Charlie Trotter's

[maggiethecat]

Perhaps you will read my restaurant guide for young people when it comes out: "Gauling Pallettes."

You make me laugh---in a good way! (The Sondheim comparison is excellent. )

I was about to echo my friend Nero's sentiments and I'm glad I don't have to. Stick around Adam, and tell us more---most of us take our lumps here and you took yours like a man.

So...how do you feel about Cole Porter?

[Marlene]

Adam, never having dined at Charlie's myself, I found your post to be refreshing and honest from your perspective. And as a reading audience, should we ask for more? I think that reviews of any dining experience reflect the writer's expectations and experience, and your review reflected those two perfectly.

Thank you for engaging us in this dialogue.

Edited November 7, 2003 by Marlene (log)

[Kim WB]

There is a part of me that relates to Adam, in that I was a well raised suburban Jersy girl, who thought fancy was a local steak house..when I turned 16, my father brought me to it, just the two of us, and we ordered fiLET MiGnon...with mushrooms, no less, in 1976! But then I was accepted at NYU, and real life started:

In 1981, I went to dinner with my boyfriend, who was a valet at the River Cafe. Larry Forgione treated us like Gold, and I had a cream of wild mushroom soup that I still try to emulate.

I was smart enough at 17 to pick the plainest black dress from Kmart, and drape it well over a great teen body, then added some over the top funky earings, and some ahead of the curve Madonna black rubber bracelets...we should all, in our lives, feel as spectacular as I did that night. Invincible, and what a mushroom soup! The food was an eye opener, and set the stage for my entire adult life...so, lets not minimize the importance of one meal, at one time and place.....after all, I wound up working there, had children with the chef, marreid, divorced, married again...it all started at the River Cafe in 1981, and despite some of the despair, I would not take one moment back...especially the mushroom soup.

Sorry, waxing poetic again. But one meal can change the course of

one's life. i would have never entered the business, except I was amazed that a soup could taste like that, and just wanted to learn more. 2 kids later...

Just let Adam post, and be easy on him..its better than the 5 thousand 25 year olds that go to Chilis and Fridays every night.

Edited November 7, 2003 by Kim WB (log)

[beans]

In any case, its flattering that so many of you are taking my experience at Charlie Trotter's so seriously.

adrober -- welcome to eG.

eG'ers are serious about serious food, and yes, Charlie Trotter is very serious food.

But what else did you expect when your title contains the "superdud" next to Master Chef Trotter's name?

You've jumped right in and by golly consider this baptism by fire.

[Bux]

A critic is only required to filter the experience through his own unique perspective and to relay his opinions truthfully.

Is that all a critic is required to do? I think you do a disservice to those few critics who can explain and instruct and thereby bring greater understanding of the subject to the reader. There's a lot more a critic can do than relay an opinionated view of an experience.

I think much like Alex and I being the wrong audience for Charlie Trotter's, many on here are probably the wrong audience for my review.

I may be the wrong audience for what you wrote, but it was not a review. It was merely a restaurant experience described by someone who didn't fully understand the situation at hand. As a work of nonfiction with humorous appeal to those who might share the author's disconnect with the subject it had its merits, but to call it a review, there should to be some insight into the subject and some opportunity for the reader to better appreciate the subject. I learned too much about you and very little about CT.

If you want refined tastebuds discerning the intricacies of the saffron flavor in the boullibaise, read William Grimes.

Once again the message I get loud and clear is that you have but a brief and passing understanding of the world of which you speak. Have you read Grimes? Why do you describe him as you did? Is it because you have a familiarity and understanding of his work as a restaurant reviewer, or is it just because of his job title and what you think he does at the NY Times?

My goal--perhaps an admirable one--is to write for a younger audience who, for whatever reason, fear fine dining as something not for them when, in reality, it can be very much for them: adding a whole new layer of enjoyment to their lives.

I'm quite puzzled by all this, as what was missing from your post was the kind of information that would help them overcome their fears and connect with the restaurant and food in a way that would make the meal more enjoyable and meaningful. Now I understand you to be pandering to those fears for a few laughs. What I thought I read in your post was a call for assistance in learning how to enjoy a Charlie Trotter experience. Apparently I read you wrong.

