Julian Teoh

After enduring one of the worst Sydney winters in memory (torrents of dumping rain, chill winds, no sun, you get the drift), I made the decision to pull up stumps and move to warmer climes. In anticipation of these joyful times, I had to re-visit Marque and set right what I thought was perhaps one of the worst memories of a dinner that I've had. I've only ever dined once before at Marque, and that was at the 2004 Good Food Month "Hats Off" dinner. I remember it because it bordered on the sublimely ridiculous. If I stand accused of unsophistication and a lack of understanding, then perhaps I may plead guilty and save everyone their time. But could sins like "guacamole" with cornflakes ever be redeemed? Or perhaps the farce that was the meringue with endive and matcha green tea? When Mark Best came out and stood at the doorway to thank everyone for their custom, I felt the sudden urge to inflict some serious bodily harm (upon persons unnamed, of course). The final nail in the coffin was when the "chocolate delice" dessert re-surfaced later that week at Marque's stall at the Good Food Fair. It is perhaps telling that for want of a better name for a chocolate terrine, Best (perhaps unintentionally) adopted the awful weasel word used by the Lindt Cafe for its equally ordinary macarons. It is worth noting that my dining companion on that night, whom I shall name S to spare her blushes, seemed to keep her distance after that dinner. So when S agreed to return to the scene of that last massacre, I was a little surprised, but pleasantly so. And not to detract from anything, Marque is indeed a very comfortable place to dine, much more so than the angular wood and steel-wrought edifice that is Rockpool. I apologise in advance to the pro photographers amongst us. Diners have the option of a la carte or an 8-course degustation. We choose the latter due to extreme indecisiveness. Amuse-bouche: Chaud-froid free range egg, Alain Passard 1998 If you didn't know that Mark Best trained under Alain Passard, now you do (it's printed as above on the menu). And we have eGullet and the plagiarism debate-thing to thank for that. To Best's credit, this is probably the best version I've had sent forth by a Passard disciple. Sherry vinegar, maple syrup, a slush of cold cream, warm coddled egg and house-made grissini. Perfect. First entree: Almond jelly, almond gazpacho, corn custard, blue swimmer crab, avruga caviar 2005 Domaine Pichot Vouvray Sec "Coteau de la Biche" Nice, texturally challenging. The crab meat is much sweeter than I expect from a blue swimmer. The gazpacho is foamed and is a wonderful medium for delivering the mild sweetness of almonds. Powdered popcorn added further textural interest. Second Entree: Cured Ocean Trout, Trout Roe, Citrus and Bush Samphire 2005 Crawford River Riesling This dish stirs recollections of fine Thai food, a perfect balance of salt, sweet and sour. A slash of orange emulsion, bits of pomelo, bush samphire, the acquiescent crunch of amazingly fresh trout roe. Third Entree: "Risotto" of South Australian calamari, Yamba prawn and lobster broth 2005 Salomon Undhof Kogl Riesling This was the most outrightly delicious dish of the night, by far and away the best thing I've eaten at a restaurant all year. Instead of rice grains, calamari is diced into little rice-like chunks, yet big enough to deliver a 1-2 combination of killer calamari goodness. Curry leaves create a nice base note against the higher sweet notes of the seafood. The only element which left me scratching my head was a flattened Yamba prawn - I'm sure it was a very nice prawn in its past life, but I couldn't tell now. Fourth Entree: Joselito Iberian Jamon with Belgian endive and parmesan custard 2004 Domaine Patrick Javillier Chardonnay Caramelised endive, raw endive. A little smidge of jamon on the side and a stingy dribble of delicious parmesan custard. That's it really, and the flavours really worked. However, the textural components failed to find any cohesion. The caramelised confit endive slid down the throat like a perfect little Sydney rock, but the raw counterpart had too persistently bitter an after taste, far outlasting the savoury notes. And I know jamon costs a bomb, but please, sir, I want some more. You never know, it could have saved the dish. First Main Course: Roast Jurassic Quail with Pumpkin Tofu, Pickled Onions, Sesame Salt and Lemon Confit 2005 Olssen "Bass Hill" Primitivo Pumpkin tofu is a light, sweet cube of manna that may have caused me to re-consider religion. Quail was well-cooked, and I loved the way the meyer lemon confit cut through the surprisingly big quail chunks. "Hence the Jurassic," said our helpful waiter, explaining that it was a breed of larger quail. Pork crackling powder lined the plate (a little more on that later). Second Main Course: Venison Loin with Potato Puree, Crispy brussel sprouts and mushroom salad 2004 Curlewis Syrah My wife asked me what the crispy little green things reminded me of. I replied "Wasabi green peas." S called me an idiot. I ignored her. My wife was similarly of no assistance to me. The venison, thankfully, relieved what could have been a rather testy situation. The totally unctuous potato puree reminded me why we go to restaurants - there are some things, no matter how hard you try, that cannot pretend to perfection. This came pretty damn close. Those who cannot stand false advertising should steer clear of the mushroom salad, which was a thatch of out-of-place enoki mushrooms, a grilled quarter of pine mushroom and the thinnest sliver of confit king oyster mushroom. Pre-dessert: Sauternes Custard with Caramel At this point, my camera carked it. Which was a good thing too. This dessert had the kick of an iron-shod mule. Dessert: Caramelised pineapple with Native Pepper Berry and Manjimup Truffle Icecream 2002 Chateau La Rame No great shakes, say my wife and S. Good thing too, that I asked to have the: Alternative Dessert: Caramelised Tomato stuffed with Twelve Flavours, Star Anise Icecream 2004 Muscat Beaumes de Venise This is probably the second most plagiarised dish in the world after the Arpege egg. I liked it, S told me it was revolting. Then again, I think she's just jealous. Petits Fours: Salted Caramel Chocolates, Apple Fruit Jellies with Kaffir Lime Sherbet Awaiting us at the finish line were these lovelies. Conclusion Wow. I'm impressed. Marque is really pushing the envelope in Sydney dining insofar as inventiveness of food goes. I don't think it's a coincidence that two of the other most innovative restaurants in Sydney, Oscillate Wildly and Bentley Bar and Restaurant, are steered by Marque alumni. My only gripe would be the recurrence of various powders - liquorice with the salmon (which was an inspired addition, I will concede), pork crackling, popcorn, and something nondescript with my tomato dessert. Maybe Best is riffing off the Joan Roca earth thing, I really don't know, but it got a little monotonous. As before, wine matching and general service were top-notch, the only saving grace of that last experience. Best's cooking has evolved well beyond the lessons of his mentors. When I compare this meal with Gunther Hubrechsen's (a former sous chef at L'Arpege) food at Singapore's Les Amis, Best relies on the best of local produce but unlike Hubrechsen's more cautious, conservative style, elevates them with challenging technique and innovative flavour combinations. Truly, it was rewarding to see a chef who unabashedly eschewed the "produce speaking for itself" thing and put his own distinctive signature on his cuisine. And really, who wants to see a talking Kangaroo island chicken? I wholeheartedly forgive Best for the sins of the past. Given the depravity of his past transgressions, that is high praise indeed.

