Misinformed regional pride

[Stu-i-moto]

Ever read an in-flight magazine lately? See those "best steak houses in..." or "top gourmet cuisine" such and such? Now, you can just pay to be on a list, and they'll put you there.

What is this world coming to??

[Simon_S]

Do you find this phenomenon of misinformed regional pride common in your part of the world?

←

We don't have that problem here in Ireland. We're the best people in the world, don't you know.

Si

[Isabelle Prescott]

Lots of people think a place is "best" because it serves the most food for the cheapest price.

I like my kitchen... that's where the best food is produced.

[moosnsqrl]

Lots of people think a place is "best" because it serves the most food for the cheapest price.

I like my kitchen... that's where the best food is produced.     

←

What hours are you open for service? And do you have a menu you can post? I'm not terribly pleased with what's on here for today. My "best of" vote could be bought rather cheaply at this point.

[Kent Wang]

The quest for the Best does serve a practical purpose: if a tourist arrives in Philly and wants to experience what a proper cheesesteak is like then he will only want the Best. Of course, it can get quite out of hand as you've all mentioned.

[MarketStEl]

The quest for the Best does serve a practical purpose: if a tourist arrives in Philly and wants to experience what a proper cheesesteak is like then he will only want the Best. Of course, it can get quite out of hand as you've all mentioned.

←

The funny thing is, your cheesesteak example actually violates the principle.

The tourists go to the Legendary places, and even though two of the three Legends -- Pat's and Jim's -- have won "Best of Philly" awards in the past (Geno's never has, and the editors of Philadelphia retired Pat's from competition after five of them), those in the know wound not include either of them on an up-to-date Best Cheesesteak list. Good? Yes. Worth a visit? Yes, though IMO in the case of both the establishments at Cheesesteak Corner, more for the overall experience than for the cheesesteaks themselves. The Best? Informed cheesesteak eaters would quarrel with that assessment. Word on the street these days is that the Prince of Steaks (Steve's in the Northeast) has stolen the throne from the King of Steaks (Pat's). Steve has won a few Best of Phillys of his own, though.

[Maureen B. Fant]

Do you find this phenomenon of misinformed regional pride common in your part of the world?

←

My part of the world is Italy, and I scratched my head about this for about three minutes before I realized what the answer was: Italians rarely recommend a restaurant as offering the best of any particular food. They simply say it's impossible to get the best in a restaurant and that you would have to taste their mother's version.

My (Roman) husband and I heard this just one too many times, since we KNOW the best fagioli con le cotiche are his mother's. So we had a competition, four friends' mothers' fagioli con le cotiche -- very friendly and informal, just a series of dinner parties. But sure enough, our horse came in first, by a mile.

[Scargo]

I think I hear many people saying (in this thread) that the most common thing that drives their tastes is what they were brought up on/raised on (like my Mom's chicken 'n dumplings being incomparable). Whether it is your Mom's (or Dad's) food or the local Red Lobster's, it is what you know. You go out of that sphere and then similar foods may seem wierd or odd to you. This drives the "ours is best" mentality.

I have been in Connecticut for more than five years now, and, as a Texan, I have a real problem with the chili and BBQ here. Other food, like seafood and Italian is way superior, IMHO. I have an issue with local bragging rights about the best pizza, hot dog and "the original hamburger" in the New Haven area. This is what you want to brag about and rave about? But, hey, that's me.

Having done some travelling around the world and the US, I would say my tastes are "more sophisticated" and that I am open to a wider variety of taste sensations or variations on a theme. So I try not to get uptight about the chili with vegetables and beans in it.

I had a saying at my old business, which was, "nothing is perfect; but it can be extremely adequate".

I take back what I said about the pizza. It can be damn fine.

Edited August 28, 2007 by Scargo (log)

[monavano]

Do you find this phenomenon of misinformed regional pride common in your part of the world?

←

My part of the world is Italy, and I scratched my head about this for about three minutes before I realized what the answer was: Italians rarely recommend a restaurant as offering the best of any particular food. They simply say it's impossible to get the best in a restaurant and that you would have to taste their mother's version.