But I join the others in welcoming you to eGullet and hope that reading here and replying here will be a learning experience. Sadly, your earlier Babbo piece was a little funnier and had more useful information. More sadly, you didn't learn that bellinis aren't a great investment when dining on a budget.

In any case, its flattering that so many of you are taking my experience at Charlie Trotter's so seriously.

It's less about you than it is about food and dining.

[Missy]

Cuisina

P.S. I was almost shot at once in a harold's chicken shack... really scared the heck out of me. I now make it a rule not to eat in places where the staff is behind bullet proof glass. And I don't believe celebrity chef Harold was actually in the kitchen either.

There'a a Harold's right behind the Chicago Hilton on Michigan Avenue, in a safe, well-lit and touristy neighborhood. It's right next to a not-very-good Thai place.

[tryska]

well..all this bruhaha aside - welcome to a fellow Atlantan!

[alanamoana]

Is there any scientific evidence that some palates or tastebuds are superior to others?  Are you a better person if your taste buds are better - who decides that?  Do you go to an institute and get a taste bud test?  If you have good ones you leave all smug and happy, or you find out you are merely average or, God forbid - below average and leave in a deep depression knowing you will be forced to live out your days eating Taco Bell, Hardees, and Bayless' chicken sandwiches.  Alas, wo, sigh, all that rot.

a little off topic...

this is in no way a criticism chefette, but isn't there real research out there that there are "supertasters"? people who have a higher concentration of taste buds or something like that wherein they can actually taste "better" than other people? this of course doesn't mean that the food is better or worse, it just means that they can identify flavors, etc. better than people who have the "average" number of taste buds on their tongue.

as you state for yourself, i too am lazy with my palate. i know i could try harder...

adrober,

very funny book title "gauling pallettes"...and welcome to eGullet

[hjshorter]

There are supertasters. As a matter of fact there's been a thread on it but I don't have time to find it right now.

Being a supertaster means you are more sensitive to bitter and funky flavors - and not in a good way. It in no way implies a "superior" palate, in fact it means that I am less likely to enjoy things like liver, aged cheese, wine, greens, and coffee.

[bourdain]

I too was underwhelmed by the CT experience.

Does that mean that I have to "learn how to enjoy" it? I await your instructions.

[bilrus]

I too was underwhelmed by the CT experience.

Does that mean that I have to "learn how to enjoy" it? I await your instructions.

You just haven't been to enough places or had enough experiences. Don't worry though it'll come with time.

[melkor]

I too was underwhelmed by the CT experience.

Does that mean that I have to "learn how to enjoy" it? I await your instructions.

Clearly you need to get out more, travel the world, learn what good food is all about.

[Andy Lynes]

The forthcoming eGullet.com publication "How I Learnt to Stop Worrying and Love Wallet-Emptying Restaurant Meals" is currently in preparation and will be in all good bookstores soon.

[beans]

and don't forget the chapter on extravagant, assistant sommelier pushed wines.

[Lady T]

That would be the chapter with the handy how-to chart on marking up wine prices?

[Craig Camp]

I too was underwhelmed by the CT experience.

Does that mean that I have to "learn how to enjoy" it? I await your instructions.

So does that mean we should consider your opinion and Adam's equally valid?

I don't think it is reasonable for us to ignore your years of professional training and broad experience in dining when it comes to your judgment of Trotter's any more than we should ignore Adam's lack of such experience in his judgment of the same restaurant.

It is clear that you have already had your lessons.

It is not a question of learning "how to enjoy it", but a question of knowing why you didn't like it.

Few people like their first taste of Scotch, but once they "learn how to enjoy it" many become passionate collectors.

[mags]

You know, I re-read Adam's piece with the reminder that he felt he was being "pushed" to order wine. And what I saw was that he and his friend were offered a drink when they walked in, were offered a wine-list with the menu, and were offered a digestif. None of this seems remotely pushy to me. I guess it's possible that the waiter said "You're not ordering wine? But our menus are specifically designed to compliment our wine selections. We strongly recommend that you order blah blah blah." But there's nothing like that in Adam's write-up. Whence commeth the notion that he was being given a hard sell?

Okok, the offering of the digestif may have been a LITTLE OTT, but few restaurants have them, so I see nothing pushy about Trotters' offering it, even to a couple that had refrained from wine with dinner.

