Off the Menu at 15 Restaurants

tommy · February 17, 2003

No doubt true. A restaurant needs to train its staff to deal with mild cases of entitlement, though. If the place is going to collapse over every selfish customer, it's doomed anyway. I'm more concerned about the extreme badgering form of entitlement. Even old pros are often not well equipped to deal with that.

and in a perfect world everyone would be eating the best that every restaurant has to offer every night.

and, i think it's clear that we're (mostly) on the same side on this one.

Edited February 17, 2003 by tommy (log)

Steve Plotnicki · February 17, 2003

I hate to be repetitive but, how did this issue get turned around from what restaurants do and should offer to what is an appropriate way for diners to make this request? The people who do not partake in this custom, for whatever reason, seem to need to imply that people ask for this type of service in a way that is obnoxious, or are treating staff in restaurants like servants etc.

What does this issue have to do with the diner? It has to do with whether restaurants offers this service or not. People are rude in a multitude of situations and I don't see anyone listing those situations. Why here? Why are people inisisting that an inference of rudeness be drawn to describe people who ask about off-menu items? Because aside from my experience at Babbo, I find that the request is well recieved. And we don't have to go any further then our own near and dear Christopher who when he was a Captain at Gramercy organized a number of special menus, based around nearly a dozen bottles of wine we brought in, at the spur of the moment. We asked, and he did it. If he couldn't, he would have said no. There really isn't amy more to it then that. But where does making that request deserve to be charactered as doing something wrong?

Wilfrid · February 17, 2003

if anything, i'm playing devil's advocate. however, the notion that people can sometimes make requests that are obnoxious and stem from entitlement is obviously shared by a few posters. do all diners know what "no" means? i'm guessing that depends.

Okay, but in that case I think we might discuss the topic in terms of relatively sane, informed diners, rather than focussing on how we might imagine Mr or Ms Entitlement driving a kitchen crazy.

Edited February 17, 2003 by Wilfrid (log)

Fat Guy · February 17, 2003

and in a perfect world everyone would be eating the best that every restaurant has to offer every night.
and, i think it's clear that we're (mostly) on the same side on this one.

Well no duh to the second point. But with regard to the first point, I've again got to clarify that not every customer's expectation of "best" is going to be the same. I mean, Wilfrid might want some sort of all-offal tasting menu that the restaurant would be thrilled to cook. For all we know the chef is a closet offal fanatic and feels frustrated that the customers never order any dishes with offal. But man, when Wilfrid asks about offal, the chef is unleashed and cooks up a storm. That's great. It's the best meal for him. Some other customer, call this person Regular-Guy-Customer, might be totally repulsed by Wilfrid's "best" menu. In fact Regular-Guy-Customer doesn't even want a tasting menu. He doesn't even want dessert. You get the idea.

elyse · February 17, 2003

The reason one feels comfortable asking a restaurant to provide this service is because a restaurant is a service establishment. And by asking for something off-menu, or to be prepared especially for you, all you are doing is requesting a certain level of service that might not be apparant on the face of the menu.
Please do not confuse service with servant.
I don't suppose you realize -- or care -- how insulting you are being to restaurants in general: you seem to be saying that one must push them to get a high(er) level of service -- they won't do it otherwise. And you're talking about the sort of place YOU frequent; think what that says about "lesser" venues.
...And who knows why Veal Filet, or summer truffles, wasn't listed on the menu? Maybe it was for the staff dinner, maybe for the next days menu or specials, maybe the chef was going to serve it at his Tante Paulette's Anniversaire? It doesn't make a difference. We only wanted to eat something delicious. We didn't want to prove we were high roller Americans dropping their big wad on the Croisette.
Staff dinner? Unlikely. But they surely were in the house for a reason, as part of a plan. Which you upset because you expected that nothing on the menu would be delicious enough for you. Proving your status as rich, spoiled Americans (not that nationality matters) is EXACTLY what you did.

The truffles seem to have been offered, not demanded. And how is making a request treating someone as a servant? As for insulting the resataurant, no one's telling the staff they want to go into the kitchen to cook it themselves. No one is telling the staff that they have designed a rediculous assortment of ingredients.

There are many restaurants that I avoid because the cheff feels the need to bombard my palate with too much mucky muck. I don't want rosemary in every single thing on the table. I find it insulting that chefs will fuck up good food to flex their muscles, expecting customers to fawn over complicated taste structures, when the food actually sucks. Am I being spoiled? No, I want to experience the food as I will enjoy it.

