Merchant House/Hibiscus

[Marlyn4k]

Don't judge the restaurant, judge the critic (unless it's Tom Aikens )

It would be unfortunate if the positives about restaurants were devalued by the suppression of the negatives on the forum.

I have particular sympathy for those small independent restaurants that are reaching culinary heights - where usually husband and wife, plus a couple of helpers, are forced to work every service that they open, mustering only enough gross profit to make a modest living. Scant reward for their talent.

So one naturally feels a pang of sympathy for the restaurant as well as the injured customer. Minus the assumptions and opinions from "I must confess" and cut out some of the earlier negative adjectives and this would read strongly and credibly as very damaging.

I do think that a restaurant like Hibiscus deserves a phone call to seek satisfaction. If that resolution were not forthcoming then the report would be more damaging still.

[Basildog]

Can i assume that the owners of Hibiscus are aware of this thread?

[MobyP]

It also seems somewhat evident that the staff were eavedropping throughout the entire meal, and picking fag ends then reconstructing what they had picked up back at the waiter's station

←

This is of course pure supposition of your part Moby and in my opinion not a satisfactory basis upon which to be drawing conclusions about the restaurant owners and staff's behaviour, and in particular to be using words like "shocking" and "outrageous".

←

Sorry Andy. It's not supposition, but me recounting what he'd already written:

She thus followed with a tirade of abuse towards the whole table, Claude by her side, saying that we were laughing all the time, heard us being sarcastic, saying niggly things about the food, taking the mick out of her staff etc.

The only supposition I'm making is that PWeaver is quoting Claire accurately. If that's what she said, or even a rough estimation of it, then as she wasn't an invited member of the party, she was basing her opinions on incomplete information picked up by herself or members of staff.

As to my flowery adjectives, I withdraw them as a subjective statement, until the occurance is confirmed or refuted.

Perhaps Claire and Claude would like to comment on this? Would it be possible to ask them for comment, Andy?

Edited November 7, 2004 by MobyP (log)

[Andy Lynes]

Can i assume that the owners of Hibiscus are aware of this thread?

←

I don't know, I haven't contacted them about it as yet. Has anyone else.

[Andy Lynes]

Sorry Andy. It's not supposition, but me recounting what he'd already written:

←

Moby, I don't want to engage in nit picking with you, but you can't possibly know what the waiting staff did or didn't hear, whether they misheard or misinterpreted snatches of the conversation and filled in the gaps themselves or caught sarcastic comments in full.

[Basildog]

I think it's only fair to inform them what a guest has put into the public arena regarding the experience they had with them.They don't have to reply here, they may choose to address this in a different way, but they should be made aware.

[SamanthaF]

We are having dinner at Hibiscus Thursday night. Will be sure to whisper

[Andy Lynes]

Sam, thanks. Hope you have a great meal and please do tell us all about it. Are you going to Merchant House as well?

[SamanthaF]

Yep. Doing the double - Dinner at both.

[Pweaver1984]

I agree with Basildog. Can't we trash the reputation of a restaurant without getting all heated about it?

Andy Lynnes May 8 2003, 06:18 AM

Wat a diffreence a year makes!!

[Andy Lynes]

Which thread is that from? I'd like to be able to put the quote into context before responding, at the moment its meaningless to me.

[Pweaver1984]

Whitstable, sir

[Andy Lynes]

Here's the link to the thread in question. Now I have read my comment in context I can see that its self explanatory and no further response is required from me.

[thom]

Wow this is a firey one...

Ever the pacifist (or coward), I find elements to agree with in everybodies responses.

I do think the whole point of eGullet is for people to post personal experiences (good, bad or indifferent) about restaurants. Working this way has lots of benefits - accurate, up to date detail, no commercial/political sway etc but it also has certain cons which have to be taken into account - does a poster have a hidden agenda, are they being truthful etc.

I honestly don't think Pweavers post is any different in motivation and execution to many other restaurant-review posts I've read on here. It stands out purely for the intensity of the negative experience, and that fact it is so out of character with previous postings about the restaurant in question.

The latter two facts mean that the post possibly deserves to be questioned or debated in more detail than - for example - my niggly negative comments about the much-respected Cafe Boloud in the NY thread. That said, it can still only be assessed or questioned by the same parameters we would judge any eGullet post.

I agree with Andy's points that t is important to moderate these forums as otherwise they could decend into spiteful 'He said - she said' catfights. I also agree that one should always attempt to resolve personal issues with the restaurant directly. That said it is PWeavers decision to whether to do this, and doesn't interfere with his right to post here. It's a public forum, and should they choose Claire of Claude are free to respond.

I have had several excellent meals at Hibiscus, and the service has always been fantastic. Claire has always been lovely, going back to her days when she ran FoH (a grand term considering it was a team of one!) for the Merchant House. My own view (purely on nothing more than gut reaction) is that whatever happened at Hibiscus (and I think the chances of 'nothing' happening are slim to non-existent) was a combination of misunderstanding and over-reaction, and that both parties would probably give differing accounts and possibly even feel a degree of remorse.

