jayrayner
-
Posts
589 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Help Articles
Posts posted by jayrayner
-
-
In addition to service questions (see 'A Glass Half Full?'), The Box Tree thread also prompted me to ask you about British restaurant reviewers and their seeming propensity to review a restaurant after a single visit. It seems that the reviews of The Box tree were written after a single visit, or at least that's the impression I got. Am I correct in this assumption?
If so, is it because the budgets of even the national newspapers/magazines don't allow for multiple visits given the horrific expense, especially in London? As it takes greater effort (and perhaps knowledge) to qualify for a driver's license than the postion of large-circulation restaurant reviewer, I was wondering if it asks on the job application: Are you (check one) (a.) not very, (b.) quite, or (c.) very clairvoyant?
Because as any critic worth their salt might allow, restaurants can and do change from night to night, as well as over longer periods of time; a decent critic can tell you if chef fought or made love with his girlfriend that afternoon. That change and lack of consistency is especially true of new restaurants still gaining traction; ironically that is the stage in a restaurant's life when most reviews take place.
Perhaps even more ironic however, is the fact that the financial editors of the same periodicals would never consider reviewing other businesses (and forecasting their future prospects) after a mere two hour visit--much more due diligence would be required of the reporter. Why does this seemingly not hold true in the UK for restaurant businesses?
So, for the most part are they one-shot wonders? Or do critics of conscience revisit (as in the methodology of The New York Times) until they're sure that they have gotten the full measure of the establishment, especially in tasting most of the menu? I ask this realizing that there are some cartoonish characters such as the oxymoronically named Michael Winner and AA Gill who could as easily be writing about The Norfolk Small Animal Auction as food and no doubt should.
But for the most part, what's the deal--and the rationale?
THe March issue of Saveur has a piece on the differences between US and UK restaurant critics by, er, me. It goes into all this stuff.
-
Matt and Scott and Andy - YOU ARE ALL MISSING THE POINT.
Jay and Gary made a request, whether it was petty, not to you liking, or whatever - HE MADE A REQUEST. THAT (IMHO reasonable) REQUEST WAS NOT MET ON 4 (FOUR) OCCASIONS.
I would be pissed off too, and service failure - to me- would be an integral part of the meal experience.
What Sam said.
And that's me out of this one.
-
As with most things, I do it to piss you off.
-
I don't think Jay is trying to stamp out wine pouring, just asking for something easy to do, similar to his 1/4 past the hour quirk.
I'm sure you realise that comment was made in jest, however, I do see a picture building up here; "I'd like to come at quarter past the hour, not half past, not on the hour but quarter past. And I must pour my own wine. Make sure they all know about that. And I want that table, the one Michael Winner always sits at..."
I have no problem with wine pouring in restaurants. If that's what you want, fine. Here's the thing: I drink faster than my wife, but we always have an equal share. You keep filling me up as I drink, and I'm left calculating how much I've had against her and when I should stop and... oh sod, let me pour my own wine and then I don't have to worry about it.
The wine pouring test for me is not about pouring wine. It's about communication between front of house staff. If I want something done a particular way, and the something is not ludicrous (bring me the chef naked and have him belly dance before me every hour on the hour etc) I should only have to tell one member of staff and they'll pass it on. When you end up batting away the wine pourers like they're flies it gets irritating and is a clear sign that nobody is talking to each other.
I'll shut up now.
-
Andy, why is wine poured by waiters intrinsic to quailty service?
Thats not what I said.
However, pouring wine at the appropriate time can be an indication that the front of house are being properly attentive to the customers needs and not just going through the motions.
Put this another way, what if I visited a restaurant that doesn't usually pour wine for it's customers (due to the size of the restaurant, the available number of staff or simply a wish not to be formal), and I demanded that someone pour my wine for me. If that didn't happen, would I then be in a position to say that they had failed my test of good service? Should I be able mark them down for it?
You have to qualify and contextualise the statement that "good service is about giving the guest the experience he/she wants", otherwise the next time I come to Margots I'll be demanding to end the evening with a line of coke and a lap dance from Jordan.
I think Simon Gueller could be forgiven, if when he read the review, for thinking "f***ing hell, now he's criticising us for pouring his wine." I could be way off beam here (I have been before and I will be again no doubt), but I think in the context of that review it was a petty remark and an unnecessary twist of the knife.