I guess when it comes down to it, my version of being a rich spoiled American is to not frequent a restaurant which will not serve me food that I will enjoy. Plenty of restaurants out there.

DAMN you people write fast!

Edited February 17, 2003 by elyse (log)

Fat Guy · February 17, 2003

if anything, i'm playing devil's advocate. however, the notion that people can sometimes make requests that are obnoxious and stem from entitlement is obviously shared by a few posters. do all diners know what "no" means? i'm guessing that depends.
Okay, but in that case I think we might discuss the topic in terms of relatively sane, informed diners, rather than focussing on how we might imagine Mr or Ms Entitlement driving a kitchen crazy.

To focus it a little more and a little differently, I'm interested most in what inferences we can draw from the WSJ article regarding how the reporters behaved.

tommy · February 17, 2003

I hate to be repetitive but, how did this issue get turned around from what restaurants do and should offer to what is an appropriate way for diners to make this request?

when martin offered his thoughts on the topic and you took it personally? :unsure:

Wilfrid · February 17, 2003

Yes, I'm interested in the article too, and to the extent we could avoid re-hashing the old Blue Hill/Babbo arguments, 'twould be appreciated. Damn, my fingers are cold.

Does everyone agree with my starting point that there are some restaurants where this sort of request makes sense and not others? If so, how sensible was the WSJ's list?

Steve Plotnicki · February 17, 2003

don't want rosemary in every single thing on the table. I find it insulting that chefs will fuck up good food to flex their muscles, expecting customers to fawn over complicated taste structures, when the food actually sucks

Elyse - You are my hero.

elyse · February 17, 2003

don't want rosemary in every single thing on the table. I find it insulting that chefs will fuck up good food to flex their muscles, expecting customers to fawn over complicated taste structures, when the food actually sucks
Elyse - You are my hero.

I was totally expecting to go onto the list of eGul-losers for this one.

**JAZ** · February 17, 2003

To focus it a little more and a little differently, I'm interested most in what inferences we can draw from the WSJ article regarding how the reporters behaved.

I did get a copy of the article to read, and on this point, I had to infer that they behaved badly. Phrases like "Some restaurants wouldn't take us seriously until we graciously insisted" make me think that they were in the obnoxious camp (how can one "graciously insist"?). And the fact that they provided " few parameters" leads me to believe that they probably came across poorly -- it probably seemed as if they were just being difficult, rather than trying to get the best from the kitchen.

Fat Guy · February 17, 2003

A few other revealing sentences:

These days, the hottest secret in dining may be that even average Joes can order "off the menu" at a growing number of restaurants.

Figuring we were discriminating diners, some places threw in extras, from champagne to oysters-on-ice.

Though obviously subjective, we picked nationally known or well-traveled restaurants or those run by noted chefs. We covered a range of cuisines, from a steakhouse to Mexican to a revolving restaurant in Atlanta popular with conventioneers.

Suzanne F · February 17, 2003

Steve: Your personal comments to me were quite unnecessary, not to mention presumptuous.

... The second thing is, all you have done is to apply egalitarianism to the situation. I'm not really interested in that. My dining experience, and capabilities, are not the same as every other diner in the restaurant. I would like a meal that is good enough to satisfy my level of expertise which is not the same as diners who don't do it on a regular basis. ...

Yes, you make that abundantly clear. I see nothing wrong with treating all customers to the same high level of service. If I did happen to run a place, and someone asked for "something delicious" because nothing on MY menu was "good enough to satisfy [his] level of expertise," I might serve that person a plain baked potato. Period. That can be the most delicious food in the world, that takes a greater level of concentration to appreciate. Or maybe a perfectly cooked hard-cooked egg.

Quite often, I find that restaurants are hiding little gems for special customers. ... This is just one example of why you need to ask. And why asking isn't doing anything wrong.

So you're saying that you want to be considered special? And that by indicating that nothing on the menu is good enough for you, you are showing how special you are? Why order anything? Why even go to a restaurant that may not be able to satisfy your special, unique palate? Why not just hire yourself a private chef and have him or her cook for you all the time?