In fact, I don't see anything in his piece that bolsters his allusions to supercilious servers, etc. Sure, being hand-delivered to the bathroom might be a bit fussier than I'd like service to be, but it's not insane, particularly if it includes the request that the bathroom-user put used towels in the hamper. I'd be a LOT less comfortable if they had a bathroom-attendant waiting to listen to me piddle and then dump the towel for me.

So all in all, I'm entirely on board with Bux's response. Leaving questions about the food aside (and FWIW, I enjoyed -- but didn't adore -- dinner at Trotter's, but actively hated the food at Union Pacific), bitching about formal service and being offered wine at Trotter's is like bitching about the lack of ritzy china at a hot-dog stand. Or bitching because your glass of milk doesn't taste like orange juice. If you don't want fairly formal service, don't go to Trotter's. And if the level of formality bothers you -- as it evidently bothered Adam -- then research the vibe of the place before you make the reservation.

[bbqboy]

Forgive my thin-skinned eyebrow raising, but who cares if mark silverstein is jewish? Besides the fact he's co-host of "The Best Of...",

not food finds. After that opening joke, how can you take what the rest of the post was about seriously? A young snob making a snide remark under the guise of "humor", and then proceeding to slam a noted place for being snobs. Too much! Learn to accept an experience on it's own terms, not mold it to your own expectations. Or maybe there aren't any Jews in Atlanta. Doubt it though. I guess Howard Dean was referring to

this type of guy as the southern voter he wanted to capture.

[Schielke]

Uhh, if you read further, you will find that this type of guy is Jewish.

[Cusina]

That would be the chapter with the handy how-to chart on marking up wine prices?

Maybe it's more like a pull out dartboard face.

Kidding. Kidding.

[beans]

mags, good post.

Comfortable with it or not, Charlie Trotter's offers full, attentive and formal service.

I have read other evaluations of fine dining where the guest will express their uneasy pressure to purchase an appropriate wine for each course. The most polite way I can express it within this post, and in no offense to any particular person, the key is "I" felt pressured (or "you" felt pressured), however the option is being offered by the service with the guests' enjoyment in mind. I'm going to the level of perceived professionalism to the service staff at Trotter's that this would be done routinely for each and every table and in a respectful manner.

You know, I re-read Adam's piece with the reminder that he felt he was being "pushed" to order wine. And what I saw was that he and his friend were offered a drink when they walked in, were offered a wine-list with the menu, and were offered a digestif. None of this seems remotely pushy to me. I guess it's possible that the waiter said "You're not ordering wine? But our menus are specifically designed to compliment our wine selections. We strongly recommend that you order blah blah blah." But there's nothing like that in Adam's write-up. Whence commeth the notion that he was being given a hard sell?

My emphasis added.

Welcome to eG bbqboy.

Please let this discussion of food, Trotter or the restaurant's service continue without reference nor derailing the thread as to religious belief or affiliation.

[Bux]

I believe it was Adam who raised the issue of religion as if it were relevant and I was a bit put off by his comment. Someone already replied that needing "value" might have more to do with the economic climate in which one grew up--the depression being a major factor in the financial outlook of a whole generation. I've taken to reminding people who call me a cheapskate, that I grew up in the depression, referring to the dip in the street elevation in front of my childhood home.

[mags]

for the longest time I resented the work of Stephen Sondheim.  I considered it obnoxiously inaccessible, self-indulgent, and far too brainy for its own good.  Eventually, though, I forced myself to listen to "Sweeney Todd" straight through, reading the liberetto along with.  It soon after became my favorite musical.

When a neophyte in any field is presented with a work that challenges, the temptation is to fault the work.

I guess this goes to the heart of my objections to your piece, Adam. There are plenty of things -- musical, culinary and otherwise -- that I don't enjoy. But I don't see any reason to "fault" either myself or the creator. I don't much like Phillip Glass' music, but I sure as hell don't "resent" him for composing it, as you say you used to resent Sondheim. I don't like Rocco DiSpirito's food, either, but I don't resent him for dreaming it up.

Trotter's offers a particular kind of experience. You don't like it, that's fine. But that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with it, anything to resent. If you elect to buy a specific experience -- whether it's dinner at a particular restaurant or tickets to a particular show, or whatever -- the "value" lies in whether the experience lives up to its billing, in how well the experience fulfills the promises it has made. You wanted Trotter's to be an entirely different kind of experience; you're faulting it because it wasn't Babbo. But it never claimed to be. And by your own admission, you don't have the experience to evaluate Trotter's in terms of what it DOES promise.