My (Roman) husband and I heard this just one too many times, since we KNOW the best fagioli con le cotiche are his mother's. So we had a competition, four friends' mothers' fagioli con le cotiche -- very friendly and informal, just a series of dinner parties. But sure enough, our horse came in first, by a mile.

←

This is my way of thinking!! I'm originally from Philly and you know who makes the best cheesesteak? Me!

[Jaymes]

The quest for the Best does serve a practical purpose: if a tourist arrives in Philly and wants to experience what a proper cheesesteak is like then he will only want the Best. Of course, it can get quite out of hand as you've all mentioned.

←

Not to mention the single most important aspect here. Which you've completely overlooked. And that is that taste is subjective.

Let's go back to the BBQ argument. You can say until you're blue in the face that this certain BBQ joint or that is "the best." And you can tell every single person you come in contact with that it is. And you can tell every single person that asks about BBQ joints in Texas that it is.

But that doesn't make it so. For anyone but you!

If I disagree with you, it's not because I haven't been to the one you think is the best. It's not because I just don't know any better. And it's not because I'm wrong.

It's because for ME, a different place is "the best."

There is not now, and never will be, a unanimity of opinion when it comes to something as subjective as the taste of food.

You keep trying to prove yourself "right" and others "wrong", as in the title of this thread: "MISINFORMED..."

Maybe they are perfectly well informed. And maybe they like something else better than you like it. And maybe for them, when they say something else is "the best," they're RIGHT.

[Kent Wang]

Yes, taste is subjective, but to take that populist notion to the extreme negates the entire point of informed debate. I'm not going to bother convincing someone that McDonald's is bad food, taste is subjective, but I think most of us here on eGullet would call these people 'misinformed'.

The funny thing is, your cheesesteak example actually violates the principle.

←

No, that's exactly what I mean. In Texas, tourists will also go to the "legendary" places. But for the more discriminating tourist, the kind that looks to eGullet for restaurant advice, there is still the desire to get the Best. This is the Best as decided by informed consensus, and obviously a useful piece of knowledge.

[Busboy]

I'm about 98% with Ken on this one. There are certainly objective levels of quality in any "artistic" endeavor and, if at a certain level it comes down to a question of individual taste, there is almost always a clear distinction between the excellent few and the merely good or the forgettably mediocre. We could argue all day about who was better, Matisse or Picasso, but no reasonable person can deny that they painted at a whole different level than Thomas Kinkade, no matter how many misguided rubes hang his paintings on their walls.

Every year, the Washingtonian Magazine has its readers vote for the "Best of" many restaurants and food establishments. The winners get to hang a little framed certificate and the masses beat a path to their door. But the masses are wrong. Objectively.

[Jaymes]

Yes, taste is subjective, but to take that populist notion to the extreme negates the entire point of informed debate. I'm not going to bother convincing someone that McDonald's is bad food, taste is subjective, but I think most of us here on eGullet would call these people 'misinformed'.

The funny thing is, your cheesesteak example actually violates the principle.

←

No, that's exactly what I mean. In Texas, tourists will also go to the "legendary" places. But for the more discriminating tourist, the kind that looks to eGullet for restaurant advice, there is still the desire to get the Best. This is the Best as decided by informed consensus, and obviously a useful piece of knowledge.

←

Right, Kent. But we're not talking about a poll of Chronicle "bests" and a resulting announcement of the winners.

We're talking about taking it to its exact opposite extreme.

And that just because you announce in your definitive voice to everyone visiting Texas that YOUR favorite bbq is "The Best," most certainly does not mean that it is.

To anyone but you.

[chappie]

See, I've never been to Katz's but I have been to the Montreal icon Schwartz's, which was some damn fine brisket and pastrami. Once as a novice in NYC my host dragged me to Carnegie Deli because It Was The Best! and I can still feel the after-effects of the gastrointestinal fallout I experienced downing that stupid cartoon plate of corned beef.

As for cheesesteaks in Philly, I always thought Sarcone's was way above the whiz places...

[Kent Wang]

Right, Kent.  But we're not talking about a poll of Chronicle "bests"  and a resulting announcement of the winners.

We're talking about taking it to its exact opposite extreme.

And that just because you announce in your definitive voice to everyone visiting Texas that YOUR favorite bbq is "The Best," most certainly does not mean that it is.

