I’m not a free-market fanatic, and I believe there are a lot of places where the free market doesn’t work so well, but restaurants are an awesome place for the free market. Duty minimally enters into it.
You go to a restaurant to exchange money for food. If you and the chef can come to an agreement about this exchange, it happens. If you can’t, it doesn’t. The end.
The only place duty enters into it is that you both have a duty to be honest with one another, not to defraud one another. If you order a dish, you’re implicitly agreeing both to pay for the dish and to engage in the local tipping customs (yeah, that’s right, you skinflints, it’s implicit). If you accept an order for a dish without sending the wait staff back, you’re implicitly agreeing to cook the dish as it was ordered. A customer who doesn’t intend to pay and tip needs to be up-front about that: “I’d like the steak, but I don’t plan to leave a customary tip, just so you know, and I probably won’t pay the full cost for the steak when the bill comes.” A chef who doesn’t intend to cook the dish as ordered needs to be up-front about that: “I know you ordered the mushroom ragout with ketchup, but I hate you and the wolves that raised you, so you may not have ketchup on it.”
If both parties are honest prior to the fulfillment of the transaction, they’ve both fulfilled their duties.
If Olive Garden is willing to cook for me, and the chef at Chez Snobbypants isn’t, then yes, I would prefer the Olive Garden. Even better, of course, would be one of the many places that’s better than Olive Garden but which still wants to be in the restaurant business (which business is, ultimately, that of making food for other people).
If a chef isn’t making food for other people, why does he need any customers at all? His food will still be just as magnificent a work of art if he’s the only one eating it.
You’re just being obtuse, right? They want other people to appreciate their creation. Obviously, people who are too finicky to try things “not the way I like it” are not the kind of people they are hoping to draw.
No, I’m not just being obtuse. If they want other people to appreciate their creation, and those people will appreciate it more if it’s a little different, then they should change it a little for those people.
Right, making food for people who are willing to pay them money for that food. You’re not willing to do so, but other people are. What’s the big deal? You’re willing to pay Olive Garden for food, and other people aren’t. This isn’t a moral issue; duty doesn’t enter into it.
I usually ignore spelling errors, but this one was amusing. I know many musicians, and hired a few, and known several who put considerable effort into getting “higher”, but I’ve never combined the two.
I seem to recall from earlier discussions that most of the dishes at Applebee’s come in plastic bags and that they microwave the dishes. Alterations are pretty much impossible.
You understand that every type of goods or service has multiple providers targeting different segments of each market – some providers aim to serve the broadest market base by targeting things like low prices and broadly popular characteristics. Some providers target narrower market segments that are willing to pay premium prices for goods and services with very specialized characteristics. And there are a series of market segments along the continuum between them. In some cases, it’s worth the provider’s while to accommodate special requests. In other cases, it’s not. This is very basic capitalism. It shouldn’t be that mysterious. Not every service provider is targeting you, personally, as a potential customer.
The reason I go to the kinds of places we’re talking about in this thread is that I want to eat food that a chef who knows more than I do about food is preparing it. That’s the ENTIRE point, actually. I don’t want to tell him how I’d appreciate it more; I want him or her to make something in a way that I’ve never thought of, incorporating flavors I’d’ve never thought would go together or indeed have never even heard of, and surprise me with it.
Put it this way: I’m not a big fan of tripe, but you bet your ass I’m gonna be chowing tripe in a dish that Grant Achatz or Ferran Adria or Thomas Keller created, because I’m will to bet that it’s gonna be delicious. Hell, I’d eat a plate of fried aphid shit if one of those chefs made it for me because I know I’ll be blown away.
Well, of course not. If they were, I’d never need to ask for alterations, since they’d all be making it the way I like in the first place. That’s why I think it’s so absurd that chefs wouldn’t make minor alterations: Because they’re not targeting any specific single customer.
You missed the point. They aren’t targeting any specific single customer, but they are targeting a certain category of customer, and this category includes customers who are willing to trust the judgment of the chef rather than ones that expect to make a series of personalized demands. When I say that they aren’t targeting you, personally, as a customer, I mean that they are targeting a category that might or might not include you. And it’s perfectly reasonable in those circumstances not to make accommodations for people like you.
Food-as-food should be subject to alteration; you’re just going out to have dinner prepared by someone else/change of scenery/you’re out of town/whatever. You’re just getting fed, even with good food, so what it is doesn’t really matter.
Food-as-experience isn’t really subject to alteration, since the point is the specific food being made by the specific chef. That’s those tasting menus and the like. Change the food, change the experience, and at that point it’s kind of wasted.
