French Dining Rituals

[bleudauvergne]

I find the use of "ballet" to describe the service to be accurate. I have often referred to the interaction between a diner and a waiter as a dance, and it's one that goes poorly if the diner doesn't know how the steps. American service may be less formal because we like it that way, but it's also less formal because Americans don't know the steps and American servers who know the rules, have to improvise so often that there's no point in teaching the new kids on the floor how to dance. The French are a very formal people in any social setting. It's no surprise that dining has evolved into a prescribed ballet, and no greater surprise that it makes some outsiders uncomfortable. I know certain reconstructed Frenchmen who have spent enough time in the US to be impatient when faced with the French pace, but it's a cultural difference and I find it hard to take a "right" or "wrong" stance.

Well said, Bux but, within the specific cultural context, it actually makes diners more comfortable as they too go through their paces, leaving more time for the important business of conviviality. These conventions were designed - and have evolved - to reduce and abbreviate friction and personal idiossincracies, so that exchanges are ritualized and become weightlessly automatic.

It is not a "ballet": what you experience is the result of centuries' experience in trying to please the paying customer. What might seem effete to a newcomer is, in fact, a form of being unobtrusive and even invisible. It's not at all about challenging or provoking: good service is, on the contrary, all about self-effacement. Those questions, queries and recommendations aren't conceived to unsettle the customer: they're tailor-made and proven to reassure and make it easier to order and enjoy.

There's this ridiculous idea that waiters in good restaurants enjoy "showing up" inexperienced customers. Nothing could be further from the truth. Inexperienced customers should just sit back and take it in. It's quite amazing how quickly one learns to play the King - it's easy. Just relax and be difficult!

I'm often dumbfounded by American and British friends of mine who complain about what is - in essence - proper service. The idea is exactly opposite: to find an unobtrusive way to convey your personal quirks and desires. This includes deference - i.e., when you're lucky enough to consult someone who knows more about wine than you'll ever know, you'd be stupid to inhibit his or her suggestions with your own far-flung experiences.

Trust is a crucial element of good restaurants. This often means delegation and the confession of ignorance. No shame there - rather the opposite.

I wonder how many sublime gastronomic experiences have been missed because diners were unable to simply surrender - this is what we pay for, after all - and, for some weird reason, felt that the waiters, rather than serving to the best of their ability, were somehow "putting them to the test".

Everyone's interested in enjoyment and pleasure: it's the only rule. Leaving it to those who know better is very, very easy. You just ask and listen for a short while, with absolute selfishness, and then get on with what matters: that particular occasion; that meal.

The food, however good, should always be secondary and classic European service echoes this fundamental truth.

I had to break this off Don's friend's letter thread to start another discussion. What do you think about the service aspect of dining in France? Do you find it overly formal, or is it, as Miguel states, a ritual that allows us to relax and enjoy the meal without being bothered by it?

[Carrot Top]

I agree with Miguel. But it is something that the vast majority of Americans have had no exposure to, therefore it will be as incomprehensible as a foreign language is to anyone that has not studied nor practiced it.

As with all things, though, this way of doing things can sometimes in certain instances work less-than-perfectly, for the tasks involved in this sort of service are not undemanding in the first place. That is when the whole thing might feel burdensome.

Overall, though, we are moving faster globally and simply having a hard time sitting down and relaxing...so this way of service may become less than desireable to the majority of customers that walk in the door. They may prefer to ignore the ritual and all that is behind it...