Still, I find value in nearly all of eGullets personal reports, and a lack of negative feedback of otherwise critically lauded restaurants would make the site a poorer place. I'm glad PWeaver posted, and I'm glad he seems willing to enter into a constructive dialogue with everybody here about his post.

Cheers

Thom

[Andy Lynes]

whatever happened at Hibiscus (and I think the chances of 'nothing' happening are slim to non-existent)

←

It is certainly not my intention to infer that Pweaver's post is in any way deliberately misleading or exaggerated, just that the situation was a delicate and awkward one that might better have been kept private.

However, now that its in the public domain, Pweaver ought to respond to the assertions I made in my earlier post in order to provide a fuller picture of events so that people reading this thread are in a position to make up their own minds about what happened that day. As it is, he has remained tight lipped and instead has tried (and failed) to make me look hypocritical about this issue.

[curlywurlyfi]

But eGullet.org is not a private conversation. Its a very public forum, read by thousands of people all over the world everyday. When there are reputations at stake, eGullet members and its officials cannot in all good conscience simply say           

"Oh God, no! Really, how awful!" to every sob story. 

Imagine if it was your restaurant that was being talked about in this way, and the members of eGullet as one united in saying how terrible a chef you must be, how bad your food is and how amateurish the service at your restaurant must be for such an incident to have occurred. Wouldn't your reaction be "How can they say that, they weren't even there?"

but surely the converse must by extension also be true? Let's pretend Andy's paragraph above is predicated on a positive not a negative review:

"Imagine if it was your restaurant that was being talked about in this way, and the members of eGullet as one united in saying how fantastic a chef you must be, how incredible your food is and how professional the service at your restaurant must be for such an incident to have occurred. Wouldn't your reaction be "How can they say that, they weren't even there?" "

I have a feeling that this post would be considered entirely unobjectionable on eGullet. So why can't pweaver1984 express his (negative) opinion? No-one has asked eGullet to throw up its hands and say oh god how awful poor you. Pweaver1984 has shared his disappointing experience with us, and I am sad that eGullet doesn't seem to have the capacity or the courage to allow that.

[oldschooltie]

"Imagine ... the members of eGullet as one united"

Not much chance of that I would have thought

[Andy Lynes]

Pweaver1984 has shared his disappointing experience with us, and I am sad that eGullet doesn't seem to have the capacity or the courage to allow that.

←

Fi - its allowed! It's there in black and attractive shade of blue. Pweaver's comments have not been amended, changed or deleted in anyway. He has drawn sympathy from some members, others like myself have challenged him on events and his reasons for posting in the first place. That's also allowed. I feel that I really cannot be any clearer in my reasons for criticising Pweaver in posting in the way he has done about this particular incident.

As to your example of an outstandingly glowing report, I'd like to quote William Strunk Jr and EB White from their book "The Elements of Style":

"When you overstate, readers will be instantly on guard, and everything that has preceded your overstatement as well as everything that follows it will suspect in their minds because they have lost confidence in your judgement or your poise....a single carefree superlative has the power to destroy, for readers, the object of your enthusiasm."

You can be sure that while members may not find boundless and unbalanced praise necessarily objectionable, they will be suspicious of it.

[Andy Lynes]

"Imagine ... the members of eGullet as one united"

Not much chance of that I would have thought

←

Now there's something we can all agree on.

[Pweaver1984]

Andy, I wasn't after sympathy.

I know you’re a very intelligent individual, but I was just telling you of my experience, I was in fact telling the whole of Egullet. Of course it'll be one sided, as I only experienced one side.

We're all not as well known as "you", and to walk into a restaurant and get extra special treatment is abnormal to moi. I'm obviously going to be treated as any other 20 year old?? Which is just what I want and expect from a 2 Michelin starred restaurant?

[Andy Lynes]

I know you’re a very intelligent individual

←

You obviously haven't met me!

I do know a number of people in the industry, but I'm not "well known" i.e. I'm not recognised when I walk into restaurants. I can guarantee you that nobody thinks "Oh, its that Andy Lynes from international food and drink site eGullet, lets pull out all the stops." Many chefs and restaurateurs know eGullet, but most have no idea how I fit into the picture, they just like the site and I would never use the name of eGullet in an attempt to get special treatment in a restaurant.

At the risk of repeating myself, I don't accept your arguement that your account has to be one sided. You have told us plently about how the restaurant reacted to your table, the otherside of the story (and I have no reason to doubt that what you have posted is accurate), but not a whole lot about the behaviour of you and your guests.

[Bapi]

I know you’re a very intelligent individual

←

You obviously haven't met me!