We've probably moved on from the eating <insert food of choice here> with a knife and fork aspect of this thread, but in an interview some years back, Michel Rostang, a two-starred French chef, related a charming story of extremely bad service he encountered at a McDonald's in Paris: When we received our burgers, my wife asked the man at the counter for a knife and fork. He looked at us as if we were crazy!

MarketStEl, in some way, the simplest answer to your question is if food is grown in a manner acceptable according to "Slow Food," (or even organic farmers), you would lose the advantages of using GMOs with higher yields and immunity to disease, the protection from pest and disease through the use of chemical pesticides, the loss to productivity through use of chemical fertilisers and perhaps even intensive irrigation. And if we were to take it one step further and use livestock such as the black pig of Bigorre, the time and age at which these beasts become marketable puts you right behind the 8-ball in terms of making money. Yet many of your fixed costs would remain the same, such as the cost of farming land, and inputs such as tractors, petrol etc. This would result in increased spoilage and significantly reduced yields - the cost per unit to keep the farmers afloat would increase, thereby putting it beyond the affordability of most. On a less macro level, farms need to pay for organic certification, and the bureaucracy needs to ensure that members are complying with the set standards. In Australia, we are currently struggling with one of the worse droughts on record and cyclones which elevated the price of bananas to $14+ per kilo at one stage, so we are doing pretty badly on the affordable produce front without having to factor in all of the above. It is perhaps unfortunate that when it comes to maintaining a tight household budget, food is one of the prime examples where you can easily obtain "perfect substitutes" - a banana against an organic banana, for example. It is also true that the more well-off will be the ones able to afford this. If all mainstream farming reverted to the old ways, this would not be an issue. However, much of farming is dominated by the commercial clout of supermarket chains who are more interested in the cost and volume dimensions of production than concerns as to sustainability. Obviously, there will need to be a reckoning when breaking point approaches. Without being an apologist for Slow Food, whilst the affordability of good, clean and fair food for the everyman may be the eventual goal, it is clearly not realisable at the moment. It would take a serious realignment of priorities and thought processes for individuals, industry and government to make this possible.