[robert brown]

French service, or service in France, has become less like Nureyev and more like Steppin Fetchet (okay, Bill "Bojangles" Robinson to make a better analogy. The kind of ballet-like ("choreographed" is a better term) will soon be extinct. Right now it survives in the big Michelin three-stars and some two-stars or grand hotels, but it's just a matter of time before the rampant understaffing puts an end to it. Arpege, although a small restaurant, is a good example of straight-forward, informal service in a three-star restaurant. Notice, however, how no one over forty works even in the big establishments such as the Louis XV, Ducasse's restaurant in Monaco. A lot of the servers there are not French and almost every restaurant feels it has to have the token female hauling dishes around. When I started out dining in France, there were no women servers at the upper-echelon restaurants and some had an elder statesman-type who were fixtures for decades; for example La Cote d'Or, Restaurant de la Pyramide, Alain Chapel, among others. Now with cost-saving at the forefront, every worker needs to be young, strong and energetic.

There really is no way to generalize how to posture yourself within the interaction between you and your order-taker, waiter or sommelier. It depends mostly on experience. I actually have had aggregious examples when a restaurant employee in France has tried to intimidate me or show me up. Because I have had so much experience, I have gained the presence of mind to challenge it with the inevitable result that the offender always backs off. If I had to say what the truest mark of an experienced diner in a better restaurant is, it is having the presence of mind to recognize what is taking place and to react accordingly. It took me awhile to reach that point, all of which is to say that the more you eat out, the more you get out of eating out.

[Bux]

If I had expressed myself adequately, there'd be no occasion for Miguel to use "but" when noting that in the cultural context that is France, the ritual choreography of the dining room, makes diners more comfortable. That it makes insiders more comfortable is exactly that which makes others (the outsiders) less comfortable. Conventions can appear much like secret handshakes and cryptic code to those who aren't in on the secrets, in spite of the fact that those conventions evolved to make dining more pleasant. For service to be truly unobtrusive, and it can be sublimely so in France, both partners need to be in step. A waiter must learn exactly where to expect a diners hands and implements to be at any time and to read what time it is by their placement. At the same time the diner must know almost instinctively where the staff is and what they're doing at any step in the meal. It's not just an agreement regarding the side from which food is served and the one from which it's taken, or the symbolism of the placement of tableware before, during and after the course of eating a dish. It's two sided all the way. It's not just a servant-diner relationship and it's certainly never meant to be a confrontation. Just as a waiter should never interrupt a conversation, (let alone join in one with an opinion as happened in a NY Hotel restaurant to me) it's incumbent on the diner to be aware of when the waiter should be heard as well as seen and for the diners to time their conversations. It is, as Carrot Top suggests, a foreign language. It's not really valid to make certain kinds of criticisms based on my needs of the language if it suits the native users.

Robert Brown makes a few valid additions to what Miguel said. I don't think he contradicts what Miguel says as much as I think he brings the subject up to date. Much of what it wonderful about fine dining is disappearing and can't be maintained in today's economy. That doesn't make it wrong as an ideal, it just means it's unaffordable. "The more you eat out, the more you get out of eating out," is another way of saying that you are responsible for making your next meal a better one. That there are waiters who abuse the system by trying to show up a diner is less a failure of the system than of those waiters and I don't think those were the basis of Terry's criticism.

[bleudauvergne]

So, from what side is the food served, and from what side is it taken?

[Ocean_islands]

Are you talking about how people are served in restaurants in France, or how French people eat at home?

[Bux]

Are you talking about how people are served in restaurants in France, or how French people eat at home?

←

The subject arose in regard to restaurants. Some of the ettiquette of dining applies to eating anywhere I suppose, but the interaction with waiters and sommeliers is a restaurant issue--unless you have a wait staff at home.

[Bux]

So, from what side is the food served, and from what side is it taken?

←

Wonderful question and I'm not even sure of the answer, but only because it seems so natural when it's done smoothly. I believe food should come from the right and plates removed from the left. Of course there are all sorts of table placements, tables in corners, booths, banquettes, etc., that would preclude that. A really good waiter would handle any situation deftly. It may take too to tango, but one good dancer can often make his, or her, partner appear less clumsy on the floor. I suppose that's basis of Miguel's advise to relax in a really fine restaurant. The less uptight the diner is, the easier it seems to appear to know what you are doing. For every time I may have run up against a restaurant staff member suspected of attempting to show me up, I've had scores who've covered my errors as well as any spin doctor. This may no longer be quite on topic, but the one thing I've found to be true is that if you show the staff some respect and manage to communicate a real interest in the food, you are likely to win over any staff in a fine restaurant. Of course my definition of a really fine restaurant is one that serves really fine food worthy of interest and has a staff dedicated to making those who love good food feel comfortable.

