I prefer small plates and hope the concept is not a fad. The huge portions of food served in most restaurants are too much to deal with and are in edible if taken home in doggy bags. I have to work at controlling my weight (one of the "benefits" of aging) and small plates allow me to continue dining out.
Tapas are great, we love it when we're over in Spain and sampling there. In this country? Not so much. As the late Julia Child had rightly put it, the amount of "accessorizing" the plate, serving customers a huge plate but a small dollop of food that one has to imagine some french term for it as appetizer or main dish, while being charged with an outrageous sum, is one of the biggest turnoff for me. Don't get me wrong, I love eating out, just not being robbed in plain daylight.
Why don't we borrow some sense from chinese restaurants? Yes, you can order appetizers and you can order main dishes, but it's always based on the idea of sharing, with potion sufficient enough for that idea. That way, restaurants won't be just in the business of serving up plates (and washing them in the back) while servers/chef complaining about insufficient room on the table to serve all the different dishes, when all the dishes only occur 1/10th of the dish space?
Why don't we borrow some sense from chinese restaurants? Yes, you can order appetizers and you can order main dishes, but it's always based on the idea of sharing, with potion sufficient enough for that idea. That way, restaurants won't be just in the business of serving up plates (and washing them in the back) while servers/chef complaining about insufficient room on the table to serve all the different dishes, when all the dishes only occur 1/10th of the dish space?
2
Less is more (money).
I'm all for the concept of dining on more small plates than the standard two, three or four courses. It's the forced sharing that's ridiculous. What in heaven's name does the restaurant gain from that? And I simply don't want to deal with the logistical shenanigans of sharing. Dinner is supposed ot be a pleasure, not stressful. Pete Wells covered most of the downsides - the food ending up as a pile of mush by the time it gets to the last person, etc. But he forgot to mention sanitary practices. Hey, if you have a cold, I really do not want your fork in food I'm about to eat too.
2
These high-end restaurants have become nothing more than "fashion shows" for food; "crafting" food styled on plates that no one can venture a fork to without the design collapsing like a stack of dominoes- rather than creating a meal for the purpose of eating. Those with the deep pockets can all pretend to actually get something at their table resembling and tasting like something eatable while the restaurants can continue to "jack-up" the price for the pleasure of a small plate; I will gladly take a pass.
2
It is all clever scam, thanks to food critics. Created by smart chefs to charge more money for less. I like cooking by Tom Colicchio by his philosophy wrong.
For Pete Wells it's O.K., he dine spending corporate money, we customers should stop to patronize this establishment period.
For Pete Wells it's O.K., he dine spending corporate money, we customers should stop to patronize this establishment period.
Pete, and commenters, have you ever eaten in the Philippines? Everyone at the table orders a dish, and you are expected to share, whether or not you like the food, and regardless of whether the various choices make any sense at the same meal.
Obviously a problem for vegetarians, and also for people who (like me) don't want to eat deep-fried food. (Frying, in lots of oil, is the preferred cooking method. Deep fried pork fat is a great favorite.) The waiters bring everything out at once, and the only "small plates" are your own, where the fish, the beef, and the vegetable all crowd each other. You can ask for a new plate, when something in sauce arrives, but the waiters will be very surprised.
It's called "sharing", but it is really competing, as you can never go back for a second helping.
To be fair, some of it is really good. And it is inexpensive.
Obviously a problem for vegetarians, and also for people who (like me) don't want to eat deep-fried food. (Frying, in lots of oil, is the preferred cooking method. Deep fried pork fat is a great favorite.) The waiters bring everything out at once, and the only "small plates" are your own, where the fish, the beef, and the vegetable all crowd each other. You can ask for a new plate, when something in sauce arrives, but the waiters will be very surprised.
It's called "sharing", but it is really competing, as you can never go back for a second helping.
To be fair, some of it is really good. And it is inexpensive.
2
I stopped that foolishness in the 80s, as soon as it started! When you go out to eat and spend $100 or more on 4 mouthfuls of food, you are a fool and you deserve to get robbed.
The second time that I had to stop at a diner on the way home from 'dinner' at one of those ridiculous places, I just stopped going out to eat and learned to be a better cook.
The second time that I had to stop at a diner on the way home from 'dinner' at one of those ridiculous places, I just stopped going out to eat and learned to be a better cook.
5
You're exactly right. All these self-serving chefs are propped up by self-serving food critics and TV shows, but how many customers are really dining from their own pockets, meals after meals, that are not the on expense accounts or the likes of Madoffs?
1
Small plates, large price = complete scam! I will eat where portions are in line with a normal appetite.
PS: Tom Colicchio's "lost interest in cooking or eating main courses"? Tough tarts, Tom, you sound like you need a new line of work.
PS: Tom Colicchio's "lost interest in cooking or eating main courses"? Tough tarts, Tom, you sound like you need a new line of work.
6
Some of these restaurants are very good, but isn't the small-plate "craze" more about profit per plate than about creativity?
4
And to think there was a tme when we ate for survival's sake.
1
My wife and I have been dining on appetizers for years, and we share them. We eat a lot less because the food is "more interesting".
I think one reason Americans eat so much is that the plate, consisting of one dish is so boring. Colicchio and others are trying to change our expectations of a meal. They are going over the top to define a different way of dinning.
The French eat this way. A small bit of everything. Their restaurants can do this at a reasonable price. The same price as an "average" American meal.
I think one reason Americans eat so much is that the plate, consisting of one dish is so boring. Colicchio and others are trying to change our expectations of a meal. They are going over the top to define a different way of dinning.
The French eat this way. A small bit of everything. Their restaurants can do this at a reasonable price. The same price as an "average" American meal.
1
"Here we go again" is my usual thought whenever a new small plates restaurant opens in my city, Las Vegas. To me, it's a ploy to charge ever-spiraling prices for the least amount of food. I will continue to vote with my wallet and refuse to patronize any of them, except perhaps at Happy Hour, when the prices revert to what they should be for some of these pittances.
8
Smaller plates and perhaps double in price? I'll pass on this craze thank you very much.
12
All of a sudden pulpo (better known as octopus) is all the rage. LOL, I've been eating it since I was a kid, it's a staple on the Christmas Eve menu in our house and our relatives' table. cured in a really good Sicilian Olive Oil, lots of garlic with black peppercorns fresh parsley and vinegar, it's prepared at least a month before the feast begins. What a treat. Amazing too at the price these restaurants charge for it.
1
I can't help but laugh at that schtick of an octopus in the picture. It's ridiculous, not just the pretentious look of it, but the dismal potion can't even fill the mouth of a 5yo.
1
BUMMER! Cost Effective but I am unsure if I want to pend a small fortune eating at a restaurant and Leaving there still hungry!
7
So now we have to change the way we eat because the chef is tired or cooking the same way all the time. I now know why I like Cracker Barrel more and more, they cook what I want.
7
Overeating has consequences and many factors explain America's overweight(ness).
1. Snacking between meals was uncommon in American homes before 1950--unheard of around 1900.. After snack food TV advertising made it seem the normal, desirable thing to do we now take snacking for granted. In other countries, people still caution youngsters against "spoiling their appetite."
2. TV and other sedentary activities burned nearly no calories. At the same time unconscious snacking at a movie, or while televiewing grew. Behold the new Butterball Generation.
3. The so-called Leisure Society promoted around 1971, as we failed to note Japan seizing markets once ours. Most of us moved less. Eventually some of us bought costly club memberships to stay svelte.
4. Once restaurants longed to double sales. They could not do that, but soon figured out how to do nearly the same thing. They doubled portions, charged more and the American people by then trained to be the gourmand or Stopfsich nation, figured "Generous portions are worth the cost" Our 'clean-your-plate' frugality did the rest.
Will Americans embrace paying more for a tiny, over-prepared meal? No, but we would likely embrace proportionally small prices once more.
1. Snacking between meals was uncommon in American homes before 1950--unheard of around 1900.. After snack food TV advertising made it seem the normal, desirable thing to do we now take snacking for granted. In other countries, people still caution youngsters against "spoiling their appetite."
2. TV and other sedentary activities burned nearly no calories. At the same time unconscious snacking at a movie, or while televiewing grew. Behold the new Butterball Generation.
3. The so-called Leisure Society promoted around 1971, as we failed to note Japan seizing markets once ours. Most of us moved less. Eventually some of us bought costly club memberships to stay svelte.