Thanks to rancho_gordo for his thought-provoking post. I am a paid-up card-carrying Slow Food member, but I did not see rancho_gordo's post as divisive or overly critical. Without passing value judgments on the people at the market, I thought part of the Slow Food Manifesto was that traditional organic methods should be preserved without too much regard to the monetary cost of doing so. Therefore, consumers (or co-producers, as Petrini likes to term them) by implication should be prepared to pay a higher price for products that are good, clean and fair. After all, it is the commodification and "industrialisation" of agriculture (if that's not a contradiction in terms) and insane no-holds-barred cost-cutting that has reduced much of mainstream modern farming to what it is today. Articles in issue after issue of Slow are devoted to the unique produce of various communities and the cost of maintaining such practices without destroying the environment. Case in point: the Presidia and the Ark are filled with livestock breeds which do not grow as fast as your regular pink pig, and are therefore uncommercial to produce. What are you supposed to do? Slow Food exhorts you to fork out for flavour, keep the farmers and their traditional practices going and assist in the maintenance of genetic diversity. From that vantage point, is it therefore even valid for price comparisons to be made with "conventional" products (which I understand to mean mass-produced, chemical-influenced, GMOs)? Slow Food aims to stimulate demand for these traditional farming products by creating a bond between the producer and the consumer; the natural result of that is a price increase for the traditional product if demand is sufficient. If consumers value their organic produce enough to pay such a high price, I would say that the Ferry Plaza market is an expression, albeit one of many possible, of Slow Food's goals. I wholeheartedly agree with rancho_gordo that what any farmer does in their spare time is none of our business. Petrini's writing reeked of cynicism, as if he were grasping at some sort of journalistic angle and trying to flesh this angle out as best he could. The image of peppers being ostentatiously displayed as jewels seems an attempt to perpetuate the image of bad fat America where good produce is fetishi(z)ed and accessible only to the rich and glamorous. Again, my gratitude for bringing this to my attention. This thread should stay on the board as it brings a much-needed independent perspective on the movement. PS I don't even get a pin.

A while ago, I was lamenting the demise of Balzac at St Paul's, when Shinboners recommended Libertine as a suitable alternative. Since then, I've made quite a few trips to Melbourne and dined at quite a few decent places, somehow always managing to miss Libertine. Not this time. I would repeat Shinboners' observations about the decor and leave it at that. Our entrees of 6 escargots de bourgogne and Hervey Bay Scallops with salt cod salad arrived soon after we were seated. The snails were dry and overcooked, drowning in a torrent of parsleyed and garlicked oil. There was no pretence of slipping them in shells for presentation; if they were baked in the oil, they probably ended up deep-fried to a husk, which I suspect is precisely what happened. The scallops lacked caramelisation; sprinkles of fried shallots added a tantalising sweetness, but there was nothing doing to make me sit up and take notice. At this stage, the meal had a serious WTF factor. "Entree-itis" is a very common disease in Australian restaurants where the entrees pack serious flavour and artistic punch and the mains slide off into glorified meat-and-three-veg. Starting off with nuked snails and atypically boring shellfish, what further insults could we endure? That's where I didn't reckon with the joy of eating with your fingers. Mains were bouillabaisse and "poussin with wild mushrooms and cognac." Bouillabaisse had mussels, clams, fish, prawns, half a bug (smashing stuff) and half a crab (great). It didn't help that the first morsel I tasted (the clam) was overcooked, which led me into further inward anger and frustration. But the rest of it was divine, perked up with lots of fresh dill and a base of vermicelli. Very tender poussin was bathed in an intense stock, although I'm not sure that shiitake and wood-ear mushrooms classify as wild. Cognac added a nice woody sweetness to the very worthy chicken flavour. Dive in, get your hands dirty, the voices tell me. So with my fingers and napkin rapidly getting dirty and the juices (from the dishes, that is) rapidly intermingling, despite the early disappointments, I find myself almost forgiving the sins of the entrees. Almost. Where to from here? Cheese plate - rouzaire coulommieres (brie to you and me, or at least a very close relation thereto), roquefort by Papillon and caprinelle, aged goat cheese. Walnut toasts, quince paste, muscatels and slices of william pear are fitting companions. Nearing the end, I feel that forgiveness, very hard-earned in this materialistic and agnostic age, is extremely near. A dark chocolate souffle, which has the solid feel of having been reinforced with flour or some other sort of stabiliser, is almost devillish in its intent, especially after Matthew the Waiter slashes the souffle and fills it with warm white chocolate sauce. A scoop of white chocolate and raspberry ice cream completes the damnation. As a final benediction, Matthew solemnly pronounces that the calories from the chocolate do not count because it is Easter. Immediately, the burden lifts from our hearts, if not our waistlines. I'm a little conflicted about Libertine; I could so easily have done without the entrees, which added $35 to the bill, little by the way of bulk and nothing by the way of enjoyment. Yet the mains were finger-licking good in a way that would make the Colonel blush, the cheeses were served at a proper temperature and dessert was very good. Libertine is quite a decent place and I might be tempted to check it out again. But to keep some perspective, the excellent Vera is just down the road from where I'm staying, and I might well hear the siren's song of Barry's pommes frites before the long weekend is out.