At the risk of reading way too much into your posts, you seem to think that your tastes -- in music, in restaurants -- should define what's offered, and that anything on offer that doesn't conform to your tastes is worthy of resentment. That strikes me as kind of stunningly self-absorbed.

[Bux]

-- bitching about formal service and being offered wine at Trotter's is like bitching about the lack of ritzy china at a hot-dog stand. ... If you don't want fairly formal service, don't go to Trotter's.  And if the level of formality bothers you -- as it evidently bothered Adam -- then research the vibe of the place before you make the reservation.

What bother's me about that post, supposedly written by someone who "was so excited about going there, [he] hardly ate anything that day so [he] would be able to savor the entire meal," is that so much of what one should have expected at CT was reported with such contempt.

(adrober) My initial reactions once we had stepped inside--noting the age of the clientele, the wariness of the servers--was my attempt to describe how it felt to be Alex and I at that moment in time.  It wasn't based on any preconceived notion: surely, if I had preconceived how it would be I would never have given the woman my credit card number to hold the table under the threat of a $200 fine.

Why? Why was he surprised at the age of the diners? And if he was, why was he put off and alientated by it? May I take personal offense in the knowledge that had I been there, it would have made the room less comfortable to him. I see people far younger than I was when I could first afford such restaurants, but they don't offend me. Nor am I offended by children in such places if they're well behaved. Nor am I offended by people in wheelchairs, etc. So much for the issue of the age of the diners. It's a non issue for me and I don't understand why Adam made it an issue. As for the "wariness" of the servers--pure projection. He felt uncomfortable and had to blame the restaurant for his failure to research those things that were most important to him--the age of the diners and how to interact with wait staff at a formal restaurant such as CT.

Sorry, Tony, this is not an issue of being underwhelmed by the food. As for his appreciation of the food, as someone pointed out, the chicken tasted fishy, but that wasn't the problem.

No, Adam made a mockery of haute cuisine and them came to the wrong place to poke fun at it. If I wrote a parody about religion, I wouldn't choose to recite it at a church social and if I visited someone's home, I wouldn't send his relatives a note poking fun of the family's customs and habits. If I did, I trust I might understand why no one was laughing.

[sammy]

for the longest time I resented the work of Stephen Sondheim.  I considered it obnoxiously inaccessible, self-indulgent, and far too brainy for its own good.  Eventually, though, I forced myself to listen to "Sweeney Todd" straight through, reading the liberetto along with.  It soon after became my favorite musical.

When a neophyte in any field is presented with a work that challenges, the temptation is to fault the work.

I guess this goes to the heart of my objections to your piece, Adam. There are plenty of things -- musical, culinary and otherwise -- that I don't enjoy. But I don't see any reason to "fault" either myself or the creator. I don't much like Phillip Glass' music, but I sure as hell don't "resent" him for composing it, as you say you used to resent Sondheim. I don't like Rocco DiSpirito's food, either, but I don't resent him for dreaming it up.

Trotter's offers a particular kind of experience. You don't like it, that's fine. But that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with it, anything to resent. If you elect to buy a specific experience -- whether it's dinner at a particular restaurant or tickets to a particular show, or whatever -- the "value" lies in whether the experience lives up to its billing, in how well the experience fulfills the promises it has made. You wanted Trotter's to be an entirely different kind of experience; you're faulting it because it wasn't Babbo. But it never claimed to be. And by your own admission, you don't have the experience to evaluate Trotter's in terms of what it DOES promise.

At the risk of reading way too much into your posts, you seem to think that your tastes -- in music, in restaurants -- should define what's offered, and that anything on offer that doesn't conform to your tastes is worthy of resentment. That strikes me as kind of stunningly self-absorbed.

I think your missing his point. He's fessing up to initially resenting Sondheim but now he thinks he's the greatest. My take is that he is admitting that the temptation is there to fault CT but he learned his lesson with Sondheim so he won't.

Also, I think some of us are taking this site a little to seriously. It's a food site. Comparing it to religion in any way gives me the creeps.