4. Once restaurants longed to double sales. They could not do that, but soon figured out how to do nearly the same thing. They doubled portions, charged more and the American people by then trained to be the gourmand or Stopfsich nation, figured "Generous portions are worth the cost" Our 'clean-your-plate' frugality did the rest.
Will Americans embrace paying more for a tiny, over-prepared meal? No, but we would likely embrace proportionally small prices once more.
"Will Americans embrace paying more for a tiny, over-prepared meal? No, but we would likely embrace proportionally small prices once more."
___________________________________________________________________
Didn't they do that in the 80's? Nuvelle Cuisine I think it was called. So tired of people touching my food, whether it be with forceps and tweezers or their hands, please just serve me the food, make it good, not overly prepared and I'll be happy.
___________________________________________________________________
Didn't they do that in the 80's? Nuvelle Cuisine I think it was called. So tired of people touching my food, whether it be with forceps and tweezers or their hands, please just serve me the food, make it good, not overly prepared and I'll be happy.
4
One of the more compelling, insightful and composed industry analyses to be written in some time. Like a stunning small plate in itself.
2
Small plates wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the dollars that add up quickly. I love tapas and would gladly make a meal of several small plates, which it would take to get my fill. But this is a very expensive way to dine -- just what the restauranteur ordered. When I looked at the photo of that minuscule portion of octopus sitting on the plate, I asked myself "where's the beef?"
15
Mr Wells' brief history of "'small plates" and how they came to dominate the NYC dining scene fails to include a significant pioneer of this trend. When I first came to work as a cook in the City it was 2004. I nearly took a job on the opening team of a small restaurant called the Spotted Pig. Instead, I chose to work for Wayne Nish at his seminal temple to "small plates" (they weren't called that then), March restaurant, in sleepy Sutton Place. I still have a menu from the restaurant and was recently struck, especially since the trend towards multiple-course meals and shrinking plate sizes has accelerated, how much of a visionary Mr Nish was, and how little credit he's been given since.
I would also make the argument that Italian menus and their requisite inclusion of the beloved antipasti course had a far greater impact on the rate at which proper entrees became mysteriously scarce.
Lastly, as a restaurant operator I can attest to the convenience of sending a barrage of plates to the pass as they are finished by the kitchen in no particular order. It simplifies the expediting process which, at the end of the day, makes opening and operating new restaurants much easier. This is especially attractive if you're a certain NYC based restauranteur expanding to far off destinations like Miami, Florida.
I would also make the argument that Italian menus and their requisite inclusion of the beloved antipasti course had a far greater impact on the rate at which proper entrees became mysteriously scarce.
Lastly, as a restaurant operator I can attest to the convenience of sending a barrage of plates to the pass as they are finished by the kitchen in no particular order. It simplifies the expediting process which, at the end of the day, makes opening and operating new restaurants much easier. This is especially attractive if you're a certain NYC based restauranteur expanding to far off destinations like Miami, Florida.
4
In 1992 as I prepared myself for graduation , my ob hunt research in Manhattan led me to Wayne Nash and Joe Scalice at March restaurant. Over the course of five years, I staged at March twice and dined there perhaps a half of a dozen times. The most memorable experience that I can recount was an 11 course meal for three. Each plate, with the exception of one course, was an individual creation. That's 31 different tasting opps in a four hour period complete with expert beverage pairings. Holy Canoli, I was hooked. I thought this kind of dining experience was reserved for VIP's, and Industry people only. I thought, somebody please let Tis cat out of the bag. I recall degustation menus sprouting up all over Manhattan at this time, and my perception was that they were mostly European in origin. Enter the Tapas menu which clumsily stumble along with its seemingly endless twists and variations on Haute Cuisine. Add that up with the fresh ingredients available to us from local vendors and farmer's markets and the revolution was in place. I am pleased to see that small plate style dining has progressively evolved into this. I can't think of a more qualified player to advocate on its behalf than Chef Colicchio. Thanks lazybuster for the well deserved props to Mr Nish and March. Keep calm and share small plates!
2
I love typography and I keep looking at the photo by Danny Ghitis of the octopus dish at Colicchio & Sons. It catches quite a bit of the bottom of the classic New York Times T. All it needs is the top bar. Happy accident, maybe.
What's all the excitement about? I've been eating small plates in Chinese restaurants for decades. It's called dim sum.
11
So the tasting menu has now evolved into the menu? That's what it looks and sounds like to me. Unless the meal is served family style I'm down on passing plates around.
5
The next brilliant idea might be shared Martinis: a chilled half pint of gin and some vermouth-soaked olives to be passed around the table.
I suppose $50 would be a fair price. $100 for top-shelf, of course.
I suppose $50 would be a fair price. $100 for top-shelf, of course.
3
Already been done - but with Manhattans. Gothamist just wrote about it this week.
See this NYT piece from last week, "Cocktail Table Service Thinks Big": http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/25/dining/cocktail-table-service-thinks-b...
Talk about #FirstWorldProblems - or perhaps just an invented problem for column fodder.
Thank you for this!!! I utterly despise this new sharing restaurant culture. It's great for foodies and people who are up for anything. But for groups with diners who have allergies or dietary restrictions it is a massive pain. I am vegetarian, and if out for dinner for four people, I end up eating a quarter of the vegetarian dishes "meant for sharing", but none of the other dishes, and I'm left super hungry by the end of dinner unless I make a point to literally hoard my own food and make a spectacle of myself - "sorry friends, I ordered an extra vegetarian dish for myself, please let me eat!". It is embarrassing and humiliating, and honestly it's not good hospitality on the part of the restaurant. It's gotten to the point where I roll my eyes whenever the server says "our menu is designed for sharing" - I think well I guess I'm getting a slice of pizza on my way home.
12
Instead of small plates, how about giving diners the choice of a smaller portion? I've been to restaurants where that is allowed for a lower price and it's a great option when you want to fill up but try several different dishes as well. Also, your mileage may vary -- I've been to places that serve ridiculously small portions in the the name of "tapas" but have also been to ones where the portions were truly reasonable -- allowing 2-4 people to get a bite.
6
For those that like their food in "precious" little morsels composed of the most esoteric and ridiculously pretentious ingredients, I'm sure this is all very interesting. Contrarily, for those (such as myself) that enjoy going out to dinner for a MEAL we will read reviews such as this one with a snicker and some very warranted condescension and move right along.
16
I recently had what were billed as perfect replicas of McDonald's fries. They were right, they tasted just like McDonald's fries only they were 12 bucks. I didn't order them, they were brought to us by the proud owner, to show that his chef had perfected McDonald's fries. Right, him and a million other teenagers. I hate restaurants like this, how stupid do they think we are?
13
"Top chefs?" Every old-fashioned housewife was a better cook.
7
Let's just skip the food porn and go for the bone-in veal marsala at Carbone. But not before a Manhattan (and make that a double, please).
4
Top chefs shaping the rules for dinning if you eat at their lame-o restaurants.
Hahahaha, this is like the Fashion industry, it isn't the runway that matters, but the people watching, who then go and make the real fashion decisions.
Hahahaha, this is like the Fashion industry, it isn't the runway that matters, but the people watching, who then go and make the real fashion decisions.
4
"Family-style." "Shared plates." These terms are fine and accurate if printed on the menu of, let's say, a decent Chinese or Korean restaurant. But when trendy restaurants serving tiny plates charge $22 per serving while using these terms, it's brazenly insulting to restaurants that actually mean what they say.
It's especially irritating when these "Tapas style" restaurants give you attitude about it, as if you should be grateful to pay this much for what are essentially glorified half-appetizers. Throw in a large group of people and you might as well let someone pickpocket you.
If these restaurants insist on going with the so called small plates revolution, fine. Just don't hijack descriptors that belong to chefs and restaurants that actually mean what they say.
It's especially irritating when these "Tapas style" restaurants give you attitude about it, as if you should be grateful to pay this much for what are essentially glorified half-appetizers. Throw in a large group of people and you might as well let someone pickpocket you.
If these restaurants insist on going with the so called small plates revolution, fine. Just don't hijack descriptors that belong to chefs and restaurants that actually mean what they say.
11
The tapas mandate could have originated in a b-school strategy incubator: serve a third the food for the same price, use a small plate to make it appear that nothing's amiss, add some smeared goo to each plate to hint at glamour, use a Spanish term for the meal so it seems adventurous.
