yet (food is something you have to live for YEARS to really understand), it dilute the quality of information out there.
Dear anonymous chef. Everyone has errors and I do everything I can to correct them, but that doesn't invalidate my blog, especially when I don't think that many of them are egregious. Also I do have years of experience with food, both cooking and commenting about it. If you want to ask me what I know and how i've come to know it, I suggest you unveil your anonymity and invite me to your restaurant, unless i've already been there and for some reason you're dissatisfied with my review of the experience. Of course I'm trying to educate people, because I think I can share a bit of my passion and what i've learned ove the 'years.'. I'm sure you would do the same. If you think the quality of my blog dilutes the information that's out there, I welcome you to tell me.
Yes, Matt, yes you would. Every writer has their own unique angle. Yours is neither ill-informed nor invalid.
Post a Comment