[jackal10]

No,no, no.

Food is served from the left and cleared from the right.

Service from the left is easier for right handed people, more natural, since service goes from left to right (unlike the Port).

Of course, it may be different in the US, wher they have not yet learnt how to use a knife and fork simultaneously...

[Busboy]

When I worked in a formal French restaurant we served from the left and cleared from the right, a habit I retain to the is day. I seem to remember that we called it "American service" rather than "French service (which, then, would have meant serving from the opposite side)," though I may be mistaken.

Banquet service -- in which the waiter wedges a tray full of food between two diners with one arm and either plates the food with his free hand or steadies the tray while the diner serves himself -- is always done from the left, so perhaps that's the clue that proves jackal10's assertion. Though we always called this "Russian Service."

I seriously doubt that service or clearing from either side has a significant impact on one's dining pleasure, the important thing being that the waiter drops or clears the plate with his or her "outside" arm -- serving with the left hand if serving from the left - so that his elbow doesn't end up in your face.

*****

On the larger issue, I wonder if one of the more experienced French diners could confirm a thought that I had: that France is much more of a hierarchichal society and that, say, asking a runner to pour your wine for you is akin to aking him to break the social contract: he has not "earned" the right to pour your wine, as your waiter has. If he were to pour it, it would be a suggestion to the waiter that the busboy does not know his role, and that the waiter has made an error.

Edited October 14, 2004 by Busboy (log)

[MiguelCardoso]

The greatest obstacle to relaxing is anxiety. The polite, knowledgeable and appreciative American newcomer is particularly prone to anxiety. He (or she, although women are naturally better diners, being more at ease) might:

a) be over-excited at the prospect of finally experiencing food they've read a lot about, resulting in over-attentive edginess, worrying whether what they're getting is the best, to the same high standard; fretting over choices and worrying that that one meal might not encapsulate the restaurant's essence;

b) be far too self-conscious about being an "outsider" and therefore either be too deferential and accepting (the English, bless them, are experts at this) or, with the same red-hot degree of nervousness, be too critical and even aggressive. Trying too hard to "fit in" is just as annoying as making a point of standing out, as it places unreasonable expectations on the restaurant.

c) internalize false expectations of anti-American feeling and compensate by going into ambassatorial/Jimmy Carter mode, apologizing for the imagined sins of their countrymen and making a point of showing "them" that some Americans are just as civilized and sophisticated as that Dominique de Villepin geezer;

d) regard what should be an enjoyable occasion as some sort of test, where "they" (the waiters) are a mixed army of dastardly enemy agents out to shame them and "show them up" and friendly, understanding, truly cosmopolitan connoisseurs whose job it is to make them feel confortable;

e) in many cases, be afraid of being taken for a chump and "ripped off". This nagging, anxiety-making suspicion is a real killer and its manifestations - an excessive examining and questioning about prices; conference-whispering when unordered items arrive (usually gifts) - have equally deadly consequences, as the restaurant feels its honour and honesty are being questioned;

f) burden that dinner with a tremendous "make-or-break", all-or-nothing atmosphere, something unbearably final and decision-making. I often hear charming first-timers tell the head waiter they've been waiting all their life to eat there; have read all the reviews; know the history; own the book. What's intended as praise comes across, in a more formal and less sincere culture, as a massive aircraft carrier warning shot: "So treat us properly - or else!"