To anyone but you.

←

You are employing the straw man argument. At what point do I declare that my opinion is definitive? I don't think anyone on this forum has been pompous enough to say that. I think you're reading too much into this. I have consistently stated that of the top five to ten joints in Texas, it does come down to individual taste and sheer luck of the draw.

As for Salt Lick and Rudy's, I think Busboy's apt analogy would put them into the category of the Thomas Kinkades. Maybe you love Kinkade (and certainly many people in the world do), but serious art critics do not. I respect your choice to reject this consensus opinion -- maybe all the art critics are frou-frou idiots -- I'm not here to change your mind about that.

[MarketStEl]

If I disagree with you, it's not because I haven't been to the one you think is the best.  It's not because I just don't know any better.  And it's not because I'm wrong.

It's because for ME, a different place is "the best."

←

I dunno...I can think of at least one occasion where I feel confident in saying that someone I was with judged something he ate "the best" because he just didn't know any better.

Someone not bought up around barbecue and those who fix -- and worship -- it might not be able to recognize ribs that had been parcooked as opposed to slow smoked. And if the parcooked ribs have the right flavor notes -- the barbecue sauce can supply some of the smokiness -- that someone won't realize that what he is eating is not the genuine article.

If it's not possible to educate one's palate, what are we all doing here anyway?

[Kent Wang]

Another factor is that bad versions of some of these foods really aren't that bad. Gas-cooked barbecue is still pretty tasty, and frankly I eat a lot of "bad" barbecue at various social functions where they have barbecue catered from one of the "legends". Because of this, people with less educated palates are more likely to believe that this passable version is really the Best.

Is this more or less true with the other regional foods? Cheesesteak might be another thing that can't be that bad, though I'm not an expert this -- Sandy? I think bad Maryland crab cake is pretty bad, though.

[plk]

I'd venture to say that there's the best, relative best, and then the nostalgic best of whatever specialty food you're talking about.

I think there are definite objective measures of what makes good Q, for instance, and one of those would be that the brisket is not tough. I think it's the hardest thing to do right, and I just didn't find that it was right at the nostalgic Austin places, or even most of the out of town places I went to, when last I visited. I ate well and had a great time everywhere I went, but I do think that the nostalgic joints that have become destinations for tourists (myself included there) don't necessarily remain the objective best, if they ever truly were.

[MarketStEl]

Another factor is that bad versions of some of these foods really aren't that bad. Gas-cooked barbecue is still pretty tasty, and frankly I eat a lot of "bad" barbecue at various social functions where they have barbecue catered from one of the "legends". Because of this, people with less educated palates are more likely to believe that this passable version is really the Best.

Is this more or less true with the other regional foods? Cheesesteak might be another thing that can't be that bad, though I'm not an expert this -- Sandy? I think bad Maryland crab cake is pretty bad, though.

←

I would include cheesesteak in the ranks of foods where the mediocre versions aren't all that bad -- but trust me, it is possible to make a truly bad cheesesteak: I've had sandwiches featuring dry, tough, and even burnt steak; cheese sauce with a chemical aftertaste; overcooked onions; or some combination of these, all served up on either too-soft or too-chewy rolls.

I'd venture to say that there's the best, relative best, and then the nostalgic best of whatever specialty food you're talking about.

I think there are definite objective measures of what makes good Q, for instance, and one of those would be that the brisket is not tough. I think it's the hardest thing to do right, and I just didn't find that it was right at the nostalgic Austin places, or even most of the out of town places I went to, when last I visited. I ate well and had a great time everywhere I went, but I do think that the nostalgic joints that have become destinations for tourists (myself included there) don't necessarily remain the objective best, if they ever truly were.

←

I can't say for certain that my own notions of the "best" barbecue in Kansas City aren't colored by nostalgia. I know from the comments of knowledgeable current residents that there are several places that either rival or have surpassed my personal fave Gates'. However, you will still find current residents recommending Gates' Bar-B-Q, so I don't think that sentiment has completely clouded my judgement here.

[mrsteak]

Spare me - the best BBQ is not in Texas - it's here in Oklahoma!