WHat a load of total bollocks Andy. It cost £180 for two. And at that price if I say I'll pour the bloody wine myself it should not be too much trouble for the waiter I've spoken to, to pass it on to his colleagues. They didn't do that (not once but four times).
Restaurants in this country are generally too expensive. The least those large sums should get you is a waiting staff who can respond to a polite request. You sound like a maiden aunt, ticking off their nephew for not knowing how to behave. It's that kind of response which holds this country back from getting the kind of service it deserves. Not least because, when wine waiters fill your glass they're not just attending to your needs; they're flogging wine.
-
One of the foods I always miss most when living in the UK is buffalo wings.
Once, in desperation, I had some Pizza Hut barbecue wings to try to placate my yearnings, but it's not even remotely the same. Now obviously I can learn to make them myself, but really - is there anywhere in the UK which sells buffalo wings? (Especially restaurants, although I'd be interested in grocery stores too.)
Joe Allens, Exeter Street. USed to do a more than servicable version.
-
Nothing from The Observer this week (but if I'm wrong I'm sure Jay will send us a link.
How could I dissapoint you?Go here to read a short discussion of my musings on 2005.
-
My pleasure. And, for the record, the acknowledgements are in all the editions (including the upcoming German and Russian editions; expect some cryrillic posts anyday soon.)
-
It's a slim week for the Media Round Up, only Jay Rayner has kept fighting the good fight with this review of Amaya in Knightsbridge from The Observer
I'm a trooper me, and don't you forget it.
Either that or I haven't got a life.
-
Far be it from me to redeem anybody, but I do so hate you all being without a link.
So, this week's adventure in California, in which I manage a mere 26 courses. Enjoy it here though not half as much as I did.
-
i rest my case on my critique of fay maschler's ill-informed review
i wonder if jay rayner had a look at this thread before heading over to gaucho grill...
-che
no, but I have now.
-
I think what Jay's saying is that if you're spending that kind of money at a top end restaurant then it shouldn't be such a pain in the arse to do so.
You know I think the man's got it. Or at least looking at first sentence of my piece - 'Why does eating in some expensive restaurants have to be such a hassle?' - I think he has.
I return to my first intervention. I thought the argument in my review had been pretty clear, but as the discussion over what the hell I was going on about extends to its second page, I have to conclude that it wasn't.
Note to self: try harder next time.
BTW - anybody fancy the ROKA bet again?
-
Jay
I'm just wounded on their behalf as they're so under-publicised and the first exposure in a long time is sadly a shotgun to the head of the new restaurant manager.
PS Like your book, gonna review it on our website.
As I said in my piece, it pained me too. Nicholls really is a big man in this world. Re the lack of coverage that was a strategy on their part. they felt Hywel Jones got too many column inches too soon, and that it was a hinderance rather than a help. SO they let Staines keep his head down. When Nicholls talked up his boy to me, it was his way of saying now's a good time to go and have a look.
Which again, only pains me. But I still hold to the point: all this stuff is relevant to the enjoyment of a night out. And I came away from the table thinking why did they have to be such a hassle. So that's the piece I wrote.
Glad you liked the book though. I'll stop by and have a butchers at the review.
-
Cheap shot. I think everybody should get the red carpet treatment at those prices. And the fuck up with the main course really was dismal. ANyway I wasn't the one who pulled out the 8.15 thing. My piece was about the accretion of detail. But I'm glad you've had good experiences there.
-
At which point I would love to see some Americans chip in with their views on this service issue.
-
Once I've put my youngest to bed (my task on an evening like this) the earliest I can get out of the house is 7.30pm. It takes me 45 minutes to get to town. I want to sit down to dinner the moment I'm ready to do so. So that's 8.15 then.
All this detail is irrelevant of course. The point I was making is that when the bill heads comfortably towards two ton you should be able to say I want a table for 8.05 or 8.10 or for any time I bloody well please and they should just say 'how many for?'
So yeah, sometimes I want to eat at a quarter past the hour and why shouldn't I?
-
Perhaps if I feel the need to explain my review, it didn't do it's job. Certainly posting a reply here is a great displacement activity from writing the next one.
BAsildog has got it: pile all that stuff on and you raise the bar. It wasn't just the 15 minute thing or the credit card thing (Although those combined with the empty tables do mount up); it was the hassle level of the whole experience. And it raised this simple issue with me about how much of a pain in the arse etaing out at this level can be. And if that's what's going through my head while I'm sitting there eating the food then that, I decided, was what I ought to write about: the experience of the restaurant.