Good restaurants pride themselves on their service - quite rightly, as it's so difficult (and takes so long) to establish and maintain. Each restaurant will insist on its own "signature" style of service, within the constraints of the classic system, but these particularities are easily negotiated and are part of the personality and fun.

Political correctness aside, the whole idea of dining out in a luxurious restaurant is to be waited on. The waiters are there to serve the diners. They're the ones who should be anxious and fearful, not us. They're not buddies or accomplices and most would be offended if they were treated as such. They get paid because they do their job very well. You pay for the meal. Any attempt to sabotage this crucial distance and recognition of roles (specially when you're sitting down and paying and they're running about and being paid and you therefore have a gigantic, unfair advantage over them, starting with the right to complain) not only defeats the long-established formal beauty of the arrangement but also shows (however innocently) a lack of respect for the whole system of service and insouciance towards the dignity of each station.

A common "gaffe" is interfering when a head waiter reproaches one of his charges, supposedly to "defend" the waiter who seems to have been unfairly scolded. Most of these exchanges are for show anyway, to make you, the diner, feel important. If you then protect the guy, you humiliate the head waiter and guess who gets it when your three hours are up.

Since anxiety is the main obstacle, it's not much use to just say "relax". Looking around to see what more experienced diners are doing and trying desperately to mimic them is even more nerve-wracking.

The best strategy is to thoroughly enjoy your outsider status - you're a fresh face, a potential new loyal customer - and enthusiastically explore all that's new to you. By all means, say it's your first or second time, but the idea should be that you'll soon be back if you enjoy yourself. Don't be afraid to be "educated" (ha ha, I know, but a lot of restaurants actually believe they're pedagogical institutions which the Ministry of Culture should be subsidizing for its inestimable services to gastronomy) - waiters love to show newbies their little ways.

Plus, as a first-timer you're allowed certain liberties, some of which can be feigned, of course...

But, above all, forget about the waiters. Mind about the other diners - they're the ones whose comfort you should care for. No need to worry about where to put your hands - they'll wait. That's what waiters do. Good service can acommodate an enormous variety of different behaviours - from tiny children to eccentric old coots.

That said, don't try to change a restaurant's style, just because you don't like it. That's just the way it is - that rhythm; that distance; that form of speech; that insouciance or rigidity - and either you like it or you don't.

Why be anxious if all that's at stake is a lot of money spent on one solitary meal which one, n the end, didn't enjoy? Sometimes it costs to know where *not* to go.

It's much more fun to just go in with an uncomplicated attitude: "OK, here I am, you've got me interested, now show me what all the fuss is about."

And just leave it to them and take it all it in.

I'm sorry, I meant to chip in with a brief remark and seem to have been carried away, like one of those over-chatty first-time customers who go on and on....

[Carrot Top]

I'm sorry, I meant to chip in with a brief remark and seem to have been carried away, like one of those over-chatty first-time customers who go on and on....

←

But far more amusing, Miguel.

And holding a knowledge of fine service that one hopes is never lost to the world through time and change....

[Bux]

Miguel, you've been following me around for years taking notes. Ultimately you are correct. That I don't know my left from my right and yet still leave feeling I've played my part well is proof enough.

There was an interesting thread a while back though, about how a number of us credit the waiters of our more youthful days for teach us how to eat in France.

[docsconz]

The greatest obstacle to relaxing is anxiety.  The polite, knowledgeable and appreciative American newcomer is particularly prone to anxiety.  He (or she, although women are naturally better diners, being more at ease) might:

a) be over-excited at the prospect of finally experiencing food they've read a lot about, resulting in over-attentive edginess, worrying whether what they're getting is the best, to the same high standard; fretting over choices and worrying that that one meal might not encapsulate the restaurant's essence;

b) be far too self-conscious about being an "outsider" and therefore either be too deferential and accepting (the English, bless them, are experts at this) or, with the same red-hot degree of nervousness, be too critical and even aggressive.  Trying too hard to "fit in" is just as annoying as making a point of standing out, as it places unreasonable expectations on the restaurant.

