Jump to content


Welcome to the eG Forums!

These forums are a service of the Society for Culinary Arts & Letters, a 501c3 nonprofit organization dedicated to advancement of the culinary arts. Anyone can read the forums, however if you would like to participate in active discussions please join the society.

Photo

#chefsunite


  • Please log in to reply
52 replies to this topic

#31 radtek

radtek
  • participating member
  • 291 posts
  • Location:San Antonio, Texas

Posted 10 November 2012 - 12:31 PM





To provide a further piece of context, the word c$%t is frequently bandied around in the catering industry - high-end professional kitchens in particular - and doesn't hold the same level of taboo and insult as it does in the wider world.


Indeed - I worked in the building industry for many years and you get numb to the "C" word after a week as it is part of every sentence


What is it about supposedly-mature men that the worst thing they can think of to call one another is something relating to female genitalia?

Just like infantile adolescent boys in a schoolyard calling one another pussy.

They seriously should be embarrassed if that's the best (worst) they can do.

.


Sorry to divert the thread briefly but please note that using the "C" word in parts of the UK is not the same as using it in the US.

Anyway, both parties could have come out of this a lot better by not engaging in the whole thing. All rather silly.


Sorry to continue the diversion but I know that the "C" word in parts of the UK is not the same thing as using it in the US. "Pussy" isn't considered in most quarters to be the most vile and vulgar and obscene choice of name-calling either.

But my original point still stands.


While MF'er and f**k are liberally salted throughout regular conversation polite or not the "C" word is probably the the worst thing one can say anyone and particularly women in the States. It's rarely used by anybody and is considered indescribably vulgar.

#32 Scott

Scott
  • participating member
  • 983 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 10 November 2012 - 12:32 PM

I am not defending Isherwood but why would he risk his credibility lying about paying for the meal. Here is his quote

"He mentioned I was given freebies, but I'm wise enough to know these were amuse bouches - they even appeared on the pre-printed menu they gave to me at the end of the meal "


He doesn't have *ANY* credibility to risk FFS!! He's a guy whose blog had less than 10 entries - its brand new.

And on the freebies, like the flip flop on whether he went into the kitchen the amuse bouche line is something he settled on a day or 2 after the argument. I was involved in the original, real time exchanges and despite the subsequent deletions i am very well aware of the original claims & statements.

Oh and he's not wise enough about anything, he's the rankest of amateurs. Right on the lowest, least experienced tier - which is fine but don't be taken in by a rapid journalist lead reinvention

Plus comp'd dishes usually appear on the bill for no charge as part of stock control and the order to kitchen process

This never ending accusation that bloggers get free meal after free meal is pure fiction especially from my point of view. In all of my years of dining I have only ever received five in decades, and we eat out an awful lot.


Its never ending because like big brother contestants, the desire for freebies is common. Its one of the things that upsets chefs, how often & fervent the entitlement complex is.

as for your own situation:
- do you speak with PR?
- do you contact a restaurant beforehand to announce your upcoming visit?
- do you send back comped unordered dishes?

Perhaps you should draft & outline a personal code of conduct for your blog so readers & chefs know exactly where you stand on these subjects? Always pay, no extra dishes, no PR etc much like Jay Rayner has been calling for in the last few days. He's made the point that he does just this, nothing extra, no freebies, books himself etc

Nearly every major wine critic does this also, so their integrity can never be questioned

I for one would be very interested if people would name and shame those bloggers who receive these financial incentives. It would help clear up these never ending accusations.



How about I take the field, and exclude by exception those who disclaim individually


After much annoying innuendo The Critical Couple now put a disclaimer on their site.


Quite right too.
A meal without wine is... well, erm, what is that like?

#33 Scott

Scott
  • participating member
  • 983 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 10 November 2012 - 12:34 PM




Problem is bloggers are often attracted by the promise of freebies & superior access.


Plus the chance to do a bit of Food Bragging to their friends. Some diners get quite sycophantic about the celebrity chef dining scene - it is like collecting Michelin stars are the new cigarette cards.


Exactly right - does anyone think isherwood wasn't giving it all that to his date trying to impress?
A meal without wine is... well, erm, what is that like?

#34 Scott

Scott
  • participating member
  • 983 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 10 November 2012 - 12:36 PM



Everyone - Isherwood and the chefs - has dropped a bollock here.

The only issue is whether or not the meal in question was a freebie. If it wasn't, Isherwood's dropped bollock was a simple case of naivete. If it was, I really hope this incident goes a long way towards bring to an end the practice of blogger freebies. Food blogging seems to me to be a worthwhile and entertaining pastime, but only if the bloggers are getting the very same experience as every other punter. If they're not, it becomes pointless and vain.


