Lets use our imagine a little bit here. Pretend that you are at Lola, you’ve perused the menu thoroughly, but you just can’t find an entire dish with which you know you will be happy.
The Arctic Char looks good, but you’re not into brussels sprouts.
A Hanger steak sounds delicious, but the pickle sauce isn’t doing anything for you.
Keeping in mind that Chef Michael Symon could well have spent hours, maybe even days, perfecting each combination to meet his lofty ideals: Is it rude to order a dish and request changes or substitutions be made to it to suit your personal preferences?
Would you be a ignorant jerk if you ordered the Hanger steak, but told them to hold the pickle sauce?
I’d love to hear from some chefs on this one: Which is more important, the chef’s palate or yours?
Tip for the readers: Never search for the word “ick” on Flickr. Never.
Photo: geomangio
Tagged with: Cleveland Dining • Food Debate • Food Discussion
Some other posts you might enjoy:
March 14th, 2008 at 5:30 am
You might be ignorant, but not a jerk.
I’m open to any and all food experiences short of cannibalism (barring unforeseen plane wrecks on deserted islands) so I would get the pickles sauce without hesitation.
But as a customer, it’s your right (within reason) to be ignorant and ignore the hard creative work that goes on the kitchen. (Besides, some people have weird allergies, or biological aversions to Gherkins.)
[Reply]
March 14th, 2008 at 7:28 am
Here is your authoritative answer:
http://www.finitejest.com/post/28852333
[Reply]
March 14th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
It’s my money, and my palate. If I am game enough to go into a place where I know they serve non-traditional comfort food, I more than likely am open to a little experimentation, but the end result is that I am allowed to request me meal however I like it. The chef reserves the right to not prepare it that way and ask me to leave. It’s a 2-way street.
Now, hold the pickle sauce and pass the effin salt.
[Reply]