My parents haven’t been too familiar with my comings and goings on cVillain.com, so when my father found out I was one of the food/restaurant critics, he was keen to find out more. He wanted to know how exactly I reviewed restaurants, which I thought was a very easy question to answer. I told him that I go, eat, and review what I like or don’t like. Everything was fine until I said “don’t like”.
“Wait, so you write negative reviews?”
“Yes”
And so ensued a lengthy conversation about the point of restaurant reviews. According to my father, “if you have nothing good to say, then don’t say anything at all”.
That threw my food criticism self into a nose-dive. Only write about good places to eat? WTF would anyone come to cVillain.com to only read about the cheery, hunky-dory side of restaurant reviews? My father said , “You know, you have the power to break businesses that have been around for years”. To which I responded, “its not my fault if restaurants produce terrible products”.
I know, I wrote scathingly positive and negative reviews at the start of cVillain.com , to which I have adjusted my tempo a bit. Regardless, I still hold this truth to be self-evident: cVIllain.com is supposed to provide you the facts of Charlottesville, be they good or bad. If I were to only talk about the great things about a restaurant, then I would either have nothing to say 50% of the time, or the reviews would be terribly short. The biggest problem I have with that is honesty. All of you know you can come here to read reviews as they are. We don’t sugar coat anything. I know restaurant surely have a problem with negative reviews…but my advice is this, take it as a free advice and make appropriate changes. I have never seen a restaurant patron sitting down with the owner after a meal to coach him/her on the pros/cons of the dinner. That isnt to say a review is 100% correct either…but the proof in the pudding usually comes through by comment #52 where Shenanigans or Thor throws puts the smack down.
So I keep thinking about that conversation with my dad, and I have to put you all in the driver’s seat because I am your humble servant….Fill out the survey above to give us some insight into your perception of restaurant reviews and their appropriate view on cVillain.com
[pic]
Popularity: 25% [?]
Tagged as: critic, Food, Restaurant, review
Where is the only negative option?
done. come get some.
From the diner’s perspective, with reference to a overall positive review to the restaurant, I find it particularly helpful to get a blow-by-blow of the food ordered.
If one were to go to restaurant Q and review which drinks, apps, entrees, desserts, etc. they liked and which they didn’t, and we took their advice, the following would likely occur:
Short term: We’d go to the reviewed restaurant and also avoid the pitfalls in a given menu and as a result, having a better dining experience
Long term: the owners/chefs may notice poor sales of a given item and either a) remove it from the menu, or b) rework and improve the item.
Keep it honest.
any business that can be destroyed with a single blow dealt by one negative review is a house of straw, and one way or another, is on its way out.
I’d say your dad watched Bambi too many times.
I’ve always liked honest. Without that, then what’s the point?
I wrestled with this for a long time. Of course, I don’t have nearly the audience of cVillain. I generally dealt with it by keeping my negative reviews brief and my glowing reviews were longer. There were exceptions. When Continental Divide broke my heart, I wrote a lengthy negative review, but it was only because I held them to such a high standard that I was very disappointed. I’d gushed praise on them a half dozen times before.
To me, honesty is a must, but the reviewer still needs to exercise judgement. The big problem in my mind is that a good experience generally requires a lot of small things working together in concert. A bad experience can often be attributed to one thing that went horribly wrong. Deciding whether that one thing is an isolated incident or a systemic problem is a call the reviewer has to make. In my opinion, that’s very difficult to do with one visit.
And I agree 100% with parlie. If your business can’t handle a negative review, it was just a matter of time.
P.S. I haven’t been back to Continental Divide since.
avoiding the “negative review” does not automatically mean resorting to only “the cheery, hunky-dory side.”
your dialectic paradigm is a lie.
Depends on how many times you visit a restaurant before writing a review. Sure, consistency is important, but even the best restaurants have rough days and that’s something you have to consider. Also: honest, objective criticism is helpful to restaurants; but unnecessary bashing is uncalled for and irresponsible. You can say that a certain item could have used more salt (or whatever) instead of saying that it was the worst of its kind you’ve had in your life.
@10: Unless your talking about tartare. It better be spot on always. Oh and the aioli better not be mayonnaise damnit.
@11 haha, “we’re bringing foodies back, YA, them other critics don’t know how to write, YA”
To begin, whether one should be honest in any sort of review shouldn’t be a question. If you’re going to review a restaurant or anything else, it should be an honest appraisal of your experience and the details that comprise it.
Beyond that, a review needn’t be glowingly positive in order to not be a negative review. That is, you could write a review of a restaurant that was, overall, quite positive but also pointed out areas you found lacking (ie, had to wait 20 minutes past a reservation for a seat, the drinks were unbalanced and the wine too warm, or whatever).
The real issues in my mind when it comes to the very good question of whether to write a negative review are two: 1) how many visits you’re able to make to the restaurant and 2) what is the purpose of a restaurant review.
The first issue is an important one because its entirely possible that if you go to a restaurant once you have an experience that is outside the norm for the business. It could be good or bad. If you have a bad experience on what is actually an off night for them and report on it with some authority, that’s a pretty bad deal for the restaurant. Of course, if you have a great experience because the restaurant just got lucky and the stars aligned and they couldn’t replicate that experience again in a decade that could be a bad deal for people who read your review and go running to eat there. Eating at a restaurant multiple times (I believe the critic for the Washington Post eats at restaurants at least 3 times before writing a full review) can help account for this. If you have 3 bad experiences in a restaurant (especially on different nights and perhaps at lunch versus dinner) its a pretty safe bet that that’s the experience they’re offering. Writing a review after one visit is just dicier.