Thanks for the clarification, SG. From observation, I always thought the foamy top resulted from the "tarik" action as opposed to "vigorous stirring." Despite the fact that the "tarik" technique is a mamak tradition, I've seen it many times recently in Ipoh coffee shops serving white coffee, albeit with less vigour and theatre.

Not going for the World Gourmet Summit in Singapore, are you?

Judd, Maybe I'm getting selective in my middle age, but was there a point in there where you disagreed with me? The point I was trying to make, and emphasised in my post, was that this "one-dish picture" was misleading, a snapshot in the 24-hour life of a restaurant which typically tried to underplay the profit margin. You have pointed out the empirical basis for that, for which I thank you, but you have reinforced the conclusion that I reached a few posts ago (or at least I think you have). Food costing is not an exact science, but at the same time, I can tell when it is wrong. The example provided is wrong. For instance, you point out that olives and bread etc need to be allocated somewhere. I agree with you, that's why I allowed the 2/3 cost. As you say, the best way would be to allocate it as a variable cost per cover, which it stricly speaking is, but in the example given, driving what should be a cost per cover to A dish is misleading. Exactly. But I think we've (or at least I have) reached the point when propaganda just doesn't do it for me anymore. My overarching point is that a review is the honestly held opinion of an individual. Whether you agree with the opinion or not is besides the point. It has no agenda of trying to slap the industry in the face, but merely to dish out praise and criticism where the critic believes it is warranted. If you believe the critic is exercising his voice in bad faith (as opposed to incompetence), that is an entirely different issue. On the other hand, the entire article from which the costing exercise was extracted was wholly, simply and purely a propaganda exercise. As I pointed out earlier and you elaborated upon and which I think we are all now agreed upon, the food costing exercise from the SMH article was merely a miscalculated microsnap of a much larger picture with the various complexities of business strategy, and therefore a load of bollocks insofar as it purported to depict the parlous state of the industry as a whole. Well, for a publication that purports to be the last word in mainstream wide-circulation food press, that was simply not good enough. As such, I would be interested in discussing how you thought this train was heading for a wreck. As there hadn't been a long comment in this topic for two weeks, I thought the train had pulled over at Central.

Putih means "white" in Malay. The coffee was developed in Ipoh, a wonderful former mining town about 2.5 hours drive north of KL and in my very biased opinion, home to Malaysia's best hawker food. This might be pure urban myth, but I was told by locals that what made white coffee special was the beans being roasted in margarine. Wikipedia disagrees with me, saying that all Malaysian coffee is roasted with margarine, but white coffee omits to add sugar during the roasting process, hence the lighter-coloured result. My favourite brand of instant is Ipoh Old Town, which comes in a charming package decorated with scenes of 1950s Ipoh and indeed, instant does a pretty good job of imitating the original (much much better than International Roast versus a proper espresso, at any rate) But IMHO, nothing beats pulling up a stool in an Old Town coffee shop and having it fresh. I find it strange that the pack doesn't say "Ipoh white coffee"; maybe it's become so popular that non-Ipoh manufacturers are now selling it. Speaking of which, I am running out of stock! Time for another trip home methinks.

The folks who used to be at Keyah Grande (their blog is called Ideas in Food) use blogs to share their ideas and work: Ideas in Food And here's one from Margot's in Padstow, UK, a fellow eGullet member: Margot's Taillevent has introduced about 4 blogs on their site, from Jean-Claude Vrinat and some of the staff at Les Caves Taillevent, their retail wine operation. However, the blogs aren't purely food-centric: Taillevent Hope that helps.

