When I used to wait tables at fine dining establishments throughout the Triangle, I could always spot those people who self-identified as "foodies". They were usually the insufferable prigs whom nothing was good enough for, who complained incessantly about minor details, because they thought there was some way their meal "should be."
When I first started reading this review I thought for a brief, hopeful moment that the author was being satirical. Then I realized, "Oh, wait, he's being serious." My eye rolling commenced.
If you prefer corn tortillas over flour, terrific, knock yourself out, but don't pretend for one cotton-picking minute that there's some hierarchy of ingredients, some absolute definite way that a certain meal should be served.
What I always wanted to tell my foodie guests was that fussiness is not the same thing as discernment; pickiness does not equal taste.
No, the appreciation for food and wine, beer, spirits, coffee or any other gustable lies not in whether or not it adheres to some rigorous standard picked-up by said insufferable foodie in some magazine, some show on Food Network, or something heard on NPR (or read in the Independent) but in identifying one's own specific likes and dislikes. In finding the self-awareness within oneself to pick up on the hint of mango in the Tattinger Grand Cru one is drinking, asking why the chef might have ever dreamed of mixing papaya and paprika (or some other half-witted combination,) and maybe even experiencing a little bit of pleasure in the doing. It's about being in the moment, alive, a sensate being, experiencing. Tasting. And not in the interest of determining whether or not the meal lives up to some weird ideal, but actually what it is--here and now.
And, for the record, I have never eaten at the establishment mentioned in the review, nor am affiliated with it. Yet I hope they spat in your food before they served it to you.
Re: “Nanataco geared for the tender palate”
When I used to wait tables at fine dining establishments throughout the Triangle, I could always spot those people who self-identified as "foodies". They were usually the insufferable prigs whom nothing was good enough for, who complained incessantly about minor details, because they thought there was some way their meal "should be."
When I first started reading this review I thought for a brief, hopeful moment that the author was being satirical. Then I realized, "Oh, wait, he's being serious." My eye rolling commenced.
If you prefer corn tortillas over flour, terrific, knock yourself out, but don't pretend for one cotton-picking minute that there's some hierarchy of ingredients, some absolute definite way that a certain meal should be served.
What I always wanted to tell my foodie guests was that fussiness is not the same thing as discernment; pickiness does not equal taste.
No, the appreciation for food and wine, beer, spirits, coffee or any other gustable lies not in whether or not it adheres to some rigorous standard picked-up by said insufferable foodie in some magazine, some show on Food Network, or something heard on NPR (or read in the Independent) but in identifying one's own specific likes and dislikes. In finding the self-awareness within oneself to pick up on the hint of mango in the Tattinger Grand Cru one is drinking, asking why the chef might have ever dreamed of mixing papaya and paprika (or some other half-witted combination,) and maybe even experiencing a little bit of pleasure in the doing. It's about being in the moment, alive, a sensate being, experiencing. Tasting. And not in the interest of determining whether or not the meal lives up to some weird ideal, but actually what it is--here and now.
And, for the record, I have never eaten at the establishment mentioned in the review, nor am affiliated with it. Yet I hope they spat in your food before they served it to you.
"Corn, please" my ass.