By & large agree.

Problem is bloggers are often attracted by the promise of freebies & superior access.

What has gotten lost is that its only the quality of the commentary that matters, not just that you made the effort.


I am not defending Isherwood but why would he risk his credibility lying about paying for the meal. Here is his quote

"He mentioned I was given freebies, but I'm wise enough to know these were amuse bouches - they even appeared on the pre-printed menu they gave to me at the end of the meal "

This never ending accusation that bloggers get free meal after free meal is pure fiction especially from my point of view. In all of my years of dining I have only ever received five in decades, and we eat out an awful lot.

I for one would be very interested if people would name and shame those bloggers who receive these financial incentives. It would help clear up these never ending accusations.

After much annoying innuendo The Critical Couple now put a disclaimer on their site.


Hang on David - I'm not saying all do but someone did bring up the point of the Cube on twitter - hardly anyone paid for that!


Quite so - and how many people disclaimed whether it was a freebie?
A meal without wine is... well, erm, what is that like?

#35 david goodfellow

david goodfellow
  • participating member
  • 1,352 posts
  • Location:midlands

Posted 10 November 2012 - 12:40 PM

The Cube is an exceptional case. I think nearly every blogger of note has had a freebie there, and they continue to do so. I was offered a meal two weeks ago but turned it down.

No I'm not on about The Cube but places like Gavroche, Midsummer, Ledbury, etc, etc, etc. etc, and all of my recent meals on my blog plus some which are not on there yet.

I'm going to help by posting this link to Urbanspoon. There are over 600 blogs on there I defy anyone on here to positively identify anyone ( or more) blogger on there who accepts free meals on a regular basis in return for a favourable review.

http://www.urbanspoo...estaurant-blogs

Edited by david goodfellow, 10 November 2012 - 01:00 PM.


#36 david goodfellow

david goodfellow
  • participating member
  • 1,352 posts
  • Location:midlands

Posted 10 November 2012 - 12:41 PM



Everyone - Isherwood and the chefs - has dropped a bollock here.

The only issue is whether or not the meal in question was a freebie. If it wasn't, Isherwood's dropped bollock was a simple case of naivete. If it was, I really hope this incident goes a long way towards bring to an end the practice of blogger freebies. Food blogging seems to me to be a worthwhile and entertaining pastime, but only if the bloggers are getting the very same experience as every other punter. If they're not, it becomes pointless and vain.


By & large agree.

Problem is bloggers are often attracted by the promise of freebies & superior access.

What has gotten lost is that its only the quality of the commentary that matters, not just that you made the effort.


I am not defending Isherwood but why would he risk his credibility lying about paying for the meal. Here is his quote

"He mentioned I was given freebies, but I'm wise enough to know these were amuse bouches - they even appeared on the pre-printed menu they gave to me at the end of the meal "

This never ending accusation that bloggers get free meal after free meal is pure fiction especially from my point of view. In all of my years of dining I have only ever received five in decades, and we eat out an awful lot.

I for one would be very interested if people would name and shame those bloggers who receive these financial incentives. It would help clear up these never ending accusations.

After much annoying innuendo The Critical Couple now put a disclaimer on their site.


Hang on David - I'm not saying all do but someone did bring up the point of the Cube on twitter - hardly anyone paid for that!


Quite so - and how many people disclaimed whether it was a freebie?


I did on my blog :smile:

#37 Jaymes

Jaymes
  • participating member
  • 7,457 posts
  • Location:Houston, Texas

Posted 10 November 2012 - 12:50 PM






To provide a further piece of context, the word c$%t is frequently bandied around in the catering industry - high-end professional kitchens in particular - and doesn't hold the same level of taboo and insult as it does in the wider world.


Indeed - I worked in the building industry for many years and you get numb to the "C" word after a week as it is part of every sentence


What is it about supposedly-mature men that the worst thing they can think of to call one another is something relating to female genitalia?

Just like infantile adolescent boys in a schoolyard calling one another pussy.

They seriously should be embarrassed if that's the best (worst) they can do.

.


Sorry to divert the thread briefly but please note that using the "C" word in parts of the UK is not the same as using it in the US.

Anyway, both parties could have come out of this a lot better by not engaging in the whole thing. All rather silly.


Sorry to continue the diversion but I know that the "C" word in parts of the UK is not the same thing as using it in the US. "Pussy" isn't considered in most quarters to be the most vile and vulgar and obscene choice of name-calling either.