OK, this might be OT, in which case I seek moderation, but there was an article in Tuesday's Good Living about the closure of restaurants due to the razor-thin profit margins being run, which blamed in part the influence of reviews on custom at the top-end: SMH Good Living Article Within the article, you will find that George Gavalas of Salon Blanc has attempted to break down the cost of a dish he serves at the menu in order to illustrate the profit he makes on the dish. The breakdown is as follows: Crisp skin ocean trout with roast capsicum couscous, saffron and tomato vinaigrette Menu price $32 Costs Trout (200g) $6 Couscous (150g) 50c Currants (20g) 50c Saffron $1 Roast capsicum (25g) 75c French vinaigrette $1 Tomato essence 20c Sourdough roll 35c Italian olive oil (50ml) $1.35 Labour $10.50 GST $3.20 Operating costs (power, rent, administration, phones) $4.40 TOTAL $29.75 Profit $2.25 Now let me preface my comments by saying that I have never worked in a restaurant environment before, but this costing is inaccurate. And surprise! It puts his profit at a lower level than what it actually is. Look at how Mr Gavalas seeks to support this nation's economy by remitting more GST than he has to. Yep, he is remitting 10% of the total GST-inclusive price of $32.00 by deducting $3.20, when he should only be remitting around $2.90. When my old high school (public) finally gets air-conditioning in its demountable classrooms, I will thank him personally for it. Profits are up by 30 cents. And driving the entire cost of the sourdough roll and olive oil into the price of a main course? You can't drive your costs in that manner, especially as bread rolls are also served with entrees, and bearing in mind the current practice of serving only one bread roll and stopping bread service to that table. Allowing him 2/3 of the cost driven to this dish, his profit is still up by 0.57. The end profit (from the obvious mistakes, mind) is $3.12 per dish, or 9.75%. I'll be the first to concede that it's not a king's ransom, but it's still 39% more and a damn sight healthier than $2.25. And let's not forget that he's making a lot more $$$ on drinks, alcoholic or otherwise, side dishes ($8 for chips or green salad) etc etc. The breakdown of the dish's pricing, accurate or otherwise, is only one side of the picture, and not a very accurate one at that. It is one dish, but it's trying to be the final word in an article which trots out the story of "gee isn't the industry struggling with margins like this." Oh, and did I mention that Salon Blanc also has a tapas menu? I also find the comment that dining in the US and Europe costing around 30-40% more rather misleading. At the very high end, there may be some truth to this, but the Michelin-spangled great houses are not frequented by the everyman and prices are driven by wealthy visitors, or at least people who will think nothing of this splurge. At the low end (just above food courts, takeaways and cafes), eating in Paris can be much better value than eating in Sydney.

Duncan, If it is possible at all to say this in a non-patronising manner, thank you for an articulate and well-argued post. In defence of my position, I was not suggesting that eGulleteers' reviews were in any way faultless, or that we have experience superior in any way to that of the reviewers in the major papers. What I was intending to convey is that we are not bound by censorship of any sort and can express feelings and opinions genuinely held. Whether those opinions are justified is another question but we call it the way we see it. This is in contrast to reviewers in the non-blog / website press whose opinion pieces and reviews are themselves reviewed by in-house lawyers to ensure that there is no defamation, libel etc published which may land the publication in hot water. As you have suggested, you have seen the same happen to your previous work. Egullet reviews, whatever their faults may be, are not subject to that particular one. Does anyone honestly believe that reviews should be sanitised? Like I pointed out before, SMH reviews (and Duncan's previous work) are heavily edited. Should we be at pains to disguise the truth? I note Pat's post re Franz Scheurer's policy, but I can recall various instances when Franz has damned a few places with faint praise, and the review hardly sounds encouraging in the least. There are places for cleaned-up reviews, but I hardly think a quality broadsheet paper is one of them. If we are to make an exception for the restaurant industry, there is no plausible reason for not extending the same courtesy to other industries and their "critics," such as theatre, art etc etc.

Hi cookaburra, Thanks for the review. My experience with the service was very different though...when the waiter first came to offer us wine, he also offered water. When we were there, the staff were very attentive, except when the time came to pay the bill; however, the dim lights had come on by then, so maybe they couldn't see me waving the magic plastic card around. I'm puzzled as to why they seemed so indifferent, notwithstanding the rock star presence (who were they, BTW?), but surely the place wouldn't be that crowded on a Tuesday night? I was there on the Friday and it was packed to the rafters early on, but I was served on time and the waitstaff did their thing OK.

Ouch Judd, I am not disputing the fact that Atelier was crap on the night that you went, or that it would have been better on a different night if chef was not sick. You say you would have chosen your words more carefully if you had a larger forum - but the language of Thomsen & Co does not come close to what you dished out to Atelier. We saw what happened when Matthew Evans gave a serve to Coco Roco - bring in the lawyers, boys, and let's rack up the legal bills. The reviews in the SMH, compared to the honest talk dished out here by all of us, me included, are largely sanitised. I'm not OK with the concept that reviewers control the industry, but I disagree that they do. Sure they might engage the fickle swinging custom. But like I said, it is a matter of a personally-held opinion. He can say he doesn't like it. I don't have an issue with that. If people can't make up their own minds and instead rely on the word of one man whom they've never met and will not get to know any better than reading his weekly column on Tuesdays, that's their problem. If readers read the reviews as gospel and not as the writings of one man who is paid to do a job, then they are reading a little too much into it. But if the opinion is honestly held and is not malicious, what do you really want the reviewer to do? Make it up and say the meal was good when it wasn't just so XXXX gets paid for the last shipment of kingfish? That is the default position if you are not going to let reviewers express their honest (if again, largely sanitised, edited and cleaned-up) opinions. Agreed re the eating of one's gun and the inequity of the hat system. However, I do not want a review to be whitewashed; if I want to read a nothing-but-praise review, I can rely on my local Cumberland newspaper or mX.