I do know a number of people in the industry, but I'm not "well known" i.e. I'm not recognised when I walk into restaurants. I can guarantee you that nobody thinks "Oh, its that Andy Lynes from international food and drink site eGullet, lets pull out all the stops." Many chefs and restaurateurs know eGullet, but most have no idea how I fit into the picture, they just like the site and I would never use the name of eGullet in an attempt to get special treatment in a restaurant.

At the risk of repeating myself, I don't accept your arguement that your account has to be one sided. You have told us plently about how the restaurant reacted to your table, the otherside of the story (and I have no reason to doubt that what you have posted is accurate), but not a whole lot about the behaviour of you and your guests.

←

I have read these posts with some interest. As Gary wrote in response to Pweaver's post- Rosie and I had three consecutive meals at Hibiscus and in fact dined there the very evening after Pweaver's lunch.

I am not prepared to get into the minutiae of what may have happened that afternoon. Frankly I am not going to waste my time by trying to argue the toss on this matter- suffice to say - anyone with a modicum of intelligence can read between the lines of Pweaver's post and work out what happened.

He/ she cites Claire Bosi reacted as she did by "saying that we were laughing all the time, heard us being sarcastic, saying niggly things about the food, taking the mick out of her staff". Well, despite Andy's repeated attempts you have clearly decided not to address whether you and your colleagues did in fact act in the manner described above. And yet you expect us to believe that your party were rounded upon by the Bosi's for no reason whatsoever and without the slightest provocation on your group's part. I know exactly how I would ( and indeed do ) react if people are rude to my team and I can't say that I blame Claire.

In any case - any potentially cogent point you may have made in your post is obviated by the classic-"E-Gulleters please don’t think I’m being nasty or even trying to ruin the reputation of this restaurant"…which was preceded by this very mature comment……

"I in all honesty don't think they deserve 2 Michelin Stars, and I hope in January they receive just the one, which would be for Claude’s food"

Er - yes - of course you are not being nasty there in the slightest bit. In mitigation, I suppose you were a teenager last year.

If anyone is in the slightest bit interested our three meals were excellent and totalling £400 for - one a la carte, one tasting menu and one lunch, including wine, water and service provided quite astonishing value for money. Highlights included Wild Salmon poached in oil, suckling pig served in two courses, langoustines, scallops with black radish( wow) and a pheasant pithivier. If get the chance I'll post in more detail as I am pretty sure that's what this thread's original purpose was.

On another note, it was good to see a certain chef of ginger persuasion previously based in the Cotswolds dining there on our first night. Good luck to him and his missus on their new venture, which I am sure we will be hearing about very soon.

Edited November 16, 2004 by Bapi (log)

[Scottf]

Aaah, Bapi's getting all protective over his favourite restaurant

[Andy Lynes]

Bapi thanks for the short report - definately want to hear more about those meals. Its a shame Claire and Claude don't run "a buy 3 get 1 free" scheme, or you'd be quids in. Mind you, if they did, they'd never see the back of you!

To be fair to PWeaver, we've managed to debate this contentious issue without anyone getting too hot under the collar, which is very commendable. I don't believe that we are going to get to the bottom of this matter here and so I'd ask that we move on. Thanks.

[SamanthaF]

Dinner as previously mentioned at the end of last week. We opted for the surprise menu.

We started with canapés of Cheese puffs and assorted bon bons with cheese and ham, garlic mushroom and black olive fillings. Somehow I missed the black olive one, but Scott seemed to enjoy it!

The following menu is as supplied by Claire at the end of our meal, specially printed and bound into the traditional Hibiscus folder.

Chilled Butternut Squash & Kumquat Soda.

Carpaccio of Scottish scallops, Black Mouli, Autumn truffle and Almond Oil. (as Bapi mentions - SEX ON A PLATE)

Roast Langoustine tails, Parsley root puree, Buckwheat cream, Alba Truffle

Poached Cod, Fennel puree, Salad of fennel and limequat, Parmesan and Truffle Cream.

John Dory braised in coffee and cardamon, Spiced quince, Buttered savoy cabbage.

Veal sweetbreads, Chestnut crust, Chestnut and caper sauce, Smoked butter. (MORE SEX)

Savoury ice cream of Foie gras, Warm emulsion of brioche, Balsamic caramel.

Roast Ludlow hare, Smoked Chocolate, Chervil Root, Butternut squash. (This dish is not on the menu, and was only served to us.)

Plate of English cheese, Beetroot, orange and shallot chutney.

Bramley apple puree, Sweet celeriac jelly, Chestnut cream.

Petit pot of burnt milk, Warm banana yoghurt, Jesuit biscuit.

Meal started at 8.00 and we were last to leave at around 1.30, only after Claude had thoroughly examined our photos from Anthony’s and Barcelona.

A wonderful evening with perfect service.

PS; we also found out that Claire and Claude are of the absolute belief that Gary Marshall is Bapi's manservant.

PPS; Bapi did not leave us any champagne credits from the week before.