But my original point still stands.


While MF'er and f**k are liberally salted throughout regular conversation polite or not the "C" word is probably the the worst thing one can say anyone and particularly women in the States. It's rarely used by anybody and is considered indescribably vulgar.


And, while some can say this is a "diversion" from the original subject of the thread, and that this particular sort of vulgarity is commonplace and "no big deal," and that only nannies and grannies get offended by it, would this incident have been so widely discussed had the chefs' response been less vulgar and obscene?

Obviously not.

Edited by Jaymes, 10 November 2012 - 12:52 PM.

"And you, you're just a stinker."

#38 Scott

Scott
  • participating member
  • 983 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 11 November 2012 - 03:35 AM




Everyone - Isherwood and the chefs - has dropped a bollock here.

The only issue is whether or not the meal in question was a freebie. If it wasn't, Isherwood's dropped bollock was a simple case of naivete. If it was, I really hope this incident goes a long way towards bring to an end the practice of blogger freebies. Food blogging seems to me to be a worthwhile and entertaining pastime, but only if the bloggers are getting the very same experience as every other punter. If they're not, it becomes pointless and vain.


By & large agree.

Problem is bloggers are often attracted by the promise of freebies & superior access.

What has gotten lost is that its only the quality of the commentary that matters, not just that you made the effort.


I am not defending Isherwood but why would he risk his credibility lying about paying for the meal. Here is his quote

"He mentioned I was given freebies, but I'm wise enough to know these were amuse bouches - they even appeared on the pre-printed menu they gave to me at the end of the meal "

This never ending accusation that bloggers get free meal after free meal is pure fiction especially from my point of view. In all of my years of dining I have only ever received five in decades, and we eat out an awful lot.

I for one would be very interested if people would name and shame those bloggers who receive these financial incentives. It would help clear up these never ending accusations.

After much annoying innuendo The Critical Couple now put a disclaimer on their site.


Hang on David - I'm not saying all do but someone did bring up the point of the Cube on twitter - hardly anyone paid for that!


Quite so - and how many people disclaimed whether it was a freebie?


I did on my blog :smile:


and yet you didn't mention in your faux indignation post above about how its so unfair to bloggers ;)

So do you follow jay rayners policy of not accepting free dishes, announcing your visits, or anything designed to ensure you get a better than usual experience?

It is not acceptable to hold both positions, one or the other please.
A meal without wine is... well, erm, what is that like?

#39 Scott

Scott
  • participating member
  • 983 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 11 November 2012 - 03:40 AM

The Cube is an exceptional case. I think nearly every blogger of note has had a freebie there, and they continue to do so.


No, I don't think its ok to try and brush this aside.

its very relevant (inconvenient) to the point in hand

* sorry if I seem a bit fired up, but I think the blogger/pr nexus is a massive issue right now. There's huge hypocrisy around this at the moment, and that is at the heart of the whole #chefsunite nonsense
A meal without wine is... well, erm, what is that like?

#40 PSmith

PSmith
  • participating member
  • 170 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 12 November 2012 - 07:01 AM

Don't know who City John is, but this seems like good reporting of the facts

http://fewerpedantic...than-the-sword/

http://www.thecriticalcouple.co.uk

Latest blog post - Oh my - someone needs a spell checker


#41 PSmith

PSmith
  • participating member
  • 170 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 12 November 2012 - 10:17 AM

Now this is interesting.

Remember the original "Critical Couple" and their spat with Marcus Wareing?

Discussed at length here

http://forums.egulle...ative-comments/

(make sure you read the last page - top sluthing by Paul O'Vendage)


Anyway - one would think that they would be on Isherwood's side, having had a similar experience, but no - it appears that they are also promoting CityJohn's blog on their twitter page.

Mrs Pot, meet Mr Kettle.

http://www.thecriticalcouple.co.uk

Latest blog post - Oh my - someone needs a spell checker


#42 Jon Tseng

Jon Tseng
  • participating member
  • 2,077 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 02:22 PM

The Cube is an exceptional case. I think nearly every blogger of note has had a freebie there, and they continue to do so. I was offered a meal two weeks ago but turned it down.

Bugger. I've been blogging about cookbooks for a whole two months now and not been offered one freebie of note! Not even a copy of Jamie's Fifteen Minute Meals. Am clearly not doing enough to make myself notable! ;-p
More Cookbooks than Sense - my new Cookbook blog!