Someone will put the collective industry boot into me for saying this. Whilst I don't doubt the sincerity of the letter, this letter is clearly an argument in service of the industry and conveniently disregards the fact that the restaurant industry, like many other industries, is a service provider in a commercial context. If the writer had watched the cycles closely, he would have noticed that the days of excess have not been with us for a very long time. With financial pressures from other directions such as rising house prices almost universally across the country, consumers are ever on the lookout for less pricey dining options. We should remember one thing. The industry exists to provide what in some cases is a necessary service, in other cases, a luxury. It does not exist merely for the sake of providing employment and profit for suppliers and restaurateurs. If you price yourself out of reach, demand will correspondingly drop, simple as that, as in any other industry. I work in a service industry; if I don't provide service at what the customer believes is "value for money," then I go out of business. Look at all the enterprises moving overseas to preserve their profit margins. It doesn't matter whether I think it is value for money or whether I feel I am selling at beneath cost or what makes it worthwhile; it all relies on the customer perspective. By all means, reduce working hours, hire more cooks to compensate, double the cooks' wages and incorporate that and all your other overhead into the cost you are charging, then see how many people even bother darkening your door. I AM NOT SAYING THAT I DON'T SYMPATHISE WITH THE AUTHOR'S VIEWPOINT, but unfortunately this is commercial reality in any line of work, and is not peculiar to F&B. Now if the debate is centred on what influence Simon Thomsen and other reviewers have, that is a problem that resides within the consumer, not the reviewer. I ate at the Summit a few days before Thomsen's review came out, and discounting the fact that I had none of the dishes he ordered, you couldn't believe we were dining in the same restaurant, short of the fact that we were rotating and the views were great. But the writer's "request" is disingenuous - Thomsen's viewpoint is his and his alone. If Thomsen & Co bears the influence, that is because people wish to follow him and can't make up their own minds or don't trust their own palates enough. That is due to a lack of knowledge and sophistication on the part of the dining public. I understand that reviewers can be seen to wield disproportionate influence; to the Herald's credit, they have recently been trying to emphasise that the judgment is not perceived as an objective measure of the restaurant's worth, for example, the size of the numerical score is minimised relative to the size of the review, the "scale" of scores is no longer published in the hardcopy edition and they have dropped the terminology of "best" in the Good Food Guide in favour of "favourite." If Thomsen doesn't like the way the produce was presented, he is entitled to his view, as am I or anyone else is. However, the fact that Thomsen is speaking to more people simply means he is accountable to a larger audience for his work, it shouldn't make him any less honest in reporting it. (look at the criticism of NYT's Frank Bruni on eG's New York Forum and various other websites). I know Judd hasn't expressed an opinion on the issues raised in the letter, but look at his recent brutal review of Restaurant Atelier on this board. Do I agree? I can't comment because I haven't been, though that's not due to his comments. Do I appreciate his honesty? Absolutely. As for the "request," that is tantamount to asking Thomsen "Please don't call a spade a spade." Thomsen is writing for the dining public in describing his experience, he is not an industry advocate. When the reviewers are controlled by the industry they are seeking to review, that will be a sad day in the history of free speech, if it hasn't already happened. I am not debating that the industry is in a bad state or that people are struggling with their livelihoods. These are valid points and my sympathy goes out to those affected. However, in a greater context, that is true of any industry, and to pretend that these problems are endemic to the restaurant industry is sheer delusion; whether the industry has been unable to cope with these problems as well as others is not a question I am about to address here, suffice to say that "charging a hell of a lot more than they do" is not a solution. End of rant.

Cookaburra, By coincidence, I ate at the Summit on the Friday evening before the Good Living review was published. I thought it was excellent, the view notwithstanding. By further coincidence, none of the dishes that we ordered were the same as those discussed (and generally slagged upon) in the review. And I did not encounter any of the problems which were highlighted in the review. We had: Entrees - Beef carpaccio with dukkah coated egg; some sort of tart with beetroot and slow cooked onions - good stuff! Mains - Roasted snapper with potato champ (great); some sort of lamb rack Dessert - Framboisier - smashing (This was the only dish-in-common which Simon Thomsen reviewed, and I'll be damned if he has gotten over the "cultural cringe"). I was contemplating ordering the Lenotre "daily special" of a chocolate cone filled with more chocolate but decided against it. In short, you are right - it is nowhere near as bad as the review. These days, I tend to read the Good Living reviews more for personal amusement than for dining tips. Enjoy your dinner tonight, I'm sure you will. Looking forward to your report.