14
My wife and I one time went to a highly rated restaurant in Portland, Me. I ordered the diver scallops for, I think, 28 bucks. When my meal came there were four scallops on the plate. I turned to my wife and said...Wow, that diver must have gone real deep for these!!
6
28 bucks for four diver scallops is a steal. I hate to think how much that meal would cost in Manhattan.
Here in Cleveland, Dance Bocuzzi caters to all by producing several of his menu offerings in three different sizes, i. e., tasting, appetizer and entree. You decide if you want to go the traditional 3-course route, or tapas style. Eminently logical.
5
I do believe I shall return to Ethiopia. More food on the plates and better looking.
6
Or, as Mies ven der Rohe, the Minimalist architect said, "Less is more."
When you think about it though, to share a calamari tentacle with three other people is a real exercise in Zen detachment.
"What is the sound of one tentacle clapping?"
When you think about it though, to share a calamari tentacle with three other people is a real exercise in Zen detachment.
"What is the sound of one tentacle clapping?"
13
Colicchio is just doing what the Spanish do with Tapas. It all depends on the prices.
1
Look, I get it that not everyone likes small plates, but some of us do. Not because we're trendy or hip, but because we can't eat that much. Really, at most restaurants I can't make it through a salad and entree, ever mind getting a dessert as well. So I am stuck getting an entree--too much of all one taste, and not a chance to explore different dishes. It is more expensive for most people, I'll grant you, but not for lighter eaters. Also, I like the slowness of it. A few times in my life I've had 7-course meals at restaurants, and they are so much fun, but just too much food--small plates can be like that but without the over-stuffed feeling at the end.
1
I'll stick with dim sum. There's many Chinese buffet's in Houston that serves everything from pig in a blanket to crab legs. All you can eat too.
2
Let's be clear about something, the "old rules" still apply in the vast majority of restaurants in NYC. To suggest that they don't is just more of the "everything is changing so fast!" bandwagon which is frankly not true either in the tech sector or in restaurants. Most of us still enjoy our appetizer, main course and dessert, with normal portions, pleasant service and reasonable prices, even in NYC.
4
I often have the feeling that the NYT's MO with the Food section these days is to keep explaining the same half dozen or so NYC restaurants. The same egos are stroked and the same bros are interviewed and the same influences exaggerated over and over again. I don't think this period of food writing will age well at all.
I cannot afford to eat out at a regular restauramt, perhaps an occasional diner. So what do I do? I buy what I like, cook it the way I like and plate it on anything I want. The meal can be small or large, depending on my appetite and leftovers go in the frig for the next day. The day that the rest of the world picks up on this new cooking technique is the day that all the overpriced restauranst will go out of business.
5
We love our Washington, DC chef Jose Andres. He owns several different styles of restaurants and most of his food is outstanding. And, wisely, even his tapas restaurant's include main course. This is the mark of a good restaurateur. As for those who don't like to share your food, make that clear to those with whom you dine and I'm sure they won't try to take your precious food.
1
A modest return to sanity. Now if restaurants could only lower the noise level to a point where you can actually understand what the person across the table is trying to tell you, then you would really have something.
2
One quarter the food for only half the price. Sounds like a winning formula.
Same thing the grocery industry has been doing for years.
Same thing the grocery industry has been doing for years.
8
I'm looking at that octopus,and guessing that the price tag is probably 16 bucks,give or take. There lies my problem; that I'll be spending upwards of sixty dollars just for 3 plates,not to mention drinks and tips,to cobble together a light meal. ...why I'm not eating out very often anymore...
7
In my experience, another factor which drove the increased appearance of small plates on menus was the 2008 recession. Why feature four $26-$30 main courses when you could feature 8 small plates from $12-$15 and appear to be offering a lower price point to folks whose discretionary income had taken a hit?
1
This trend frustrates me like many readers, and I have always left tapas restaurants hungry and broke, but what's being described here actually nears the classical way of eating in Italy: three small courses so you can have meat, fish and starch that don't compete. When I was in Italy last year, I expected to find this, but in fact portions are too large in most places to have more than two dishes.
It's true that it's more expensive, but if you're looking for a great dining experience, the three-course savory meal can be really special, and worth it. I'm not a fan of superexpensive (and snobby) NYC restaurants, but I can see the value in this style of eating.
It's true that it's more expensive, but if you're looking for a great dining experience, the three-course savory meal can be really special, and worth it. I'm not a fan of superexpensive (and snobby) NYC restaurants, but I can see the value in this style of eating.
1
If it is true that: 1. The plates are indeed this small and 2. This expensive and 3. Sent to the table in too large a number or in a regrettable order, then sure, I agree if these are the parameters of the argument. But this argument is too easy to win, and a little uninteresting. It would have been more sporting to take a restaurant that does shared plates really well, like Girl & The Goat in Chicago (I don't live in NY), where the portions are substantial and the prices are moderate ($9-17) and the service is on point. If you take a restaurant like this, where 2-3 plates per person is more than sufficient and not going to brake the bank, then it's far from clear what the problem with shared plates is, unless one is opposed to sharing altogether, in which case the conversation is a nonstarter. As for me and my friends, when we go out we love to share food, and try as many dishes as we can, since Chicago restaurant culture is flourishing beyond our wildest dreams.
7
A professional chef for 18 years, I must say I am not pleased by the last two decades' "small plates," or, even worse, "tapas" revolution (any chef or worldly diners knows that a menu of appetizers has no right to call itself "tapas).
Some time ago, a restaurant opened on the Oakland-Berkeley border, trumpeting "Pan-Asian Tapas." All this meant was that you could order sashimi, cabbage salad, and Korean short ribs, and whichever dish the kitchen received seven orders for first, was sent out first. So my meal was short ribs followed by sashimi followed by salad. Ugh.
More recently, in my home in Princeton, NJ, an acclaimed "small plates" restaurant has opened. On one visit we asked that our Asian-accented vegetable and raw fish dishes be served first, to accompany our white wine, followed by our richer meat dishes, to accompany our red wine. I was told that this was not possible, that the dishes would come out as the kitchen saw fit. This confirmed my thinking that what "small plates" really means is that the chef has abdicated his or her responsibility for providing an orderly and thought-out meal. I would much prefer a menu of four appetizers and four main courses, with changing specials. What "small plates" has given us is a sixty-dollar meal of street food, without even the choice of what to eat first. We should ask ourselves, in the end, who we would like to be calling the shots -- we the paying diners, or the bean-counting restaurateurs?
Some time ago, a restaurant opened on the Oakland-Berkeley border, trumpeting "Pan-Asian Tapas." All this meant was that you could order sashimi, cabbage salad, and Korean short ribs, and whichever dish the kitchen received seven orders for first, was sent out first. So my meal was short ribs followed by sashimi followed by salad. Ugh.
More recently, in my home in Princeton, NJ, an acclaimed "small plates" restaurant has opened. On one visit we asked that our Asian-accented vegetable and raw fish dishes be served first, to accompany our white wine, followed by our richer meat dishes, to accompany our red wine. I was told that this was not possible, that the dishes would come out as the kitchen saw fit. This confirmed my thinking that what "small plates" really means is that the chef has abdicated his or her responsibility for providing an orderly and thought-out meal. I would much prefer a menu of four appetizers and four main courses, with changing specials. What "small plates" has given us is a sixty-dollar meal of street food, without even the choice of what to eat first. We should ask ourselves, in the end, who we would like to be calling the shots -- we the paying diners, or the bean-counting restaurateurs?
37
Oh my! So many curmudgeons leaving comments. I loved the article and applaud the small plate trend. Would I take a gang of teenagers - no, of course not - but a few close friends for "small plates", good wine and conversation is a delightful way to eat out. Le Rendezvous here in Tucson has small plates down to an "art" - no pun intended. Well presented, innovative, fun. I'm all for this trend. Had enough of the giant mounds of so-so food slapped in front of me - the hovering wait staff "how are we enjoying our meal" routine. And as a more than decent home cook I've taken to preparing small plate spreads for close friends. Gets around the numerous allergy and diet fads and I enjoy the creative outlet.
2
Every single restaurant that takes itself seriously needs to remove the word "sharing" from its vocabulary. A great example of why it doesn't work: a series of wonderful dishes emerged from the Il Buco kitchen last week only to have the table turn into a three ring circus of passing and jockeying and grasping for a bite big enough to give you the true flavor. It's absurd. Even if the dishes are brought out with some space in between, there is never a sense of peace at the table. Every conversation we began ended with the arrival of the next "dish(es) to share" and we left the restaurant disheveled and feeling like both the food the diners were sold short. It's like a money grab every time and no one profits really.