#43 Julian Teoh

Julian Teoh
  • participating member
  • 183 posts
  • Location:Singapore

Posted 19 November 2012 - 09:57 PM


The Cube is an exceptional case. I think nearly every blogger of note has had a freebie there, and they continue to do so. I was offered a meal two weeks ago but turned it down.

Bugger. I've been blogging about cookbooks for a whole two months now and not been offered one freebie of note! Not even a copy of Jamie's Fifteen Minute Meals. Am clearly not doing enough to make myself notable! ;-p


Jon and David,

You really should come out to Asia. Here in Singapore, it's part of the standard marketing routine to have a pack of bloggers (credible or otherwise) visit within a fortnight of opening, even at restaurants with world-famous chef-proprietors who really should know better.

Back on-topic, while I find the chefs' behaviour in this instance utterly repugnant and OTT, equally I find Isherwood's words and actions rather odd.

1. Re his excuse that he was on a date, he spoke to Bosi only after the meal, and he only had problems with one starter out of a "more than pleasant meal". Is this really the stuff that ruins dates?

2. His complaints about the sommelier are not very clear. If the sommelier sends you wine you didn't ask for, don't assume it's on the house, drink it and gripe about it afterwards when you get charged for it. Clarify the situation or send the wine back. If there's too much wine, tell the sommelier you've had enough.

3. If you are going to pre-announce yourself and ask for an interview, think of how you are coming across. You are announcing to the staff that you care about your dining experience (whether it's true or not) and that by God you're going to write about it. The chef, not unreasonably, may want to know what you think and you should be prepared to honestly interact with him. Tell him one starter wasn't to your taste. Tell him you found the wine service pushy. It's called a conversation.

It doesn't sound like Isherwood is a very experienced diner, but at the same time, these are points of commonsense, not the sacraments of some elitist cult.
Julian's Eating - Tales of Food and Drink

#44 Harters

Harters
  • participating member
  • 1,089 posts
  • Location:North Cheshire, UK

Posted 08 December 2012 - 04:52 AM

I've been watching "Professional Masterchef" this week and found it interesting how the three 2* chefs reacted and treated the contestants. On the one hand, right from the start, Tom Kerridge welcomed, guided and praised the two doing a service at the Hand & Flowers. Just as you'd expect a good manager to behave in any industry. And, at the other end of ths scale, I thought Marcus Wareing came across as a pretentious knobhead.
John Hartley

#45 Man

Man
  • participating member
  • 333 posts

Posted 08 December 2012 - 01:51 PM

I've been watching "Professional Masterchef" this week and found it interesting how the three 2* chefs reacted and treated the contestants. On the one hand, right from the start, Tom Kerridge welcomed, guided and praised the two doing a service at the Hand & Flowers. Just as you'd expect a good manager to behave in any industry. And, at the other end of ths scale, I thought Marcus Wareing came across as a pretentious knobhead.


My sentiment exactly. I didn't know Tom Kerridge and from the chefsunite story I assumed he was an uncouth bully. Instead he came across as warm, sympathetic and understanding, a gentle giant. Quite a change from the usual style of this part of the competition. A 2* without pressure. And by the way his dishes looked more inviting than Wareing's to me :cool:

#46 Harters

Harters
  • participating member
  • 1,089 posts
  • Location:North Cheshire, UK

Posted 08 December 2012 - 02:08 PM

I agree about the look of the dishes, Man.

We looked to having a meal at the Hand & Flowers in the summer when we were celebrating a major anniversary. Was going to go for lunch but we were seduced by Le Manoir. I know we made the right choice then but will probably have to have another schlep down south. Still can't get my head round the concept of a pub with 2*.
John Hartley

#47 offcentre

offcentre
  • participating member
  • 287 posts
  • Location:East Sussex

Posted 10 December 2012 - 04:35 AM

I really enjoy Professional Masterchef - I am surprised there is not more discussion about it on here. And yes, I agree with your comments regarding the striking difference in approach...I would have much rather been in the Hand and Flower's kitchen than MH or MW.

And I was very happy to see both chefs get through to the final in that episode, I think they are the two strongest all-round chef's and was a little disappointed to see them placed in a semi together. Although Michel obviously has a bit of a liking for the kid (who's name escapes me).

#48 bhsimon

bhsimon
  • participating member
  • 57 posts

Posted 10 December 2012 - 05:46 AM

'Opinions are like a?%£holes; everybody has one.' (Unknown)

'What chefs have to realize is that the people judging them know less about food than they do.' (Marco Pierre White)


Edited by bhsimon, 10 December 2012 - 05:47 AM.