Steve Plotnicki · February 17, 2003

Suzanne - You are just vicariously arguing politics with me through the dining experience. I believe in a level of individualism in this instance that you don't seem to believe in. You believe in egalitarianism, something I believe in quite often, but not in the context of luxury goods. In fact I think it's a gross mistake to apply that concept to luxury goods, which is what fine dining is. When I go to the type of restaurant I have described, I would like to have an experience that suits my needs. Sometimes that experience can be the exact same experience that everyone else is having, and sometimes the same exact experience that everyone else is having doesn't satisfy me so I would like something better. It really doesn't matter to me which one it is, as long as it reaches my threshold level of satisfaction.

But what I am not willing to do is to compromise standards in this situation for this particluar egalitarian principal. Try something else out on me. Affirmative action, women's rights, you will see I agree with you most of the time. But at the same time I believe that the guy with the most money is entitled to drink that last bottle of 1947 Petrus that the sommelier has been hiding for a special customer. And I also believe he should ask for it if he wants it and doesn't see it. It's his entitlement for being able to afford it. And if his ability to do that means I don't get to drink any, too bad for me. I should work harder and make more money so I can afford it too. But at the same time, it also means that I want to maximize what I can afford to buy. And it just so happens that asking for off-menu items is a good way to do that. And why you resent that, or criticize anybody for doing that deosn't make any sense to me? It has absolutely zero impact on you. Unless, you are interested in preventing people from enjoying their hard earned money.

elyse · February 17, 2003

Steve, while I agree with you generally, I have to say, I don't think money's the issue.

Fat Guy · February 17, 2003

Suzanne - You are just vicariously arguing politics with me through the dining experience.

I wonder what happens if you try to go off-menu at Chez Panisse. That would be the purest example of a pretty-much-socialistically-run restaurant. But if anybody knows the answer, or has informed speculation to offer, how about starting a different thread?

macrosan · February 17, 2003

To focus it a little more and a little differently, I'm interested most in what inferences we can draw from the WSJ article regarding how the reporters behaved.

I won't pay the subscription for WSJ, so I have to form my view on the titbits provided by those who have read it. And it seems to me, not surprizingly, that they have gone out of their way to provoke the restaurants they visited into making fools of themselves. The clues picked up by FatGuy, and the places they chose to visit, suggest they wanted to get the restaurants to "fail".

On the one hand, I suppose that's just the normal game that newspapers play (bad news sells more copies than good news), but for the WSJ it surprizes me. After all, I would be interested to see a list of which restaurants do and don't willingly offer this service, and I would have thought that many WSJ readers would also like that. I would have thought that those restaurants that do offer this service would be delighted to have it made public. And in this case, I would have thought that a story saying that X Y and Z high end restaurants will provide off-menu items is a bigger story than the one they produced.

Wilfrid · February 17, 2003

I am just back from a restaurant at about the opposite end of the ideological scale from Chez Panisse, and have been watching, and participating in, some off menu ordering. Le Cirque was a cinch to get into today, although it was close to two thirds full by two o'clock, something many restaurants would settle for on a Monday in February, snow or no snow.

Although Sirio was on his throne, even Le Cirque was trimming its service to the prevailing conditions, with some staff inevitably absent and some ingredients unavailable. They could offer only a limited prix fixe, starring grilled salmon and herb-stuffed chicken. Being familiar with the usual daily specials (although I've not eaten all of them, by any means), I mentioned to my server that braised short ribs were usually available on Monday. "I don't know if the chef made them today, let me check." The chef had, and I gorged on a slab of absurdly tender beef in rich stock, garnished with freshly prepared carrots, parsnips and pearl onions. Other diners might have liked this dish very much, especially on a day like today, but if they didn't know to ask...

Similarly, a couple of regulars at a nearby table - sufficiently valued for Sirio to haul his increasing girth across the room and greet them - shared a whole fish, presented and boned tabelside. Wonderful aromas, and certainly not on the prix fixe. Maybe they ordered it in advance; maybe they eat it every Monday. But whichever way you read it, some people eating lunch there today were getting food other diners didn't know about.

Is this so terrible? (I did a fantastic impersonation of a fat penguin, slithering along fiftieth street.)