c) internalize false expectations of anti-American feeling and compensate by going into ambassatorial/Jimmy Carter mode, apologizing for the imagined sins of their countrymen and making a point of showing "them" that some Americans are just as civilized and sophisticated as that Dominique de Villepin geezer;

d) regard what should be an enjoyable occasion as some sort of test, where "they" (the waiters) are a mixed army of dastardly enemy agents out to shame them and "show them up" and friendly, understanding, truly cosmopolitan connoisseurs whose job it is to make them feel confortable;

e) in many cases, be afraid of being taken for a chump and "ripped off".  This nagging, anxiety-making suspicion is a real killer and its manifestations - an excessive examining and questioning about prices; conference-whispering when unordered items arrive (usually gifts) -  have equally deadly consequences, as the restaurant feels its honour and honesty are being questioned;

f) burden that dinner with a tremendous "make-or-break", all-or-nothing atmosphere, something unbearably final and decision-making. I often hear charming first-timers  tell the head waiter they've been waiting all their life to eat there; have read all the reviews; know the history; own the book.  What's intended as praise comes across, in a more formal and less sincere culture, as a massive aircraft carrier warning shot: "So treat us properly - or else!"

Good restaurants pride themselves on their service - quite rightly, as it's so difficult (and takes so long) to establish and maintain.  Each restaurant will insist on its own "signature" style of service, within the constraints of the classic system, but these particularities are easily negotiated and are part of the personality and fun.

Political correctness aside, the whole idea of dining out in a luxurious restaurant is to be waited on.  The waiters are there to serve the diners. They're the ones who should be anxious and fearful, not us.  They're not buddies or accomplices and most would be offended if they were treated as such.  They get paid because they do their job very well.  You pay for the meal.  Any attempt to sabotage this crucial distance and recognition of roles (specially when you're sitting down and paying and they're running about and being paid and you therefore have a gigantic, unfair advantage over them, starting with the right to complain) not only defeats the long-established formal beauty of the arrangement but also shows (however innocently) a lack of respect for the whole system of service and insouciance towards the dignity of each station.

A common "gaffe" is interfering when a head waiter reproaches one of his charges, supposedly to "defend" the waiter who seems to have been unfairly scolded.  Most of these exchanges are for show anyway, to make you, the diner, feel important.  If you then protect the guy, you humiliate the head waiter and guess who gets it when your three hours are up.

Since anxiety is the main obstacle, it's not much use to just say "relax".  Looking around to see what more experienced diners are doing and trying desperately to mimic them is even more nerve-wracking.

The best strategy is to thoroughly enjoy your outsider status - you're a fresh face, a potential new loyal customer - and enthusiastically explore all that's new to you.  By all means, say it's your first or second time, but the idea should be that you'll soon be back if you enjoy yourself.  Don't be afraid to be "educated" (ha ha, I know, but a lot of restaurants actually believe they're pedagogical institutions which the Ministry of Culture should be subsidizing for its inestimable services to gastronomy) - waiters love to show newbies their little ways.

Plus, as a first-timer you're allowed certain liberties, some of which can be feigned, of course...

But, above all, forget about the waiters.  Mind about the other diners - they're the ones whose comfort you should care for. No need to worry about where to put your hands - they'll wait.  That's what waiters do.  Good service can acommodate an enormous variety of different behaviours - from tiny children to eccentric old coots.

That said, don't try to change a restaurant's style, just because you don't like it.  That's just the way it is - that rhythm; that distance; that form of speech; that insouciance or rigidity - and either you like it or you don't.

Why be anxious if all that's at stake is a lot of money spent on one solitary meal which one, n the end, didn't enjoy?  Sometimes it costs to know where *not* to go. 

It's much more fun to just go in with an uncomplicated attitude: "OK, here I am, you've got me interested, now show me what all the fuss is about."