Being an occasional tourist to Melbourne myself, I can recommend the following: - Pellegrini's, 66 Bourke St, around $12 a main course. Hearty pastas and good coffee. Dessert around $4-5, so it makes your budget. Someone told me they charge you based on how you look (the better you look the cheaper), but I can't confirm the veracity of such vicious rumours. - Piadina Slowfood, 57 Lonsdale St, around $10 for a decent bowl of stew or slow-cooked something else and piadina. It's only open on weekdays as it's slap-bang in the heart of the corporate district. - Further on Beandork's post, there's a lively branch of everyone's favourite La Porchetta (I think it's located in a pub) just down the street from the QVM; terrifyingly large serves that will scare the kids from around $9 a main course. Hope that helps.

Since Maliaty evinced a reluctance to return to Tetsuya but not Rockpool, I cast my vote for Rockpool. The current degustation menu is an absolute rip-snorter. 13 courses of sheer bliss. It took me over 3.5 hours to finish the meal, and trust me, we were not lingering. At $175, it's a considerable investment but the returns are indeed handsome. I would also recommend Astral at Star City (which comes with the Entertainment Book bonus - save 25% up to $50 or something). Stay away from the more experimental dishes like apple powder and apple foams; Sean Connolly is a fine classically-trained chef and his "non-avant garde" but modern dishes can be quite remarkable. There's also always a foie gras dish on the menu somewhere if you are into that kind of thing. The wine list is excellent. Let them know you are celebrating an occasion and they'll plonk you by the window with a marvellous view of the Sydney skyline, and maybe send you off with a complimentary plate of nibblies as a present.

In response to Kent's query, I'm not sure what the menus of Chinese restaurants in the States are like, but if they are anything like the corner takeaway ones here in Australia, the large number of dishes is often due to a variation in protein. For example, there will be around 8-10 standard sauces (like sweet n' sour, plum, satay, kung pao, mongolian, honey etc etc) and they will form the base of the dish with proteins such as prawn, chicken, lamb, fish, duck, pork and beef. Whilst the menus are still large, there is a huge distortion effect due to this kind of menu listing. Also, if takeaway forms the bulk of their business, expenses like rent, waiters, dishwashers etc decrease greatly. Huge turnover also helps. The comments about "under the table" practices are spot-on; in many Chinese places, for example near the college where I studied, there is a whole street of Asian restaurants catering to the student population. Sometimes, you would see the Asian international students working there for straight cash payments. Having said that, I am reminded of an immigration raid on the famous Doyles Restaurant at Watsons Bay, Sydney. Around 12 staff were expelled for working without legit permits. Goes to show indeed that it can happen anywhere.

My partner and I spent an amazing weekend at The Loose Box...well actually, it was a Thursday night, not a weekend, as you can't get a dinner / accommodation booking there on the weekend until March. At least that was the case last December. I am not going to say too much as I have been retained to write a couple of articles about it, but the menu was as follows: Amuse-bouche: frittata Appetisers: Prawn and coconut broth with kaffir lime leaf Socca (nicoise chick-pea crepe) with eggplant confit Entrees: Roasted WA prawns with saffron emulsion Veal kidney "chasseur" en croustade Compliments of the Chef: "Sausage" of chicken mousseline stuffed with deboned pig trotter topped with shavings of Manjimup black truffles and Dijon mustard sauce. Mains: Amelia Park rack of lamb with truffle infused mash, star anise and cardamom Daube of beef cheek in shiraz sauce, mashed potato Green leaf salad with reggiano and balsamic Desserts: Cheese Plate Raspberry "Clafoutis" layered with custard and meringue Coffee (of your choice) and petits fours The meal was excellent. Alain Fabregues (MOF 1991) is perhaps one of the finest technicians of French cuisine I have come across, not just in Australia but overseas as well, and he is possessed of remarkable intelligence and charisma. Fabregues was also the "name chef" in the Genting bid to build an Integrated Resort on Singapore's Sentosa Island. It will be interesting to see how he juggles The Loose Box with his duties there, which will include a restaurant and a truffle boutique selling fresh Manjimup black truffles. The price at dinner is $120 a head plus drinks and service. If you are staying the night, the package for accommodation, dinner and breakfast for two is $440.00. "Accommodation" is a luxury cottage in the self-contained grounds behind the restaurant, a very intimate and comfortable environment. Breakfast consists of a carved rockmelon stuffed with strawberries, house-made strawberry jam and butter, spinach quiche, brioche, glazed fruit loaf, croissant, a gi-normous bowl of muesli (plus milk) and a flask of juice. The only weakness is that I find the by-the-glass wine selection a bit limited. For couples, and presuming you aren't ordering two bottles of wine for two, you may have to pick an all-rounder like an aged sparkling rose or a lighter red to suit all of the courses. Otherwise, full marks to the crew for a thoroughly professional pampering. Contrary to reports you might hear, I didn't find the food here to be outdated. Sure, there are visual flourishes that you may not have seen for a while, for example, the stylised meringue dove on top of your dessert or the little heart designs artfully teased into the gravy of your daube, but I find these little tricks a perfect prelude to the pleasure of eating. The Loose Box has been around for a while, and frankly, I hope it hangs around for a lot longer.