21
I'm a foodie and I'm appalled at what and how US restaurants have destroyed what small plates (ie tapas) are meant to be. So many establishments here in the states spout off about how they take a tapas approach - just like in Europe. But there are several major mis-hits here. First, most tapas that I've had in Europe have a tendency to run a few dollars. We're talking $1 to $5 a plate. Here in the U.S. most tapas run in the realm of $7 to $18 a plate. I'm hard pressed to justify spending $18 for a 3 or 4 oz piece of xyz steak, when a 8 oz portion at a steak house would cost be $22.
And the portions - as noted by the author and a number of the readers - are terribly small and incredibly hard to share. Perhaps there should be a per person cost. So, instead of trying to cut three shrimp up to share amongst 4 people, there are 4 shrimp for 4 people (and we don't have to over-order).
By default and without exception, every tapas meal I've had in the states (LA, Chicago, SF, Seattle, NYC, Dallas, etc.) has ended up costing 20-40% more than what I'd pay for a standard three course dinner.
And the portions - as noted by the author and a number of the readers - are terribly small and incredibly hard to share. Perhaps there should be a per person cost. So, instead of trying to cut three shrimp up to share amongst 4 people, there are 4 shrimp for 4 people (and we don't have to over-order).
By default and without exception, every tapas meal I've had in the states (LA, Chicago, SF, Seattle, NYC, Dallas, etc.) has ended up costing 20-40% more than what I'd pay for a standard three course dinner.
26
This is off-topic with respect to small plates and the size of food servings, but: in my opinion, chefs are deluding themselves when they think most (not all) of their patrons go to their restaurants only for their "creative" cooking. Most diners have almost no interaction with the chef. As long as the food is acceptable, their dining experience is defined largely by their interaction with their server and the restaurant staff (manager, bussers, etc.) If chefs/owners can succeed in training servers to be more professional - efficient but not brusque; timely without rushing; courteous but not fawning; friendly but not too talkative or intrusive - they will see their patrons' overall satisfaction rise rapidly.
21
What a joke. Small plates are descended from tapas, which if my memory serves me, were meant to be bar snacks you ate while drinking. Now entire restaurants expect us to pay the same price as entrees for minuscule portions that we are risibly supposed to share? This is about profit masquerading as a new trend in food.
Here's a thought: if I want a small plate I will order an appetizer, which will come before my larger plate, called an entree. The entree will contain enough sustenance to be worthy of a larger price tag and will satisfy me as a meal. It will also be large enough to be shared - large plates are sharing plates - or not, depending on my whim. This has been the standard for a century because it works for the diner. The only people it seemingly doesn't work for are the owners, who want to squeeze more profit from the rest of us.
Here's a thought: if I want a small plate I will order an appetizer, which will come before my larger plate, called an entree. The entree will contain enough sustenance to be worthy of a larger price tag and will satisfy me as a meal. It will also be large enough to be shared - large plates are sharing plates - or not, depending on my whim. This has been the standard for a century because it works for the diner. The only people it seemingly doesn't work for are the owners, who want to squeeze more profit from the rest of us.
31
The interesting thing about eating in France, for instance, is that the meal is timed correctly. One gets an appetizer that is not huge and can be eaten slowly. Then, one gets a main course that is also not huge and can be enjoyed slowly. Afterwards there is either cheese or dessert (or both). Dinner is a 2.5 - 3 hour affair with wine and company. One does not feel stuffed afterwards because there is adequate time to digest and enjoy the food. All of this obsession over portion sizes in the US is missing the main ingredient of a good meal: extended time with others and good conversation. Each table has one seating per evening. Period.
So, why all the obsession over small plates? Might it be that people do not talk to each other when they eat? As a result, people eat more quickly and can not finish larger meals. Might it also be that they are rushed and can't possibly finish a large meal in the limited and shorter time slot that the restaurant expects them to take? Perhaps we have lost sight of the most precious things that make a meal memorable: time and company.
So, why all the obsession over small plates? Might it be that people do not talk to each other when they eat? As a result, people eat more quickly and can not finish larger meals. Might it also be that they are rushed and can't possibly finish a large meal in the limited and shorter time slot that the restaurant expects them to take? Perhaps we have lost sight of the most precious things that make a meal memorable: time and company.
22
I appreciate some restaurants' move to offer two sizes of their entrees. Often (in my case) I'll opt for the smaller size if I want to start with a salad and save room for dessert. And I'm glad that the trend toward massive, Cheesecake Factory-scale entrees is fading.
But there's a big difference between more sensibly sized (and priced) entrees and the shared/small plate trend discussed in Mr. Wells's article. Maybe it's my inner child (and I'm 60) but sometimes I just don't want to share.
But there's a big difference between more sensibly sized (and priced) entrees and the shared/small plate trend discussed in Mr. Wells's article. Maybe it's my inner child (and I'm 60) but sometimes I just don't want to share.
12
I don't eat to keep the chef amused or to spark his creativity. Microscopic portions aka small plate courses are not a meal and are unmoored from their cultural context. I am rarely amused by a chef's improbable combinations - like the talking dog it's not how well it talks, but that it talks at all. If I am served one more microscopic dish whose sauce is lovely describes as a reduction of this or that or whatever I will commit murder.
25
I don't want portions the size of Cracker Barrel, but I also don't want to pay a fortune for a meal where the servings are so small I have to make myself a peanut butter sandwich when I get home.
I often order an appetizer and a salad or soup and no entree when I dine out, but I expect the portions to be reasonable, not just a "taste". That, and dessert, is often as much as I want or feel I should eat when struggling with my weight in my elderly years. Maybe twice a year, I'll go whole hog and start my meal with seared foie gras, add a salad, and an entree of duck confit with two side dishes, plus dessert. I can barely move after such a meal, but oh, it is SO delicious..once or twice a year.
Dining out - for that matter, eating in general - used to be so pleasurable. Good food, good company, pleasant atmosphere. That rarely happens anymore. When I read a review that says the restaurant is "vibrant", I know it's loud and so noisy that I"ll never be able to carry on a conversation with my dinner partner. When it says "tasting menu", I know that I'm going to be broke and hungry when I leave. Then one throws in the fact that a big emphasis is made, not just on the menu, but by the server, about the ingredients "sustainability, organic, free-trade" - you name the political movement involved, and in the end, I might just prefer to stay home and fix something delicious myself.
When chefs became media celebrities, it all went straight downhill.
I often order an appetizer and a salad or soup and no entree when I dine out, but I expect the portions to be reasonable, not just a "taste". That, and dessert, is often as much as I want or feel I should eat when struggling with my weight in my elderly years. Maybe twice a year, I'll go whole hog and start my meal with seared foie gras, add a salad, and an entree of duck confit with two side dishes, plus dessert. I can barely move after such a meal, but oh, it is SO delicious..once or twice a year.
Dining out - for that matter, eating in general - used to be so pleasurable. Good food, good company, pleasant atmosphere. That rarely happens anymore. When I read a review that says the restaurant is "vibrant", I know it's loud and so noisy that I"ll never be able to carry on a conversation with my dinner partner. When it says "tasting menu", I know that I'm going to be broke and hungry when I leave. Then one throws in the fact that a big emphasis is made, not just on the menu, but by the server, about the ingredients "sustainability, organic, free-trade" - you name the political movement involved, and in the end, I might just prefer to stay home and fix something delicious myself.
When chefs became media celebrities, it all went straight downhill.
47
Oh, I am over the moon about smaller plates and therefore, servings. But, please don't confuse that with the ridiculously, architecturally prettified smidgins of questionable substance viewed here. While I am perfectly contented to never request a doggie bag again as I depart, I would be ever so appreciative of leaving the table completely sated and not doggedly looking for a handy deli to take the edge off. Come on, get serious! On the other hand, there's no waste because there's no food.
21
Tasting menus are always what I order instead of carte blanché. For starters it takes the worry off the impending check. Also I can finish my portions entirely. It also gives me a vast array of different flavors for the buck. And most certainly there is no need to share so no embarrassing moments Each person can choose their own flavors. The only drawback I see is that there are only a couple or three choices of tasting menus. But that is o.k. with me because I still get more flavors than ordering carte blanché. Also, some restaurants have the wine to go with each dish. So again, I do not have to decide and stick with a whole bottle of the same wine for the entire meal. I don't know the management, chef or the waiting service angles. But for me it's a win-win situation - both for my pocketbook and my taste-buds.