And we have the best hamburgers! Some place called "Mc" something or other. Can't miss it - yellow arches on the outside.

Silliness aside - the "best" is what you personally believe to be the "best" for you.

[sazji]

Istanbul has several places which are popularly considered to be "the best" in their area. Some really deserve it, like Hacı Bekir's lokum. I just haven't found another one quite like it.

Bluefish as it just comes through the Bosphorus from the Black Sea is unlike anywhere else; by the time it gets to the Aegean it's lost its fat, and just isn't the same.

BUT: There are several places which were perhaps very good but are now riding completely on their reputation and the fact that most people will eat anything.

"Profitrol" here refers specifically to a dessert made with small cream puffs filled with pastry cream and covered with a rich puddinglike dark chocolate sauce. It is said that it was first made here by a pastry shop called İnci and people rave about it. Perhas it was good, once, but now it's made with cheap cocoa, the pastry cream is thick and paste like. It's a tasteless mess. And yet people go on and on about it; you see peopel go in and eat two servings and talk about how great it is. I disagreed with someone about it the other day and was practically read the riot act!

Another one is Güllüoğlu Baklava. It's become fairly famous and has opened a branch in New York now. It's not bad at all. But I'm convinced they use som corn syrup in their syrup because I get a burning in my stomach after I eat it. I'd much rather eat that by Köşkeroğlu right around the corner; but lots of peole haven't even heard of it. And there are plenty of smaller places that make a really nice product. But if you ask anyone, they automatically say "Güllüoğlu."

[Jaymes]

I'd venture to say that there's the best, relative best, and then the nostalgic best of whatever specialty food you're talking about.

I think there are definite objective measures of what makes good Q, for instance, and one of those would be that the brisket is not tough. I think it's the hardest thing to do right, and I just didn't find that it was right at the nostalgic Austin places, or even most of the out of town places I went to, when last I visited. I ate well and had a great time everywhere I went, but I do think that the nostalgic joints that have become destinations for tourists (myself included there) don't necessarily remain the objective best, if they ever truly were.

I can't help but be really curious...

Just what exactly in your view are the "nostalgic Austin places" that serve sub-par BBQ brisket?

I mean, I lived there for over ten years but I can't really come up with a single Austin 'cue joint that I'd call a "nostalgic place." Sam's maybe?

Lockhart, Taylor, Luling, Llano, sure.

And quite a number of regular restaurants in Austin definitely could be called "nostalgic."

I'm not trying to argue with you. I am honestly curious as to what BBQ restaurants in Austin are considered by others as being "nostalgic."

Edited August 31, 2007 by Jaymes (log)

[Kent D]

For me, I always qualify a "Best of" with "that I've had so far", although I'm always looking for something better. Having a difference of opinion doesn't make either person wrong, it's a factor of individual taste. And until you've FOUND the best, you have to go with the evidence you have gathered to that point.

"Best Of" lists and titles are an interesting diversion, but they mostly come down to a popularity contest, nothing more.

[Kent Wang]

I'm not trying to argue with you.  I am honestly curious as to what BBQ restaurants in Austin are considered by others as being "nostalgic."

←

Perhaps the better term is "legend"; nostalgic implies a long history, while effective marketing can build a legend in a short period of time. Salt Lick is the top candidate, followed by Stubb's, County Line, Rudy's. Essentially what you would get if you polled the general Austin population.

I don't think Sam's has been around long enough or is known well enough to be considered nostalgic. Sam's and the Lockhart, Llano and Taylor places are just the opposite of what I am criticizing, they're little known (compared to Salt Lick), but are the true best.

[plk]

I'm not trying to argue with you. I am honestly curious as to what BBQ restaurants in Austin are considered by others as being "nostalgic."

A good half of my family lives in Austin, and depending on who I talk about BBQ with, or whether the point is just to eat or listen to live music and eat, some wax philosophically about Sam's or Stubbs, some Ruby's, Artz, County Line, or something. There are a few others I've been to a couple of times, though I probably haven't been to every single barbeque restaurant in Austin. I've always gotten the impression from my family and friends that there is a lot of local, nostalgic pride in a number of in-Austin BBQ joints, even if the most famous barbeque is further out of town.