Except the thread you cite was explicitly at a Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse. (And what a horribly stupid name that is.)
How the hell does the chef know what the customer’s best interests are? If I like my steak well done with tomato sauce on the side, who are you to tell me I can’t eat it that way?
Backwards. In the example cited, the steak in question normally comes with a dab of butter on top so that it melts and sizzles when it hits the plate. The customer requested no butter, but the restaurant served hers with butter anyway.
Bingo! The chef’s duty is to play the role that the restaurant owner desires. If that role is as magnificient specialty creative dining experience creator, then that is what the customers should expect, and ultimately what the customer gets is at the creative control of the chef. Requesting variations can be done (like for allergies), but the chef can decide if the variation is merely a challenge or a complete destruction of the intent of the dish. If one of those survey meal things (a dozen 2 bite courses), then the easiest answer may be to switch one of the items. (“I’m sorry, I can’t make the raspberry tart souffle with strawberries, but I can substitute the iced-lemon tart wedge for that course.”)
If the role is to provide good production of a variety of typical dishes, then there should be no issue for the cook providing the steak well done with ketchup on top. Not because the cook would eat it that way or be proud of it that way, but because his role is to satisfy the customer, and not preparing it that way will not satisfy the customer.
And if a customer makes a request that is not feasible, the proper response is to inform the guest prior to preparing/serving the food. “I’m sorry, but the lasagna is prepared as a large batch dish that takes several hours, and the mushrooms are integral. It isn’t possible to prepare without the mushrooms, but perhaps you would enjoy the baked ziti?” That is an acceptable answer. The customer then may choose an alternate dish, or choose to eat elsewhere.
I went to a somewhat fancy place once, I wanted my steak well-done. The waiter didn’t approve, and confused me into getting the filet mignon instead of the sirloin. It came out cooked on the outside and bloody raw on the inside. I was not happy. Hint: “well done” does not mean cook the outside black, it means cook the steak through.
And this is the very definition of snobbishness. I am not uneducated because I have a different opinion. If you have to resort to that concept, you have no argument.
There is no inherent link between “fine art” and education. Actually, there might be, in that you need an education (in that type of art) to enjoy some types of art. But food is not one of them. It’s not as if people make crappy food that only the elite can appreciate.
If there is a menu, I am deciding what I get to eat, and I have the right to tell you what I want. You have a right to refuse. You do not have the right to berate me for my choice, or bring out what I did not order and expect me to pay for it.
As for the OP: ultimately, his duty is to the customer. Maybe not one individual customer, or even one type of customer, but a chef is creating food he thinks people will like. If he is not, he’s not even a cook, let alone a chef.
I don’t see how a duty to himself even makes sense.
My husband and I go to fine dining tasting menus once a month (it is unquestionably our most expensive hobby, but we really really love poncy food), and are often accompanied by friends who are eg allergic to nuts or vegetarian (or in one memorable case, a vegan coeliac). No restaurant has ever had a problem accommodating our friends, and I have received the impression that the chef usually enjoys the challenge. For example, the chef (who is a fairly big name in the British foodie world) came out to meet us after the 12-course vegan gluten-free menu (we had made inquiries when we booked, of course) and specifically ask my friend what her favourite courses were, any tastes she thought went particularly well together, anything she found clashing or off-flavoured, etc. Even when we haven’t called ahead mentioning an allergy, at the beginning of the evening the servers nearly always ask, “Is there anything you’re allergic to?” and I would say at least 40% of the time ask “Are there any foods you particularly don’t like or don’t eat?”
I eat most of my meals out and have for 25 years. I’ve never met a chef or waiter who isn’t happy to accommodate the customer. It is a very competitive business. But I order my steaks medium rare or rare and my only pet thing is no mushrooms.
My parents are well done people, both having biology degrees. I have now introduced them to sous vide cooking medium rare with printed proof that it is pasteurized (and I scorch the outside for aesthetics) and they think I am a genius and eat it without complaint and many compliments.
It’s a business dinner, my boss picks the restaurant, and I have food allergies. * Il maestro* will back down, or I will give him reason to wish he had.
Ever encountered a line chef who mistakenly believes himself to be Wolfgang Puck? They’re out there, and they don’t have my sympathy. The actual Wolfgang Puck is a different story, of course.
TV and comics writer Mark Evanier has a story about the time he went to a sub shop for a cheese steak. The chef refused to make one without peppers. Hilarity ensued.
