The Power of a Food Critic Part 2

There is one thing that is certain in New York, the only review that counts, is the one by the NYT. Lauded with past critics such as Mimi Sheraton and Ruth Reichl, the NYT has always had a firm grasp on the New York dining scene. As a chef I always find reviews of other restaurants insightful, not only as a measuring stick for my own restaurant but as a sort of compass for what is happening at restaurants no matter their location. In any event the review of the Kobe Club and its subsequent zero star rating have started to make me think of the way restaurants are reviewed in Singapore.

Having been here for a year I have yet to read a review that really tackles the guts of a restaurant and offers a critique that is fair and just. Most of the reviews, including the ones of my restaurant are almost always announced, meaning the reviewer comes in for a meal with me knowing, making for a highly contrived experience. Restaurant critics for highly lauded publications in the States and Europe visit restaurants anonymously, many in disguise and multiple times to paint an accurate picture of what the restaurant is really like. They speak about the food, the wine, the décor, service, the phone greeting and numerous other topics that deliver a view of the holistic experience of dining out. As a chef I welcome the thoughts of those critics who evaluate the experience, rather than simply write an essay on what I fed them at a food tasting.

The Straits Times is Singapore’s NYT and on Sunday the restaurant review is always the first page I flip too. Wong Ah Yoke, the Straits Times restaurant critic, offers his thoughts on the many restaurants in Singapore, but all too often they fall short of a really digestive experience. What I mean is that, although he may visit anonymously, I fail to believe that he visits more than once to get an accurate picture of the restaurants consistency. His commentary on the food is often quite good, especially with local food, but his lack of breadth on western cuisine is noticeable. And, for all the reviews I have read, I have never heard him speak in depth about the experience as a whole. He rates service, décor and food separately, but rarely does he comment about the first two or give justification for there marks. A note, although Wong Ah Yoke has dined here before(we had his picture on the wall in the back) he has never reviewed us and if he does, I welcome his remarks.

I think every restaurant ought to be reviewed and here’s why. Mostly because reviews can serve to educate the consumer on that particular restaurant and pique interest, be it good or bad. Second, and in my opinion the most valid, is that honest reviews create a higher level of dining, thus the competition is greater, weeding out those restaurants who consistently under perform and making way for ambitious restaurants who have to exceed standards to succeed. Lastly, because restaurants experiences can be so subjective, reviews from multiple sources can often tie together all the points that either make a restaurant great or not. Till next time. Good Eating!