I will confess, as I pretty much said in the piece, it pained me to do so. David Nicholls, Exec chef at the hotel, is superb. One of those names not many people outside of the business know but should. I went because he said his boy was on top form (And food wise, he is); it was everything else that riled me. Which I hope was what my review said.
Now, time to go and take down the Gaucho Grill. Carpaccio ceviche anyone?
-
Bet you 10 quid Jay Rayner reviews Roka next week. Because this week he's at Le Bouchon Bordelais in Clapham.
I'll take that bet.
-
Chapters is Canadian. Very often in Canada we'll get UK books before the US release date. (Even better, still with the correct spellings and wording as the author intended.)
That makes sense. The Canadian edition, in paperback, was published about three weeks ago: same cover and title as the US, only earlier you lucky things.
-
Forgive me for being so ignorant but is chapters a bookshop? If so it's curious; the books not out in the US for six weeks.
-
Well, it's the southern US and I think the word 'deserves' is spelt correctly, even in the proof but apart from that it's fine.
CompassRose, as ever amazon.com is offering the book at a pretty good discount. And anybody who would like to read more can go to
Which is named after the UK title. There you'll find an outline, excerpt from the book, links to british reviews, links to all my restaurant reviews for the past four years and, most importantly, an apology log where you can apologise for all the terrible crimes you have committed.
And that's probably enough hard sell. For now.
-
Anyone else spot Jay Rayner at table on tonights show? Maybe we can expect a full report tomorrow.
Jolly good eye sight mate. Yes, I was there. Let's see what turns up on tonight's edition. And I also have to check whether I'm writing it up for the day job.
But I'll say this. We got fed, three courses. Nothing trully repulsive. The emergency mars bar stayed in my top pocket. But was the food up to the quality of Ramsay's? No, obviously not.
-
I refuse to sit on my hands. In the spectrum of crap reality progs this comes out near the top for me. It seems to me to be a C4 programme on ITV. And the kitchen stuff is intriguing. this bunch of d listers are clearly learning something. (My money's on Al Murray.)
Re Harnett and Sergeant, get a grip. Do you think they both work 14 services a week? they both have seconds who can run the kitchen without them. Frankly it was a huge pleasure to see Angela with her back to the wall for once rathre than floating serenly through it all. I'm hooked.
-
Deep breath time.
Whenever I'm asked what the job of a restaurant critic is, I say exactly what Basildog says: to sell newspapers. By saying that, I'm stating what our job isn't. It isn't to serve the restaurant industry. They can read caterer or restaurant magazine for that. Nor, frankly, is it to serve the type of people who populate this board. People with a highly developed interest in restaurants are never likely to be satisfied with the kind of criticism published in national papers. (It's the same with classicla music or art; you should hear what the buffs say about national newspaper critics in those disciplines.) With the best will in the world the type of restaurant write ups here, while fascinating to us, would be as mogadon to the majority of the general readership.
On the other hand I would hope that people here would take the fact that I and Circeplum hang out on egullet as an indication of the level of our interest. I don't loiter about egullet for my health. I do so because I'm tragically interested in restaurants.
Does my definition of the job mean therefore, that a restaurant column can be a long drawn out tea time of the soul for the critic? Personally, I hope not. Within the definition I've given there's good and bad. I regard my job (and forgive me if this seems a bit willow-the-wisp) as being about communicating the pleasure of a particular type of experience: going out to eat. That means finding common ground, rather than occupying the high ground; talking about the food, obviously, but finding a way to do so that is neither repetitive nor glib. (I always say that writing one restaurant column is a piece of piss; writing the 234th is the real problem). And it has to be entertaining. If it ain't, it's a waste of ink and paper.
I think Gill, as quoted by Bourdain, is spot on. I wouldn't expect the likes of disgusted to agree. On the other hand, if we were such pariahs for the restaurant industry why do I have a propoganda pile of press releases a foot and a half high at my side? For what it's worth, five years in the job as taught me that an up review can do a restaurant serious good; a bad review makes no difference whatsoever.
British Restaurant 'Critics'
in United Kingdom & Ireland: Dining
Posted
Because more people go to restaurants than play Bridge, and when they do they are less obsessed with the detail of the restaurant's functionality than the bridge obsessive is with the play of cards. As I've said many times the people who post here on egullet are far more interested in the nitty gritty of restaurants than the general reader (though I don't believe that means restaurant columns should be Deborah Rossesque streams of sconsciousness about the trials of being Deborah Ross.)