#49 Harters

Harters
  • participating member
  • 1,089 posts
  • Location:North Cheshire, UK

Posted 10 December 2012 - 06:23 AM

'What chefs have to realize is that the people judging them know less about food than they do.' (Marco Pierre White)


To which the correct response is "All chefs, Marco? And all people?
John Hartley

#50 tsp.

tsp.
  • participating member
  • 52 posts

Posted 10 December 2012 - 03:58 PM

Plus the chance to do a bit of Food Bragging to their friends. Some diners get quite sycophantic about the celebrity chef dining scene - it is like collecting Michelin stars are the new cigarette cards.


Agreed.

#51 Mjx

Mjx
  • manager
  • 6,586 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 01:31 AM

'Opinions are like a?%£holes; everybody has one.' (Unknown)


And..?

'What chefs have to realize is that the people judging them know less about food than they do.' (Marco Pierre White)


Arguable: at least some of the people doing the judging are fellow chefs and others who are equally knowledgeable.

Regardless of the truth of the statement, it is irrelevant.

Seriously, stop and think about it: The chefs are preparing food for which they wish others to pay. If these 'others' don't consider the food worth seeking out and paying for, then this process comes to a halt.

Cooking for the unappreciative/clueless can be unbelievably frustrating and disappointing. Even I know this, from personal experience, which is one of the reasons I'd never, ever even consider being a chef. If I'm cooking for a bunch of people who simply stuff their faces with food, chewing without even pausing in their conversation, automatically pouring a flood of Heinz's over a reconceptualized, deconstructed Beef Wellington, that's not going to happen twice.

I know that people don't really change (neither the diners or the chef).

Surely, professional chefs must know this too, having lived on this planet amongst their fellow humans for several decades.

The fact that a chef may know more about food than the diners is not relevant, because the restaurant exists for the diners, not the chef.

It would be wonderful for chefs if virtually all the diners in a restaurant were dining out because they were interested in thoughtfully conceived, skilfully presented dishes, but that's never going to happen, since most people don't devote much conscious thought to food and eating. And some diners are unquestionably self-important ego trippers, just like some chefs.

However, even if it is apparently unbearable, you bear it if you're a restaurant chef, because unfortunately, this is what you signed on for: restaurants are full people, and, well, people can kind of suck.

Hurling babyish abuse makes no sense (and if we move past its putative shock value, calling someone a 'cunt' is as infantile and unintelligent as calling someone a 'poo head'). At best, no one will care. At worst, it alienates the small number of people who genuinely care about and appreciate a chef's efforts, but find screaming tantrums and public scenes so distasteful that they wish to distance themselves from its source, which is sad, because these are the diners are the restaurants should be paying attention to, the ones they want to attract.

'I'm off an a rampage because I'm standing behind my commitment/integrity' doesn't hold up as an argument, either, since that is accomplished by doing one's best job (i.e. they've probably already done that). If it really comes down to defending one's restaurant, fine, but credibility is only going to be maintained if the defence is couched in language that doesn't suggest a fight between small boys at a playground.

Is the possible relief of blowing off steam in public really worth the longer-term cost to the restaurant?

It would make more sense for chefs to form local supper clubs, where they could dine out on diner horror stories: the chef with the best (i.e. most appalling) diner story doesn't have to pay for his or her share of dinner that time round ;)

Michaela, aka "Mjx"
Manager, eG Forums
mscioscia@egstaff.org


#52 offcentre

offcentre
  • participating member
  • 287 posts
  • Location:East Sussex

Posted 11 December 2012 - 04:14 AM

I like this idea mjx - like poker players getting together to discuss bad beats. They would have a great time I'm sure. In fact they'll probably televise it and stick it on BBC2.

#53 bhsimon

bhsimon
  • participating member
  • 57 posts

Posted 11 December 2012 - 04:32 AM

And..?


I don't think this really needs explanation. Anyone can be a blogger; there's no barrier to entry. There's no mandated qualification. Of course, the same thing could be said about someone who cooks food for others. At least chefs have to obey by local food handling and preparation laws; there are some minimum standards. A blogger just needs a keyboard.

The fact that a chef may know more about food than the diners is not relevant, because the restaurant exists for the diners, not the chef.


Marco was referring to Michelin Star judges, not ordinary diners. I thought the quote was totally relevant when it comes to food bloggers, too.

I think you make some great points and, actually, I agree with you. Chefs must consider the diners. Nobody will eat sand, regardless of how many awards the chef has earned.

All these things aside, it is hard to argue that the chef was out of line with their response and they language they used. They just failed to realise that the opinions of one meaningless little blogger are not worth getting upset about.