And just leave it to them and take it all it in.

I'm sorry, I meant to chip in with a brief remark and seem to have been carried away, like one of those over-chatty first-time customers who go on and on....

←

Miguel, this is a post for the ages and one that should be made available for anyone going to a restaurant, FD or otherwise. Another gem. Thank you.

[robert brown]

Miguel, you should become a restaurant psychologist. That is a post for the ages. Just to embellish it a bit, I have a few cardinal rules. One is allow every employee his or her dignity. Don't try to befriend them, which actually is a fairly common occurance that Americans are guilty of. Rather, be effusive with the "merci"s every time someone does the smallest task. Second, always make eye contact, particularly when you are ordering something or asking a question that you may think makes you appear uninformed. Related to this is what Miguel called the pedagogical function that servers feel they are fulfilling: Don't be ashamed to show ignorance. In Spain, where I am still at a low level of familiarity with the country's wines, I also say, "I don't know these wines. What do you recommend?" I like this line because it implies that I know about French wine, which I do to a certain extent.

If there is one overriding tenent, it's to let the staff know that you have an abiding interest in and curiosity about their restaurant. Any server who is immune to that from a client doesn't deserve to be on staff.

.

[MiguelCardoso]

I have a few cardinal rules. One is allow every employee his or her dignity. Don't try to befriend them, which actually is a fairly common occurance that Americans are guilty of

It works both ways! For every embarrassing American in Europe story there's an equally embarrassing European in America story.

I'll never forget, the first few times I was in New York, I thought I'd developed a real friendship with this charming, very knowledgeable bartender at the Bemelsmans Bar at the Carlyle Hotel, before eGulleteer Audrey Saunders took over. We'd had so many conversations - during the emptyish, afternoon off-hours I was there - I kind of thought we were buddies. This also happened with a handful of waiters I'd befriended at other well-known restaurants, bars and hotels, but this was quite shocking. First reaction: "What a sucker!"

Being Portuguese, I like distance and formality - there being a very sharp distinction between real friends and the cheery but ultimately artificial and self-serving relationship with favourite waiters and owners - so I was quite unprepared for the friendliness of American (and, even more, Canadian) waiters, specially as it's quite clearly genuine and intelligent, though less plainly conditioned by the particular circumstances and situation. It's very disarming.

In her marvellous latest book ("Eat My Words") Mimi Sheraton, when remembering the genesis of The Four Seasons, actually pinpoints the origins and the person responsible for the old "Hi! I'm Michael and I'll be your server for this evening" habit. So imagine how subversive it was, when it first appeared and was expertly employed, to old Euro-foxes like me.

Anyway, in another bar I was happy to chance upon this great bartender and naturally said hello. What a "faux pas"! It was like it started raining or something. Although I'd always tipped generously (having been a bartender while I was at university) and brought him books which where according to his interests, what he did was remind me he was off-duty now and, politely, ask me to leave him alone.

He was quite right, of course. It was worth the sulk. As a writer, I know how bothersome it is to have people come up and act as if they're old friends, because they've read books of mine. But books hang on, whereas good service is wondrously ephemeral - and easier to get used to...

There are roles and places for everything. American waiters are just the same as European waiters: their jobs must be respected and it's just silly to suppose the relationship is special just because they're good at what they do.

When it comes down to it, French waiters probably like American customers more than they let on and American waiters like European customers a little less than it appears. In either case, there's no hypocrisy whatsoever - only professionalism.

The only difference is in conceptions of distance. Europeans enjoy distance - it allows them to concentrate on their dinner and dining companions. Americans probably prefer comfort and friendliness - it creates the agreeable impression of equality and relativity.

Either way, the lesson should be the same: just enjoy. Tomorrow it might be you or me who's serving that European or American waiter in our professional capacity and the very least we could do is try to offer the same quality. Or revenge...!