2
Forget the content; the writing was wonderful fun to read. Thanks for a great article. A pleasure to read, probably more pleasurable than most of the restaurants and their fancy foodstuffs.
4
Well, the verdict seems clear. By a very lopsided margin, people who read this column are clear that the emperor/rest'r has no clothes.
Maybe, it would be nice if Mr Wells used his clout to point out that dining out should not be limited to the 1%. (Even if it's 5% of Times readers, something is very wrong here.)
The Times seems to be en route to "getting it" that you can't pay shareholders with prizes & the assertion that you're a must read forNy's "elite."
Looks to me like this column is "running on empty." If it's there to increase advertising, label it as such.
Mr. Wells shd check who he's working for - in that this is not a review or parody, could he - or more than 10 phonies/foodies - call it "reporting?" Last I looked, the Times devoted scant linage to polo - with good reason.
Every other review should be about a place that's 1/2 as precious as is now the case!
Maybe, it would be nice if Mr Wells used his clout to point out that dining out should not be limited to the 1%. (Even if it's 5% of Times readers, something is very wrong here.)
The Times seems to be en route to "getting it" that you can't pay shareholders with prizes & the assertion that you're a must read forNy's "elite."
Looks to me like this column is "running on empty." If it's there to increase advertising, label it as such.
Mr. Wells shd check who he's working for - in that this is not a review or parody, could he - or more than 10 phonies/foodies - call it "reporting?" Last I looked, the Times devoted scant linage to polo - with good reason.
Every other review should be about a place that's 1/2 as precious as is now the case!
13
I would think that this trend would be cheered by every pizza-by-the-slice joint and hot dog cart in the vicinity of small-plates restaurants. You inevitably leave still hungry, and there they are, your beacons in the night, where for just a few more bucks you can go home satisfied.
12
It is all greed and marketing. Smaller plates, same or larger prices! Just look at any item in the grocery store. Example, yogurt used to be 8oz and now it is down to 4oz or maybe 5.5! Ever see a "gallon" of ice cream anymore? Or let's switch to litres or grams and fool everyone. It's the emperor's new clothes syndrome.
The best meals are ones prepared with love, thought and are HEARTY.
By-the-way, why does everyone blame the US for large portions? I was in Munich recently and the plate was overflowing! Sometimes here in France it can go either way.
Let's just hope Americans continue to make REAL sandwiches, not the afterthoughts produced here in Europe...a wisp of meat, cheese and maybe a smear of something hiding between the bread.
The best meals are ones prepared with love, thought and are HEARTY.
By-the-way, why does everyone blame the US for large portions? I was in Munich recently and the plate was overflowing! Sometimes here in France it can go either way.
Let's just hope Americans continue to make REAL sandwiches, not the afterthoughts produced here in Europe...a wisp of meat, cheese and maybe a smear of something hiding between the bread.
15
Ew. American sandwiches are gross. Too much meat and hard to eat. Give me the sandwiches my mom and dad made with a thin slice of serrano, some manchego, tomato and olive oil. Yum!
2
The old adage "follow the money" is the real driving force behind the trend. This method costs a customer more $ than does the old method. You can bet your final dollar that if this smaller plate method reduced the restaurants revenue, the "trend" would never had occured.
Sorry to sound cynical, but following the money never fails.
Sorry to sound cynical, but following the money never fails.
44
Small plates are awkward, and the concept of "sharing" them even more awkward. I've seen it happen time and time again, when the last morsel (usually 25% of the dish) will sit on its small plate waiting for someone to make a move for it. Sometimes it gets politely offered up, or ridiculously "split" but more often than not, a server will come by and attempt to clear that non empty small plate and this is just wrong.
20
My creed regarding food is: "If it doesn't satisfy, eat something else." This philosophy steers me away from cereal, potato chips, and restaurants who lace everything with sugar. Some small plate restaurants satisfy. Some don't. The ones that satisfy are likely giving you the higher quality and more nourishing meal.
Beachcraft is opening in Miami Beach, not Miami.
Beachcraft would not survive in Miami.
Beachcraft would not survive in Miami.
5
I know a Japanese restaurant that has a fantastic dish for $19. I always need a doggie bag also. Sushi, tempura, seaweed rice, shrimp balls and more!
5
Where please?
1
Don't order the scallops, you may get two if you're so fortunate enough to be dining in a high star restaurant.
No thanks, to the Crusty Crab Shack we go.
No thanks, to the Crusty Crab Shack we go.
17
I'm going to post these photographs on my fridge as appetite suppressants.
16
......“That process ceased to be that enjoyable from a creative standpoint,” is how the chef Wylie Dufresne
Someone needs to remind the chef that I didn't come for his pleasure and enjoyment - I came for mine. If the chef wants to cook for his own pleasure he should do it at his house.
Someone needs to remind the chef that I didn't come for his pleasure and enjoyment - I came for mine. If the chef wants to cook for his own pleasure he should do it at his house.
67
What an imperious attitude! It's simply a mutual arrangement - you're not forced to eat at a restaurant that you don't care for: they choose how they would like to run their restaurant, and you choose whether or not you're dining there. No need to be condescending about it.
Cui bono? The owner, of course. Why not charge an astronomical amount for the anorexia plate, as long as people will pay for it and pretend it was the best meal ever.
29
Just went to a tapas restaurant in Richmond where all dishes were offered in two sizes. The four of us ordered the larger size and shared. I can't imagine trying to do that with the small plates.
8
Now we can all finally pay twice as much for the same amount of food! Rejoice!
25
Small plates, big profits. Spend $100 or more for dinner for two and end up getting pizza after.
22
At Le Cirque in NYC, a friend took me to the most amazing meal I had ever eaten (courtesy of his boss for a business deal he had just closed).
I am not a big eater, so I prefer to order a small salad and an appetizer. The appetizer I ordered of cold seafood was very large, much more than I could eat, much to my friend's delight. The service was perfect, not too much hovering and no upselling or snobbiness, which is the bane of most expensive restaurants.
He took me to other trendier restaurants after that, but I did not enjoy any of them, as they had tasting menus with dishes similar to those shown in the photographs, with snotty waiters to match. (The worst was Eleven Madison.)
Best restaurant in NYC, as a once in a while treat, as I prefer more casual fare and a relaxed environment.
I am not a big eater, so I prefer to order a small salad and an appetizer. The appetizer I ordered of cold seafood was very large, much more than I could eat, much to my friend's delight. The service was perfect, not too much hovering and no upselling or snobbiness, which is the bane of most expensive restaurants.
He took me to other trendier restaurants after that, but I did not enjoy any of them, as they had tasting menus with dishes similar to those shown in the photographs, with snotty waiters to match. (The worst was Eleven Madison.)
Best restaurant in NYC, as a once in a while treat, as I prefer more casual fare and a relaxed environment.
5
I'll venture this: am I the only one who noticed that lots of these fancy restaurants that serve thimble-size apps are more often than not patronized by tables of women in 2, 3, 5, 8...? Impeccable outfits and hair, a riot of 'it' bags on the banquette, you know the type, well-paying jobs and possibly one of them has a decent T&E account to charge some of those expenses. A good time with the girls is priceless. In my experience and opinion, girls don't really stay home and mope in front of their iPad. They call a girlfriend and complain about everything and being single, so let's go out, call Cindy.
Without too many generalizations, the girls like to have a girls' night-out and they actually adore to 'share' these tiny lovely dishes. THis way of eating is ideal when 'on diet' of some sort anyway and allows to sample an ample assortment of gorgeous dishes. THe fun they're having is beyond the quantity of food served in an 'entrée' (yak!), so gross, such a guy-thing...!
In effect, as much as the concept originates from Spain and more particularly from Ferran Adria at El Bulli's, the dishes are set like pieces of jewelry, where all elements are combined by imagination and creativity. This way of eating suffers no mediocrity since each piece is cooked and apposed in an open, transparent, and hopefully different way. There are impostures alas, some trickster-chefs only mimic the nouveau tapas aesthetics with nothing to write home about. In all logic a countertrend will emerge.
Without too many generalizations, the girls like to have a girls' night-out and they actually adore to 'share' these tiny lovely dishes. THis way of eating is ideal when 'on diet' of some sort anyway and allows to sample an ample assortment of gorgeous dishes. THe fun they're having is beyond the quantity of food served in an 'entrée' (yak!), so gross, such a guy-thing...!
