Dirk Wheelan

My own opinion is that media cacophony created by MG is just not there on the plate. Sure, the Fat Duck and its clones are great for a one off meal, but I certainly wouldn't want to eat there more than once a year, let alone six. It's one thing producing food that can be talked about, but if I could eat at the Waterside Inn every meal of the rest of my life I'd die happy. As I said before, and despite the many claims made about it, MG doesn't deliver the goods in a similar way that knowing the scientific principles behind the internal combustion engine doesn't make you a better driver. But anyway, thanks for humouring me Jay.

I didn't realise that Jay had an unreserved enthusiasm for molecular gastronomy. What's your evidence for this statement Dirk? I'd love it if you could outline what "a firm basis in the actual eating of it" is. Maybe list for me where you need to have eaten to have an opinion that would be a considered one? Cheers. ← Just to give you an idea, MG's obvious, and best, proponent is Heston who Jay rates above anyone else. My experiences with the Fat Duck are that it's a great place to eat (once or twice), but that the static nature of the menus suggests that there's not much behind MG except a handful of new techniques. In other words, I think MG has failed to deliver, because it sounds a lot more interesting than it actually is. I think Jay, like a lot of people, has been caught up in the excitement of MG, and hasn't treated it with a critical eye. Otherwise, I'm sure that Jay's a great guy, I just don't rate the consistency of his taste (probably because it has little in common with my own).

I don't know if I'm allowed to say this but I don't much care for Jay Rayner's reviewing. I don't think he does know a great deal about food; I don't feel his unreserved enthusiasm for molecular gastronomy has a firm basis in the actual eating of it; and I don't find him very entertaining to read. Sorry

Very very true; empty vessels and so on. I've lived in both Paris and several cities in Spain and if there's one thing that's very noticeable apart from the food is that the hype is virtually non-existent. Living in London gives one the impression that it's happening place gastronomically only because it's constantly banged into our ears. Interestingly, get out of the English speaking world and you'll hear almost nothing of UK dining. There is plenty of good food to had in the London and the UK, but anyone who seriously believes that it is 'best' (or even among the best) is the victim of a fabrication of the English Speaking media, and really should try to get out more.

If you think about it for a moment, any city-special of any magazine is not going to sell many copies unless it presents that city as an absolute must see. London's a great food capital, but I don't think any of Gourmet's contributors genuinely believe it's the greatest. Like most writers, their job is to sell their publication, and without hyperbole they're not going to shift many copies. So Gourmet's claims are understandable given the context. What is harder to understand is that people believe them. Either you've eaten out a fair bit in Paris, Madrid, New York, etc. in which case you know it's not true, or you haven't and you're taking what you read at face value.

There's always room for another guide if it's good. I like Ronay's concept and choices. It also represents the regions well. He clearly has his ear to the ground, without being slavishly trendy. He rewards what he likes, not just conspicuous success, so it's obviously subjective, but I'd value Ronay's credentials for subjectivity over most other guides' and critics' attempts at objectivity any day. Like you say, it's about finding someone whose taste you trust. I know that Ronay is a notoriously demanding taskmaster of restaurateurs, and not at all one of these industry schmoozers, but he's very respected by his peers as a true gourmet whose many years of experience have honed his ability to separate quality from the bullshit that sometimes seems to characterize UK dining. This ability is reflected in his spot-on choices.

Michelin may have passed them over, but Egon Ronay thinks "Anthony Quinn" deserves a star in his new guide.

The Bedlington Cafe. 24 Fauconberg Road, London, W4 3JY. Greasy spoon by day, excellent BYO Thai by night. Has been living this double life for the past fifteen years or so, and has a very loyal following of both Chiswick locals, and Thai aficionados.

Do you mean 'anonymously', or perhaps 'unannounced'?

edited.

Despite featuring in Savuer magazine, are we really sure that Jay Rayner is the best person to answer the question, "why are British restaurant critics so crap?"

What Sam said. And that's me out of this one. ← I think you could have given them the benefit of the doubt. It's a rare thing for a national critic to venture so far north, and they probably fingered you straight away, perhaps they were overly nervous. Who wouldn't be?