[bleudauvergne]

I have a few cardinal rules. One is allow every employee his or her dignity. Don't try to befriend them, which actually is a fairly common occurance  that Americans are guilty of

It works both ways!  For every embarrassing American in Europe story there's an equally embarrassing European in America story.

I'll never forget, the first few times I was in New York, I thought I'd developed a real friendship with this charming, very knowledgeable bartender at the Bemelsmans Bar at the Carlyle Hotel, before eGulleteer Audrey Saunders took over.  We'd had so many conversations - during the emptyish, afternoon off-hours I was there - I kind of thought we were buddies.  This also happened with a handful of waiters I'd befriended at other well-known restaurants, bars and hotels, but this was quite shocking. 

←

Miguel. You have masterfully expressed something in this last post, something very important. It's really quite remarkable. Thank you.

Another recent experience - A couple of weeks ago we were dining at a place in St. Malo. At the restaurant, we ordered a certain menu. We were served the amuse with an aperetif, and then another course before what we had ordered. It was a slice of a fois gras terrine, and not very remarkable. As we proceeded with our meal, we noticed that the people at the table next to ours ordered the same menus. So we watched to our suprise as the waiter brought them each, in place of this unremarkable terrine, a plate with a gorgeous thin slice of fillet de lotte, (I think bux would appeciate this dish) having been seared and served over a bed of langoust meat and graced with a saffron sauce and fresh green herbs. I know this because they discussed it at great length as they ate it approvingly. Their meal then proceeded as ours did. This restaurant was an all seafood place, I must note. I wondered what it was that they did to prompt that. I noted from that meal that the waiter was very chatty and smiling to us, something I did not expect, and to be quite honest, was mildly put off by, because it seemed forced and rather odd in the context. But this discussion has brought this to mind. I did not scrutinize every detail in the differences between the service. Do you think I should be paranoid enough to think that they gave us the "foreigners" service? That would be just too much, don't you think? But now I've begun to think.

[Ptipois]

A common "gaffe" is interfering when a head waiter reproaches one of his charges, supposedly to "defend" the waiter who seems to have been unfairly scolded.  Most of these exchanges are for show anyway, to make you, the diner, feel important.  If you then protect the guy, you humiliate the head waiter and guess who gets it when your three hours are up.

A restaurant where you can actually see head waiters scold subordinates right by your table is a restaurant with the worst possible service. I've seen this once or twice and found this to be the most perfect dinner-pooper I could imagine. And if it's for show, that's even worse: strategic use of humiliation to make the client feel important. The sooner restaurants (French and other) get rid of that kind of folklore, the better. To me, it's a sure sign of hystery and tackiness in the restaurant service policy. Fortunately, it is very rarely seen.

[Ptipois]

Do you think I should be paranoid enough to think that they gave us the "foreigners" service?  That would be just too much, don't you think?  But now I've begun to think

I think you should have asked. This is odd indeed.

[Bux]

Lucy, there may be any number of reasons for the discrepency. All may be valid although some may seem less fair. Well they all may seem less fair since the lotte was apparently better. Odds on the most likely are that that was the last of the foie gras, or perhaps these were regulars and as such had earned some special treatment. It's rare that a restaurant won't go out if its way for a regular client, unless French restaurateurs are not as smart as those in NY.

(I think bux would appeciate this dish)

In an otherwise acceptable restaurant, one I had read about here, by the way, I had some particularly joyless lotte, (monkfish in English). I'm generally inclined to let those things slide, but when the waiter asked about my meal, I noted that I thought the lotte was a bit overdone and had a less than ideal texture. I thought it was a nice gesture for the chef to come out and explain to me that the texture came from marinating the fish in red wine overnight. Perhaps it did, and I refrained from asking why then did they do that. First I'm not fluent enough to get deeply into culinary conversations of that sort and secondly, I have to assume the chef, and likely his clientele, appreciate the texture and there's no reason for him to begin catering to the taste of visiting transients. Lucy told me that monkfish is often, if not usually overcooked in Lyon, if not in France, and appreciated less for it's qualties than for the high prices it's now able to command. As consolation, I had a superbly cooked piece of monkfish in Paris at l'Astrance, whose chef has spent time cooking far from France. That dish could have used more sauce, but the fish itself was quite moist, and rather succulent, as it should have been.