In effect, as much as the concept originates from Spain and more particularly from Ferran Adria at El Bulli's, the dishes are set like pieces of jewelry, where all elements are combined by imagination and creativity. This way of eating suffers no mediocrity since each piece is cooked and apposed in an open, transparent, and hopefully different way. There are impostures alas, some trickster-chefs only mimic the nouveau tapas aesthetics with nothing to write home about. In all logic a countertrend will emerge.
4
Let me say that the supersize trend in American restaurants over the past 20 years is something that should be backed away from. However moving away from entrees so large everyone needs a take out bag to portions that cause starvation is not a good trend. The plates shown in the slide show is a joke. The chefs may be full of themselves with their nice plate designs, but anyone that pays a large amount of money for a sliver of octopus is a fool. I'm not sure this is anything new I started seeing artsy plates with very little food on them at fancy restaurants 10 years ago.
46
C'mon. These guys change the rules for yuppies. Most people eat what they like in amounts that they like and are available -- as they have for at least the last several hundreds of thousands of years -- not what and how much others are told is fashionable.
In 20 years, most people will still be eating a lot of meatloaf and ribs (more than one or two) and bacon and eggs and what these guys serve will be as quaint as fondue.
Get a grip. Virtually no humans who have ever lived have chosen to eat in the manner described in the article. One can only call that sort of food as provincial.
In 20 years, most people will still be eating a lot of meatloaf and ribs (more than one or two) and bacon and eggs and what these guys serve will be as quaint as fondue.
Get a grip. Virtually no humans who have ever lived have chosen to eat in the manner described in the article. One can only call that sort of food as provincial.
19
As someone who has eaten at just about every "it" restaurant in New York, I am done and finished. The portions are so small that I am more hungry after I've eaten than when I started. And the prices are through the roof ! From now on it's family-style restaurants for me where the food is served in abundance and the prices do not put a dent in your wallet.
29
This new trend is absurd, and thank heavens it hasn't (yet) reached France.
22
Ghastly photos of totally unappetizing foods. Fortunately the portions are small - reminds one of the Russian saying - life is very hard, but fortunately it is very brief.
18
Sort of reminds me of the old joke: "The food in that restaurant is terrible..... and the portions, so small!"
"Greeting these shrunken portions was a new generation of eaters who saw restaurants as a game. The object was to taste as many OMG dishes as possible, and sticking to two courses and dessert was no way to win."
Dining isn't about "winning". It isn't about trends of the moment. It's about enjoying perfect food with friends. Period. All the rest is fluff, unnecessary fluff. I'm not buying it.
Dining isn't about "winning". It isn't about trends of the moment. It's about enjoying perfect food with friends. Period. All the rest is fluff, unnecessary fluff. I'm not buying it.
23
it's moot for me these days. i go out only once in a while, for budget, and for nutrition, reasons. when i do go out, it's to a local place for Mexican, sushi, thai or Italian. when i order my mole, or unagi, it's mine, all mine. I got a fork, and i know how to use it. back off, bro.
15
Before the fad, there was one of the great restaurants tucked on a back street in Chinatown, NY. 13 Doyers St. Dim sum at its best. No ordering. Waiters came by with carts laden with this dish and that dish. One, two, three, and occasionally four of the same item. You chose what you liked and you learned what you liked by sampling. Even non-preferred foods were wonderful. At the end of the meal the plates were counted and the bill made up. You could feast for a truly reasonable cost. So today's chefs have nothing on what was in the -- wait for it -- yes 1960's
20
Nom Wah Tea Parlor is still there, Richard. Now they have waitservice, but the food is still fabulous. I am eating my way through the menu, delicious bite by delicious bite.
When I go out for dinner, I'm not looking for an upscale pigs-in-a-blanket experience.
22
They look dried out too. One thing about small plates. You either are working quality ingredients or you go home.
3
Unless you go to an all 'you can eat' buffet restaurant, no one really offers huge portions. This small plate nonsense is a gimmick that leaves me hungry and wanting for more. I recall from experience leaving a small plate restaurant still hungry and stopping for a slice of pizza just to take the edge off. Forget huge portions, but offer me a decent portion that won't leave me stopping for a slice afterwards.
12
I have often ordered several appetizers when dining out. Just recently in Williamsburg, VA at The Fat Canary I couldn't resist Tom Power's Foie Gras with Blackberries. I then followed that very rich portion with another appetizer of fregola simmered in lobster broth complete with pieces of lobster and decorated withleaves of Brussels sproust leaves. Both portions, not skimpy, were ample leaving plenty of room for one of the best desserts ever. The finale couldn't have been better, three criss-crossed light as a feather crepes filled with lime pastry cream. Moderate plates, not too small, they were just perfect!
3
We eat high end a lot and often family style as we have no idea what dishes our children (4 and 7) will gravitate toward. We prefer restaurants that offer a mix of small plates and large. We are grateful for the flexibility in format---and the reasonable proportions---and often have a conversation with the wait staff about the order of dishes. Some diners perhaps need to be led by the nose but we find that many of the best restaurants----like the Inn at Little Washington---view the dining experience as a gracious exchange between host and visitor.
3
I vote with my wallet. If I need to spend an extraordinary amount of money to have my appetite whetted, I'll go elsewhere. Unfortunately, at least here in NYC, there are a tremendous number of people with tremendous needs to be seen at the buzziest restaurant, portion size and cost notwithstanding, so that many of these joint will not only survive, but flourish. After all, they're taking advantage of the market.
8
I find many of these articles distasteful given that only the top 1 percent can afford to eat well in this Obama economy. Many Americans are surviving on Ramen noodles paid for by food stamps. 46 million Americans are now on food stamps. Can you publish an article on what these people can do with Ramen noodles, water and salt pack?
29
Un - what they can do with "Ramen noodles, water and salt pack?" is throw them away or not buy them in the first place. That is a nutritionally devoid "meal" harmful to your health. I totally agree that these articles (as well as the numerous cooking TV shows with over-weight chefs with tattoos galore) are a diversion from some of the real issues that confront our society in terms of people going hungry or doomed to eat pooly. Of course, if it's the only meal you can afford (Ramen noodles, water and salt pack) then you've got to eat it. but food is the last place anyone should skimp on in terms of living a healthy life. The compound effect of food choices is enormous: affecting our health, time spent at and going to and from the doctors, cost of medicine and co-payments, energy and concentration level, ability to work at your peak level, the example you are providing for your children. The effect goes on. If someone is choosing to spend money on cigarettes, entertainment, smart-phone when a simple cell phone will do, alcohol and drugs, rather than eating organic, non-GMO, and preferably a vegetarian diet, they really have their priorities in the wrong place.
1
your astounding lack of perspective aside, when you say "this Obama economy" would you be referring to the economy that has continuously improved for 65 months in a row since it was inherited in complete shambles from the Bush administration? just want to clarify.
meanwhile, you should probably stick to good old Fox News lest you be further offended.
meanwhile, you should probably stick to good old Fox News lest you be further offended.
25
This article is not about that, but other articles are, so why read it?
If you look for offense in everything, you will rarely be disappointed.
That said, the food looks awful, but to each their own, and people who can afford this kind of meal create many good-paying jobs for many NYers (we are not all millionaires, you do realize).
If you look for offense in everything, you will rarely be disappointed.
That said, the food looks awful, but to each their own, and people who can afford this kind of meal create many good-paying jobs for many NYers (we are not all millionaires, you do realize).
3
What a rip-off. When I go out to eat I'm hungry. No thanks.
38
I like the idea of small plates because it gives me a chance to eat many different things without being stuffed at the end. However, it is so expensive to go to these restaurants! $35 for a small plate of risotto! $45 for a tiny fish plate! I'd have to spend $200 just for me to get a complete meal at some of these trendy restaurants. And it makes no sense to say "for sharing". HUH? Wouldn't a big plate be better for that? So I hope this trend doesn't go too far and doesn't catch on beyond a couple of places in my city because honestly, I can't afford it.
48
Do what I do - stop for fast food on the way home!
2
I have always liked to order two or three appetizers in place of one and a huge "meat and two". And if you wanted to share the entree - you were charged for the division. Now they give you less and want you to share more. We just order four to six plates and eat off them all. Fun and you sure don't want to go to all that work at home.