PCL, I'm going to beat this drum for a while, because it is Visit Malaysia Year 2007 and Malaysia's 50th anniversary of nationhood, meaning that lots of people are going to be visiting the country. And if the experience is as bad as you say it is, it's going to reflect very poorly on the way we do things. My hometown of Ipoh is scrubbing up very nicely for the festivities, and wouldn't it be a right shame if our hospitality (for which I might add we are justifiably renowned, at least on a historical basis) just fell way short of the mark? I think we owe it to the country and Malaysia's dining fraternity in general to draw the attention of management to these defects. As diners, we are more than just stakeholders, despite what some prima donna chefs might think - we drive the entire industry. Without us and our dollars, the industry runs out of puff. It is not a case of "if you build it, they will come." It is "they will come if you build something good, and they will never come back if you serve crap steaks." Often, there is some slave driver hardcore career hospitality / chef expat, especially behind hotel F&B operations, and they will take action if the service experience does not live up to standards. So please, take a couple of minutes to alert the higher-ups about the fact that we are being given poor food and poor service and that this is totally unacceptable. If they continue on without being alerted to the problem, things will chug along as normal, to everyone's detriment. That's my whinge for today.

Hi Ken, Are we talking about buying the raw meat or restaurant -prepared meals?

Nice report, Peter. I look forward to the next instalment. I got the impression that the Norwegians had the premium seafood supply pretty much locked up in Singapore, especially to large consumers such as hotel F&B outlets and Chinese restaurants for Chinese delicacies such as yee sang or hotel seafood buffets. ANZ have the red meat market, due to the ban on USA beef from the mad cow outbreak, but with the return of USA Prime Beef, which Singaporeans seem to prefer to the Australian product, that market might be under threat as well. Obviously, please correct me on either count if I am mistaken. The Norwegians have really invested big-time in the WGS, which is plainly evident in the fact that every year in living memory (since 2003), one of the featured Masterchefs is a (current or previously) Michelin-starred Norwegian chef who specialises in cooking Norwegian seafood (Hellstrom, Stiansen, Ness). In my befuddled and noncommittal manner, I thoroughly loved the event and the hospitality, but I hate the over-commercialised aspects of it. I appreciate that you need sponsors, but does my duck breast need to come with "US Potato" matafans, or my dessert come with a "California raisin" crisp? I can vouch for Pavanello, especially in the sweets department. WGS 2005, pannacotta of gorgonzola dolcelatte with a puree of mustard fruits. Paired with Frescobaldi's vin santo for a spicy and delicately sweet finish that cleanses your palate as thoroughly as Listerine mouthwash, but in a good way. Now, back to the food...

Thank you for the kind comments, Peter. I wholeheartedly agree, I'd rather pay $200 for a great meal than $50 for a bad one. And given the quality and premium nature of ingredients, such as clam, Alaskan crab, foie gras, langoustine, wagyu beef, I'm actually inclined to think of it as somewhat of a bargain. Sadly, there won't be a review of Iggy's, at least not from me. Given our short time in Singapore, we were running around like headless chickens and it was hard enough setting aside one entire evening for a formal dinner.

I should also add the following: During a three-hour stop in Singapore on my way home, I discovered the most wonderful chicken rice at Bukit Panjang Plaza's "Kopitiam" cash-free eating outlet. A fortunate occurrence in a way, as I had previously spent a week in Singapore before that and couldn't find chicken rice of any noteworthy calibre. The rice dude probably thinks of himself as a bit of an artist; he slices off thin fillets from the breast, thigh and drumstick areas and chop them up. The pieces all end up looking the same (even the colour contrast of the dark meat is somewhat lost) but the flavours and textures are remarkably different. It goes without saying, of course, that the rice is absolutely divine.