Edited February 17, 2003 by Wilfrid (log)

tommy · February 17, 2003

But whichever way you read it, some people eating lunch there today were getting food other diners didn't know about.
Is this so terrible? (I did a fantastic impersonation of a fat penguin, slithering along fiftieth street.)

is that what you've taken from this thread? that people think it's terrible that some get food that other diners don't know about? oh dear. where did we go wrong. :blink:

macrosan · February 17, 2003

But whichever way you read it, some people eating lunch there today were getting food other diners didn't know about.
Is this so terrible? (I did a fantastic impersonation of a fat penguin, slithering along fiftieth street.)
is that what you've taken from this thread? that people think it's terrible that some get food that other diners don't know about? oh dear. where did we go wrong.

Yeah, what Tommy said, several times in several posts, with remarkable clarity and eloquence :biggrin:

maggiethecat · February 17, 2003

Steve: Your personal comments to me were quite unnecessary, not to mention presumptuous.
... The second thing is, all you have done is to apply egalitarianism to the situation. I'm not really interested in that. My dining experience, and capabilities, are not the same as every other diner in the restaurant. I would like a meal that is good enough to satisfy my level of expertise which is not the same as diners who don't do it on a regular basis. ...
Yes, you make that abundantly clear. I see nothing wrong with treating all customers to the same high level of service. If I did happen to run a place, and someone asked for "something delicious" because nothing on MY menu was "good enough to satisfy [his] level of expertise," I might serve that person a plain baked potato. Period. That can be the most delicious food in the world, that takes a greater level of concentration to appreciate. Or maybe a perfectly cooked hard-cooked egg.
Quite often, I find that restaurants are hiding little gems for special customers. ... This is just one example of why you need to ask. And why asking isn't doing anything wrong.
So you're saying that you want to be considered special? And that by indicating that nothing on the menu is good enough for you, you are showing how special you are? Why order anything? Why even go to a restaurant that may not be able to satisfy your special, unique palate? Why not just hire yourself a private chef and have him or her cook for you all the time?

I agree with *every single word* Suzanne writes. I have been trying to avoid posting to this thread, but Suzanne said it so well I figured I'd say so.

**JAZ** · February 17, 2003

Being familiar with the usual daily specials (although I've not eaten all of them, by any means), I mentioned to my server that braised short ribs were usually available on Monday. "I don't know if the chef made them today, let me check." The chef had, and I gorged on a slab of absurdly tender beef in rich stock, garnished with freshly prepared carrots, parsnips and pearl onions....
Is this so terrible?

No, not terrible at all (at least I don't think so). But to me, what you asked is worlds apart from what the WSJ folks did. You asked about a daily special that's usually available, at a restaurant you're familiar with. And I imagine that if the waiter had returned to your table and said, "sorry, sir; the chef couldn't get them today" you wouldn't have insisted on ordering off the menu.

(I can't help wondering why, though, if the short ribs were already prepared, they weren't on the menu. Think they were being saved for the dinner menu?)

On a more general note, I began reading this thread wondering why on earth anyone would think they should be able to get something off the menu, but I have come to understand why in certain circumstances, one would want to ask if it's possible. Insisting or assuming that the restaurant has a duty to comply, though, is still a notion that's beyond me.

tommy · February 17, 2003

Insisting or assuming that the restaurant has a duty to comply, though, is still a notion that's beyond me.

because people who have money and work hard deserve the best.

as far as the short ribs go, i'd bet that they could have been from yesterday. let's face it, they're better the next day. :smile:

Steve Plotnicki · February 17, 2003

You can't go off-menu at Chez Panisse. It is the egalitarian's dream. They only offer one menu per night. You couldn't go off of it if you wanted to.

Wilfrid - Good work. And to think you could have ended up with salmon instead.

Edited February 17, 2003 by Steve Plotnicki (log)

Wilfrid · February 17, 2003

I can't figure out if Tommy and Martin are being sarcastic, or whether they just didn't read any of Suzanne's posts. With all respect to Suzanne, I just can't share her views on this one. I was consciously discussing a situation different from that artificially set up by the WSJ article in order to illustrate the point that ordering "off menu" is not exactly the same as pushing the menu aside and asking the kitchen to cook some thing nice.

Of course, high altitude diners know that tripes a l'armagnac is the Sunday special at Le Cirque, although maybe the kitchen does have the ribs at least in a marinade on the previous day.

Edit: deleted because I take Tommy's word for it I was wrong.

Edited February 17, 2003 by Wilfrid (log)

Sign In

Off the Menu at 15 Restaurants

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Similar Content

Recently Browsing 0 members