I understand the problem from Jay Rayner's point if view as a diner, but surely as critic he shouldn't complicate the task of a restaurant in serving him, or, if he has to, at least not write about it. It just seems a bit unfair.

It really was like this and, imho, this was when it was at its best. I used to live nearby and I wouldn't be surprised if I was among the first hundred customers, lemon tart, parfait of foie gras, steak and chips with bone marrow sauce etc. I was quite a regular. Compared to the FD, Anthony's has hit the ground running, but when the buzz wears off I hope the team will be able to sustain the initial interest without succumbing to gimmicks, a la Heston. It would be a shame if Anthony Flinn turned out to be yet another chef who looked upon cooking as just a waystage in personal promotion. Hopefully, he'll be more Shaun Hill then Heston or Gordon.

I was impressed by my meal at Anthony's, I felt the food was excellent, i.e. 'modern delicious', rather than 'molecular pretentious'. However, the newness of the operation and the strain of very early (and deserved success) was palpable in the service, despite good intentions. It's not, to me at least, surprising that there are one or two negative comments to made about Anthony's, it's a really new operation. What's really surprising is that, given its newness, negative comments are so few and far between.

It's odd that the Waterside Inn doesn't get a mention. I know it's in Bray on Thames but then so is the Fat Duck and of course neither are in London. Perhaps the hundred yards down to the end of Ferry Lane makes all the difference.

Actually, that's a red herring Dirk. ← Erm,... no it's not. I think I pointed out my perspective at the beginning of the thread, but seeing as I haven't made myself clear I'll restate it. The cuisines that are successful in the U.K. are the ones that best lend themselves to the British expectations and assumptions of what a meal out should be -- sit down, dining room, waiting-staff, three courses, wine list, coffee etc. Cuisines that aren't like this, have either had to adapt to this model (think of all the posts on, "What is the best wine to drink with Indian/Chinese food?"), or aren't represented. Consider that the traiteur in France or the covered markets in Italy are also representative of the their respective cuisines yet are non existent in the UK. Likewise, is the absence of the street food vendors that are so characteristic of Asia, despite their being a surfeit of restaurants offering those cuisines. In the end, what we have in the UK are 'restaurants' adapted to our expectations. Things like tapas and pintxos; eating standing at the bar; and other defining qualities of Spain's diverse gastronomy just don't mesh with consumer habits here. And often when these things are adapted, as MobyP's post seems to imply, they lose something vital in the process.

Derek, thanks very much for your straightforward replies. In a world obsessed with doublespeak this is refreshing to read. To what extent is there a chummy dialogue between the guide and its more high profile entries, and how does this affect ratings and response times for their new ventures?

That would explain why there are now so many Japanese restaurants in the U.K. Thanks.

Maybe you don't have much experience with it, or maybe it's because there aren't any Spanish restaurants in Spain either. The cuisine of Spain is heavily regionalized, and consequently specifically local produce is its defining quality. It is also a cuisine of specialities, diners go to one place for fish, another for pork, and another for lamb. All this adds up to a confusing diversity, and a unique style of eating, neither of which export themselves terribly well, or mesh with the Franglo-Saxon 3 course knife and fork supper expectations to be found in Britain.

The Fat Duck website has had a pop-up announcing their three stars since January 2004. They don't seem to have suffered for it.

It is ridiculous, especially since really new arrivals such as Heston's Hinds Head have gone straight in with a 'bib'; how long has that been open, 2 months? Also notice that the Riverside Brasserie has lost its bib, is this due to no longer being Heston's? Edit: Definitely not buying the UK guide this year, it just diverges too much from my tastes now.

This wouldn't be the Ashley at the Fat Duck would it ?

Yes, is there congruence between the different national guides? For my tastes, a French star is worth about two in the U.K. and one and a half in Spain. Indeed, I just don't believe the U.K. has any three star dining, if by three star we mean the standard to found at Michel Bras or Pierre Gagnaire etc. Do you think you'd sell less U.K. guides if there were no three starred restaurants in the U.K? Have you considered doing a 'guide of guides' for Europe as whole, but ranking establishments on a Europe-wide criteria instead of a set of differing national criteria? It would make the list obsessed like myself very happy

Peter Barham seems to think so, "The Man Behind Blumenthal" (scroll down to 17/02/05)