3
Small plates? Nothing more than bar food (tapas) masquerading as dinner. While it is certainly respectable to go from bar to bar in Spain and eventually making a meal of tapas, no Spaniard would sit down at a table to dine and expect the same treatment. Small plates equal big profits and are one of the two reigning scams in restaurants today, the other being "specials". Where once specials were either seasonal delicacies or items that caught the chef's eye at the market that morning, now they are generally unpriced items announced by the server that carry larger price tags even though the ingredients are NOT particularly special.
78
I also should have added that nothing is more off-putting than to sit down to dinner and have the server instruct the table on the suggested game plan of ordering, say, three or four small plates per person and then sharing them.
21
Totally! I used to feel embarrassed asking the price of specials. But after a few experiences of sticker shock when the bill arrived I ALWAYS ask the price if I'm considering ordering a special. About 90% of the time I decide on another dish after hearing the exorbitant cost.
8
I was raised in Spain and you are correct. Tapas are consumed when bar hopping and as a snack before dinner. NEVER as a main meal. Spaniards like to eat and eat well, and they would never sit down to a tapas sized meal.
1
While artfully presented, I find it interesting that combined, the citrus, caramelized endive and chorizo vinaigrette pictured about equal the octopus. I guess that means the current wave in dining is small plates equals larger checks.
20
And the price of that single octopus tentacle, with a few segments of citrus, and I think two tiny pieces of endive????
Retail, Octopus goes for $4.00/lb. A lot more than a restaurant buys it for. Here, for what looks like an 1/8th of a pound you'll pay $22.00? That mark up is quite tidy for the house.
Now granted that's only for the octopus, there are real costs for everything else that gets the plate to your table. But still, that is a ghastly price. Below is a link to Hank Shaw's Pulpo Gallego. Rather than say "Chorizo" he, a tad more Honest, credits Paprika, Pimentón for the flavor. Make it yourself, jar it and keep it in the fridge and enjoy it.
http://honest-food.net/2013/11/25/pulpo-gallego-recipe-octopus/
Now granted that's only for the octopus, there are real costs for everything else that gets the plate to your table. But still, that is a ghastly price. Below is a link to Hank Shaw's Pulpo Gallego. Rather than say "Chorizo" he, a tad more Honest, credits Paprika, Pimentón for the flavor. Make it yourself, jar it and keep it in the fridge and enjoy it.
http://honest-food.net/2013/11/25/pulpo-gallego-recipe-octopus/
10
Scam, scam scam. Less food, about the same money.
50
Small plate meals are fun from time to time but I'd rather see less restaurants vice more going this way. First, I have to now figure out how many small plates will provide the right amount of food. I have to decide what goes with what such that I sort of get a nutritional and balanced meal. Then I have to hope that things sort of show up in the right order and at the right pace. I'm doing a lot of the restaurants work for them.
17
Small plates equal big prices. Go to any tapas style restaurant and expect to leave hungry with an empty wallet. What a scam. Oh well. Dining in "fine" places is a treat now, if you don't mind the wait time.
I love eating small plates, only to build up to a larger finishing dish that is fulfilling in flavor and appetite.
I love eating small plates, only to build up to a larger finishing dish that is fulfilling in flavor and appetite.
24
As anyone who has lived or spent time in Spain knows, a tapa costs about one euro. So you can fill up on 5 Euros plus another 3 Euros for the jara (pint) of beer. Better ambiance and you still got money in your wallet.
12
I would like to order a good old Cassoulet for $10... anyone?
11
Seems to me that these top chefs didn't get the message. People need smaller portions, not a bunch of small courses at God knows how much a plate. This is just price gouging.
46
My rule of thumb is as follows:
If I'm hungry I choose an ethnic restaurant or a bistro where the portions will choke a herd animal.
If I want to play with my food, I choose something more upscale. Typically in this situation, I am looking for something to keep the wine and cocktails from sending me home in a teacup.
Now there are myriad things in between. The trick to all of this mess if to know where you are dining. That often takes trial and error.
We don't need to have one version or another, we need to be wiser consumers and chose where we eat based upon our current requirements. If you're ravenous and you end up in a small plates restaurant you have no one to blame but yourself. It isn't as if NY restaurants are in a habit of hiding their menus. They're on display for anyone to see. Go to Ruth's Chris and consume a 2 pound porterhouse plainly grilled. If you're feeling snacky and exotic visit the flavor of the week, wait online for 2 hours even though you have a reservation and then graze.
It's not complicated. It is after all food and we've been doing it since the dawn of life.
If I'm hungry I choose an ethnic restaurant or a bistro where the portions will choke a herd animal.
If I want to play with my food, I choose something more upscale. Typically in this situation, I am looking for something to keep the wine and cocktails from sending me home in a teacup.
Now there are myriad things in between. The trick to all of this mess if to know where you are dining. That often takes trial and error.
We don't need to have one version or another, we need to be wiser consumers and chose where we eat based upon our current requirements. If you're ravenous and you end up in a small plates restaurant you have no one to blame but yourself. It isn't as if NY restaurants are in a habit of hiding their menus. They're on display for anyone to see. Go to Ruth's Chris and consume a 2 pound porterhouse plainly grilled. If you're feeling snacky and exotic visit the flavor of the week, wait online for 2 hours even though you have a reservation and then graze.
It's not complicated. It is after all food and we've been doing it since the dawn of life.
7
I notice how much of this story is about what and how the Chefs want to cook and how little is about the customers and their happiness. While I have had some lovely small plate meals, I sometimes want to know that the Chef will cook me dinner...in the form of something so wonderful I will eat my whole portion; with maybe a few tastes for my husband.
21
Pretty soon there will be empty plates and just like the crowd who admired that emperor, they will rave about the taste. This will occur only after these admirers of the non-existent offerings have greeted each other by giving kisses to the air in lieu of the cheek. Check please.
57
There won't be any plates at all. The diner will make a"food" selection and then the waiters will provide a spray of the aerosolized version!
2
How nice! Sharing a parade of tastes and textures with friends while you chat (and ignore your phone).
Not only do we not need huge portions, exploring foods you may not otherwise experience is a great way to expand your view of the world - and yourself.
Not only do we not need huge portions, exploring foods you may not otherwise experience is a great way to expand your view of the world - and yourself.
6
As other readers have astutely pointed out, the small plate fad is really just about large profits. Everyone in the restaurant business knows that appetizers are more profitable than main courses, so just make everything on the menu an appetizer...I mean, "small plate". This is why you see tapas places popping up on every block. They are gold mines. And the food is usually mediocre at best.
34
Remember, "just enough" is as good as a feast.
4
In Spain, tapas is not a meal...it is tapas...hors d'oeuvres to be taken with a glass of sherry or wine. Followed usually by a real meal...we used to call it dinner.
"Small plates for sharing," the phrase is a misnomer in any language. Small/share seems to be contradictory or is it a test of generosity?
Taste and appetite are totally upended by the avalanche of OMG plates. There is a rhythm to a meal, and it is not one shocker after the other or served side by side. It is a cadence of rich and simple courses, a salad to clear the palate, then cheese and fruit or a wine friendly sweet. May I recommend Richard Olney, author of "Simple French Cooking" for aesthetics, philosophy and good sense about food.
"Small plates for sharing," the phrase is a misnomer in any language. Small/share seems to be contradictory or is it a test of generosity?
Taste and appetite are totally upended by the avalanche of OMG plates. There is a rhythm to a meal, and it is not one shocker after the other or served side by side. It is a cadence of rich and simple courses, a salad to clear the palate, then cheese and fruit or a wine friendly sweet. May I recommend Richard Olney, author of "Simple French Cooking" for aesthetics, philosophy and good sense about food.
37
Small Plates to Share is not only illogical but also just a scam for Restaurants to maximize profits. The ratio of a small plate to full plate seems to be lost when these things are priced out on the menu. I will never go to such a place for dinner. The Modern Bar at MOMA for a between meal snack with friends over a drink is a perfect example of a place and environment where this seems to work for me; however in most other cases such a "meal" leaves me feeling taken by a scam.
10
For my parents' generation, it was a truism that women enjoyed eating out more than their husbands did, mostly because going to a restaurant meant a break for "housewives" from kitchen duty but also because restaurant portions were sized to be more satisfying for women, who tend to be smaller than their husbands and have commensurate appetites. (The dinner patrons asking for "doggy bags" to carry home leftovers were, more often than not, women.)
So, unlike at home, where portions can be appropriately sized according to each diner's size and appetite, restaurant portions are uniform.