[Carlsbad]

I can accept that maybe the other table were regulars and got the lotte because of that. I don't buy the scenario that they gave the foreigners the last of the mediocre foie gras and served the other table something else because they were out, especially in a fish restaurant. Maybe they figured the foreigners would be more impressed by mediocre foie gras. I might have asked the overly friendly waiter about it. But maybe not.

[Bux]

Lucy did say the "foreigner's" service, but I wonder if she meant the "stranger's" service as in out of towners rather than Americans. Lucy's husband is French, they live in France and she works in France. I don't know that a waiter would be able to recognize her as a foreigner to France, but possibly as someone who wasn't a local and certainly as a stranger to the restaurant. As unremarkable as the foie gras may have been, it's possible the restaurant thought it was special, or at least thought their transient diners would think it's special. There are plenty of Frenchman who think foie gras is fancy stuff and who are impressed by it just as they are by overcooked monkfish. It's not unusual for an American in France to meet Frenchmen who know and care less about food than we do. There's a great food tradition in France, but it's not really a genetic factor or universally appreciated among the citizens.

[bleudauvergne]

I did make those reservations only one day out. The restaurant was full that evening. I do know that they served lotte in one of the courses of another menu, so they should have had plenty in the kitchen. But I don't know how they plan these things.

I think Bux and Carlsbad may be right that they actually thought we might appreciate the fois gras for whatever reason, my silly thought about the fois gras was that they might really think that certain types of people insist on fois gras, otherwise it's not fine dining...

Should I really have asked? Does one normally have a say about comped courses? I have to admit that I prefer observing and watching the choices that the restaurant makes, instead of trying to influence them one way or another. I don't eat in michelin starred restaurants daily, however, so that may be a factor. Perhaps I should assert my rights as a consumer and need to be more savvy in my ways of maximizing the value of my meal. But half of the joy I get from a dining experience is observing the way they do things, thus a question like "why didn't we get the lotte too?" or even "we noticed that our neighbors received lotte in place of the fois gras, may I venture to ask, for the next time, if this is something possible to request?" might prompt them to do something out of the ordinary to compensate. In any case, I suppose that fully supports my stance that fine dining here in France is similar to theater, where I am perhaps as much a spectator as a consumer. When we go out to eat in the better places, there is usually much more at play than what's coming out of the kitchen. The table is the stage, and the technical aspects of when and how wine is served, the sides from which the food is served and taken away, the demeanor of the server have a whole lot to do with it, even if I don't normally take specific notice of every single detail. If Act I, Scene II of our meal differs from my neighbor's, I am not going to ask why. But yes, I will think about it, and write about it.

My question is, is switching dishes and serving different things to different tables common practice, or is it something I can say was particular to this restaurant?

[Ptipois]

My question is, is switching dishes and serving different things to different tables common practice, or is it something I can say was particular to this restaurant?

It is indeed not common practice and considered bad manners when it happens, which is why I would have asked, with all due gentleness, why I was the only diner to be served foie gras as an amuse-bouche.

[bleudauvergne]

It is indeed not common practice and considered bad manners when it happens, which is why I would have asked, with all due gentleness, why I was the only diner to be served foie gras as an amuse-bouche.

←

This is noted, Ptpois. It may be the one and only time it every happens. About it about it being bad manners - I just can't imagine that any restaurant would choose to exercise bad manners in such a way. I am going to investigate this further.

The thought that perhaps our neighbors simply requested an all fish meal, knowing the fois gras, has come to mind as well.