thevoiceofreasonanddissent

Thanks Andy for correcting my web site connection problem. Will book a table at Lola's I think and check it out...

I have been away and came back last week. I read the Giles Coren review of Lolas last Saturday in the Times, and thought it sounded fabulous. He is normally quite critical of at least something when he reviews a restaurant, but he seemed to be saying that in his opinion this new Chef was as good as, if not better than Tom Aikin... I have always liked Lola's, but this new Chef seems to be doing some wonderful things. Has anyone been recently? I have some clients who would like to dine in North London and I think Lola's would be a very interesting place to take them (Still seems a good wine lovers place??....) Review is here.. Lola's (Has this web page been posted correctly?)

Tend to agree with the current thread of these postings...Fergus Henderson is a fine chef and should be applauded for championing the style of food he cooks, but St John has never made me bounce off the rafters with excitement in spite of this.. and the glassware is utterly deplorable - why bother putting together a decent wine list when you are serving the wine from beakers? ps Could anyone direct me how to quote from a previous posting?

Not eaten anywhere that interesting lately Jon, had to cancel both reservations at Aiken and Boxwood for various reasons. Eat at The Ivy last night, food fine, at the Almeida, food fine, but will report on Aiken/Gilles (have re reserved for next week)

Dear "Dave the Cook", in reply to your train of thought (which is somewhat confusing) and therefore not necessarily an appropriate response..all opinions are subjective (of course) but all of us who voice them have a duty of care to ensure that they are as "objective" as possible and not just an opportunity to mud fling or use the forum as a platform to express one's own prejudices. Reviewers of restaurants are often maligned on this forum (Giles Coren, Jay Rayner, Adrian Gill) for being biased, partisan or just plain irrelevant whilst the forum itself is so BILIOUS, it justifies the name E-gullet. Even these reviewers I have just mentioned express their own bias, and can on occasion be accused of innapropriate remarks. However, these sort of forums arent meant to be a free for all "I'm going to tell everyone what I think regardless of how constructive it is" (plenty of examples) We participate in these forums because we are interested in food and restaurants, and because we want to learn what is going on, not because we want to read the opinions of would be writers with minimum objectivity..

re.Simon Majumdar's review: Thank you Simon for your review of MVH - however, please could you make your numerous posts more objective (and therefore more readable) by the omission of the rather tiresome inclusion of your own personal opinions of an area. i.e "swamp" "vile place" etc hardly makes for objective reviewing, nor does it reflect any particularly intelligent analysis of a restaurant. E gullet is one of a number of websites than in principle give a platform for exchange of views and discussion, but in reality are marred in a major way by the belief of some of their contributors that they have the ability to write. 1.5 out of 10 for the restaurant review.

I am not entirely sure but I think the dont eat fish on Monday rule no longer applies. I believe that fishing is now done every day of the week (much like shopping) and that refridgeration being so computerized and technological, fish is still "fresh" even after a few days old. Otherwise, wouldnt all the major chefs for whom quality of ingredients is paramount, just simply not serve fish on their menus on Mondays? Do all the Michelin restaurants remove the fish dishes from their menus on Mondays? Interestingly, on TV a few years ago, some survey was carried out comparing fresh to frozen fish and analyzing how the fish was preserved and transported from the moment it was caught to the point of consumption. The fish destined to be sold fresh was put on ice, whereas fish destined to be frozen was frozen immediately. The "panel" tasting fresh and frozen fish blinf voted the frozen fish as tasting fresher and more flavourful!! Would we then conclude that if you freeze fish as soon as you catch it, the freshness of the fish is actual preserved better this way?

Does this happen every time you go there? Once, at Tour d'Argent, I saw a waiter spill an entire bowl of soup into the lap of a hapless customer. Would you call this a shambolic restaurant as well?

Do agree with you. Sometimes you read these reviews and they all seem so personal. Went to Sonny's after they brought in the new chef (Helen...?) Mostly good food, service a bit erratic but I wanted to say "shame on you" to Durak for the stulifyingly boring focus on the Caesar...he does not rate as a reviewer in my opinion - not constructive or intelligent enough.

By "fresh" do you mean the fish that is caught by the deep sea trawlers and put "on ice" in the hold whilst they take 3-5 days to sail back to shore before the fish is transferred to temperature controlled vans and the following day transferred to Billingsgate where they are then sold to the restaurants and supermarkets, arriving on our plates almost a week after being caught????!

I think you are being rather ungenerous Simon, the service at Lola's is sometimes scatty but shambolic is a gross exaggeration, certainly from my experience. I would agree with A man for all seasonings (great pseudonym -is that a play on the Thomas More film?) that Lola's is maintaining its standards on all fronts since this new chef arrived. (cant remember his name, ex Putney Bridge??)

..and I come back to my point....Maschler's rating (and presumably Gill's) is based upon their evaluation of the whole operation. They are RESTAURANT critics,after all, not food only critics - they are evaluating, on their readers' behalf, the restaurants they visit in order to say "do go" or "dont bother" We dont go to Claridges or Gavroche for the atmosphere, but we do go for the cuisine. Likewise, a visit to somewhere like Daphne's is more likely to be because you are in the area, the atmosphere is buzzy etc etc. not because it is known for its food. Places like Chez Bruce get the whole thing right because they have a fantastic wine list, great food and service, and the atmosphere is good. But I have always disliked Pharmacy because of the seeming arrogance of the people who own/run it. (..and I love the loos at Lola's being beyond the kitchen - it means I can have a peek at what is going on!) However, I will give Pharmacy a try and let you know what I think...

I have eaten Hywel Jones's food at both Foliage and Lola's and on each occasion had a delicious meal. I think with regards to the Fay Maschler reviews, she awards high marks not just on account of the food - she clearly has to like the whole operation and feel that it has integrity. Presumably she awarded 3 stars to Foliage and Lola's because she not only thought the food was worth 3 stars, but she also thought the restaurants deserved three stars as well. As for Pharmacy, the overall score did not amount to very much either from Gill or from Maschler. However, should I run the gauntlet and go anyway?

Did anyone read the disparaging review of Pharmacy by Adrian Gill last Sunday? Has anyone been lately and were his comments on the food and restaurant fair?