You're right that in most case it was disingenuous if not absurd for restaurants to claim that their tapas were "small plates meant for sharing" when, indeed, the food presented was not at all conducive to dividing and sharing.
This article does not get into the economics of the restaurant trend toward "tapas everything," but the cost of meals based on "several" small plates does seem to be higher.
So, unlike at home, where portions can be appropriately sized according to each diner's size and appetite, restaurant portions are uniform.
You're right that in most case it was disingenuous if not absurd for restaurants to claim that their tapas were "small plates meant for sharing" when, indeed, the food presented was not at all conducive to dividing and sharing.
This article does not get into the economics of the restaurant trend toward "tapas everything," but the cost of meals based on "several" small plates does seem to be higher.
9
forgive my cynicism but I cannot get past the fact that it is commercially very attractive if successful.
Tapas are not done well in the US because they work well in environments where people sit and talk and eat and drink and sit some more and drink some more....not in a high rent, high cost business environment like NYC where they are under pressure for maximization of the number of covers.....
However as a concept the adapted small plates outlined here might work better and perhaps lead to a clearer understanding of what customer is getting i.e. some well crafted food which will satiate you but not fill you up in the weigh the classic steak meal did......unless you drop $100 on a number of them......
Tapas are not done well in the US because they work well in environments where people sit and talk and eat and drink and sit some more and drink some more....not in a high rent, high cost business environment like NYC where they are under pressure for maximization of the number of covers.....
However as a concept the adapted small plates outlined here might work better and perhaps lead to a clearer understanding of what customer is getting i.e. some well crafted food which will satiate you but not fill you up in the weigh the classic steak meal did......unless you drop $100 on a number of them......
13
Capitalism at work. Doritos, Lays, et al. have been doing this -- same price, fewer ounces -- for a while. Except this time the audience is different -- pseudo intellectuals who aspire to be seeing as "foodies".
It's a win-win-win -- the restaurants get to make more money, the chefs get to feel important and trend-setting, and the patrons get to feel elevated to the status of "adventurous foodies". Bon appetit!
It's a win-win-win -- the restaurants get to make more money, the chefs get to feel important and trend-setting, and the patrons get to feel elevated to the status of "adventurous foodies". Bon appetit!
64
Egad, back to the diner and the blue plate special.
62
Dear Chef.
You want to be creative? You are so stretched? Where is the muse, surely not in that steak?Take up painting. Become the next Picasso. Or Miro. Otherwise, recall that you have a trade not an art form and knock out the entrees.
You want to be creative? You are so stretched? Where is the muse, surely not in that steak?Take up painting. Become the next Picasso. Or Miro. Otherwise, recall that you have a trade not an art form and knock out the entrees.
13
I hate this. I want a main course and I'm not sharing it. I order what I want, and I want all of it. You want it? You order it. I don't taste other people's food because, well, if I wanted it, I would have ordered it too. Dining forces choices, which I, for one, and apparently for only, am willing to make. No, you cannot taste my anything, and if it's chocolate, nuts, smoked salmon or risotto, watch for flying knives. I refuse to feel guilty about this, although some would have me do so. We're eating out because we want to be together, share a meal, some wine, some good times. But please, I beg of you, keep your fork off my plate. I most definitely will not reach over to yours.
104
I don't mind sharing in a chinese or indian restaurant, but not any other!
I'm with you. I want my meal and I want all of it. I hate when people say let's order one and share. No. Get your own. That said, I hate mega portions and I'm a wonderful cook, so when I do go out to eat, it's at fine restaurants who serve civilized portions.
I wish I could say that small plates are not a cost-saving gimmick but all too often I am reminded to the contrary. What the marketing-savy chefs have discovered is that eyes can replace the stomach, at least for a while.
Designing and presenting a visually effective - whimsical - dish is supposed to pander to the customer's aesthetics while leaving them let us be frank here - hungry. Unless it's tapas classics, the emperor, as far as I am concerned, has no clothes.
Designing and presenting a visually effective - whimsical - dish is supposed to pander to the customer's aesthetics while leaving them let us be frank here - hungry. Unless it's tapas classics, the emperor, as far as I am concerned, has no clothes.
30
I'm all for smaller servings artfully prepared with strong nutritive value. But one of the reasons I no longer patronize trendy restaurants is that I was tired of coming home broke and hungry!
89
The Charred octopus with citrus, caramelized endive and chorizo vinaigrette pictured in the article is priced at $22.00 on the published menu. That's US $.
Is that what constitutes a reasonable price for an appetizer in NYC nowadays?
Was the octopus raised by Jacques Cousteau himself?
Is that what constitutes a reasonable price for an appetizer in NYC nowadays?
Was the octopus raised by Jacques Cousteau himself?
150
Smaller plates can translate into smaller people. Just what America needs.
2
Try leaving CA. Go out for dinner in Cincinnati. The women and children will all be taller, bigger, and stronger than you. Every one of them. Whatever you do, don't tell their husbands to eat smaller portions.
2
cjhsa: And fatter.
5
Why are they complicating eating? What if I want a steak or a lobster? I have to eat a mini steak or a lobster claw?
We're blessed with an abundance of food in America so in our limited wisdom what do we do with it?
We shrink it in order to pretend that we're hungry. As my grandmother used to say, 'You have to be really smart to be that dumb.'
We're blessed with an abundance of food in America so in our limited wisdom what do we do with it?
We shrink it in order to pretend that we're hungry. As my grandmother used to say, 'You have to be really smart to be that dumb.'
9
gone are the days when people ate because they were hungry? and should those of us who are hungry not expect delicious inventive food? doesn't escape notice either that the pitiful portion size is in inverse proportion to the price. been to plenty of high end restaurants, rare is it to find a meal that surpasses the wonderful food I eat at home. i'll save my money for the theater tickets and happily eat the delectable creations coming from my kitchen that leave me satiated.
41
I couldn't agree with you more. As someone who cooks at home 5 nights a week -- whenever my fiancé and I eat out, he always says that he prefers my cooking so much more.
5
Shared plates should be large enough for everyone to have a few bites. The idea of plates smaller than an appetizer for 'sharing' is capitalism gold. I don't mind small plates or expensive entrees, but they shouldn't be the same thing.
When I order charcuterie for the table that includes nuts, cheese, and 'homemade' pickles I better receive more than four almonds, less than a teaspoon of honey, and two of the tiniest pickles I have ever seen. That was over two years ago and I am still enraged thinking about it.
When I order charcuterie for the table that includes nuts, cheese, and 'homemade' pickles I better receive more than four almonds, less than a teaspoon of honey, and two of the tiniest pickles I have ever seen. That was over two years ago and I am still enraged thinking about it.
99
This mode of eating is okay once in a while but I find most of the dishes are small but really rich and there are rarely any decent vegetable options. A garnish of pea shoots doesn't qualify as a vegetable serving. Pork belly and stylized pigs in a blanket may be delicious but they do not make for a very balanced meal.
36
Can we get medium plates? Something between giant entrees and tiny small plates would actually make sense. I totally agree with your criticism of small plates for sharing at modern/new american places. If you go eat tappas or sushi the small plates are specifically designed to be easily split so that you can take a portion from the plate.
Calling the traditional entree concept boring is entertaining because frankly, at this point aren't deconstructed plates with little dots of sauce strategically placed and microherbs played out? As a diner I am far more impressed by a composed dish that tastes wonderful and balanced than a dish that requires me to compile 4 different things on the plate together.
Calling the traditional entree concept boring is entertaining because frankly, at this point aren't deconstructed plates with little dots of sauce strategically placed and microherbs played out? As a diner I am far more impressed by a composed dish that tastes wonderful and balanced than a dish that requires me to compile 4 different things on the plate together.
71
Actually, the Spanish have medium plates called raciones -- basically large portions of tapas, meant to be shared. I wish these chefs would import that concept, as I'm already sick of small-plate dinners that really *aren't* cut for sharing and don't fill me up. If the food is any good, I want more than two bites.
1
My wife and I have been having appetizer-only meals for many years - maybe half of our restaurant meals. More restaurants are including small versions of main courses in their appetizer menus. We like the variety, the combinations, the sizes (though some appetizers are pretty big themselves) - and if one isn't great, another may make up for it. And we're not victims of main-course failure.
21
In restaurants, the smaller the portions, the fancier can they be arranged on the plate, and the price made inversely related to the size. Is this not an old advertising/marketing gimmick? At home, there are likely to be members of the family objecting to the shrunken portions.
47