Of course, then you come to the second issue in my mind, what’s the point of the review anyhow? Is it to catalog restaurant offerings in town, to entertain readers, to offer suggestions of where to eat…something else entirely? I expect that its a combination of wanting to have fun, offer suggestions and try to do something to help increase the overall level of restaurants and food in the area. Sounds like good ideas to me.
Where does all of this leave me in thinking about it….negative reviews are fine, but don’t really do much for anyone. The key, though, is to make it very clear in a review how many times you went, when you went and what you ordered. When a review spins into the negative but starts to leave out the details about food it can easily turn into a rant about a bad meal/experience. Those don’t help me much because they happen all the time and can happen anywhere to anyone.
Personally, I think I’d skip writing a negative review based on one trip. The potential downside for the business doesn’t seem worth it if I just had a one-off bad time. A positive or mostly positive review after one trip doesn’t offer the same sort of bad deal for the restaurant and I’m more comfortable with that though I think you should be just as clear about having only visited once so the readers can decide whether they want to follow the reviewer and eat there.
Lastly, @4 - I agree, but then they’re going to be gone anyhow and perhaps the negative review isn’t necessary.
And wow this got wordy.
@9 and 10
dammit, go ahead and be all succinct while I’m busy writing a lengthy version. Fine.
@7 i’ve read your review, & yet i still went to continental divide to make up my own mind. i was just forewarned. and my experience was absolutely great, except i didn’t like the margaritas.
similarly with boheme. loved the review. would have gone there for dinner despite it, except i don’t go to french restaurants. (not on purpose, it’s just a weird void.)
@13 you said in 598 words what I [@9] said in 20.
I posted my view on the matter here. Basically, if something goes wrong—especially if you plan to write about it—you should alert the server/bartender/manager. Their response will tell you far more about the restaurant than a single oversight or gaffe.
Maybe the critic was well respect he would not need to write a negative review but write a reveiw with less than positive tone and/or may be I should say what you don’t write would be more powerful than a negative review? Just something to think about.
I understand the point of this conversation, but could the survey options be more skewed here? Why not make them:
a) Are you a thoughtless, uninteresting person who is afraid to offend anyone and wouldn’t tell a friend they had poppy seeds in their teeth
b) Do you believe that the truth is a good thing
c) You aren’t as vapid as A, but you know payback’s a bitch, and what do you really know about haute cusine anyway, as you’ve only waited tables part time and occasionally watched the Food Network
d) Are you an asshole who only writes reviews because you much prefer the attention you get for being snarky and mean, regardless of who’s expense the joke is at
Yeah, I wouldn’t be surprised if the results were a bit out of balance here.
That being said, I think the more detail you provide in the review (I’d never been there before, I go all the time and this was out of the ordinary for them, I don’t actually like fois gras so maybe I shouldn’t be calling their’s gross, etc.), the more you set up the reader to make an informed opinion. It’s like Trip Advisor - when someone leads off with “I usually stay at the Four Seasons” I know their expectations for service and their opinion on price is going to vastly differ from mine, just like I know someone who asks for sauce on the side or well done steak doesn’t factor into my judgement of a restaurant.
And let’s be honest - this is why local business owners are afraid of this site. Even when they get a good comment, someone inevitably comes back to say how they don’t think it’s all that cool anyway. This is not one of those cases where there is no such thing as bad publicity. Just be mindful.
@19: D
So based on this conversation, Coco, are you thinking about altering your reviewing strategy? Do you tend to go to the place more than once before reviewing, as others have suggested? I think both suggestions of going 2-3x, plus talking to management/kitchen about any issues are worth considering…
@21: some places are one-trick ponies for me, others are not. It depends on how wow’ed (or lack of) I am as a result of the experience. As far as talking with management about issues, I will gladly send something back if it is god awful or cooked improperly, but (1) I dont like giving advice to a place that is comfortable with bad quality and (2) it kind of kills the anonymity no?
@22 didn’t mean necessarily revealing anything, but just seeing how the place deals with whatever problem you might be having. I think you can do that and still remain anonymous, and also do it without giving advice, per se…
I do think going more than once is important to a review, though, whereas going once and reporting on one’s experience seems more suited to the comments section.
@23 thanks for the feedback!
@21-23 someone told me recently that the american society of restaurant reviewers, or whatever, mandates at least 2 visits.
@17 agree with stanley. if something goes wrong, wouldn’t you want to do that anyway? my mom always tells me these stories about “and the onion soup was absolutely inedible because it was so salty, so i had one taste and left and went somewhere else.” well, mom, did you ask them to fix it? did you get your money back? so you just didn’t eat lunch? brilliant.
There should be an option for ‘Villians to add options to the quiz. Otherwise there aren’t any good choices.
bump because i might have a few words to say when i am not exhausted.
/and i night have tomorrow off.
// …
I’m fine with you reviewing a place after one visit, but presumably you’re there with other people? no? Or was that Boheme review fueled by bitterness and lonely despair? If so I’d like to know what others thought of the experience and I’d like you/them to try as many things as possible. You don’t come to cVillain as a world-renown expert on this or that cuisine, as far as I know you’re just a bit of an ass with an attitude [”but my advice is this, take it as a free advice and make appropriate changes.” Or don’t. Just because you didn’t stain your shorts over their tartare doesn’t mean its shit and shouldn’t be fed to dogs. Your opinion is just that, and that only.] I would be much more inclined to make dining decisions based on more than one opinion, particularly when that one is yours. Did anyone else like the tartare? Was the whole table aghast at being served Norwegian water?!? Even if you’ve only had a bite, if you’ve tried 3 or 4 entrees each, you’re more likely to temper a review of a meal that, rather than being improperly prepared, was simply not to your liking. Build a consensus and your review is going to carry a lot more weight with me.
If bitterness and lonely despair aint on the menu, I aint eating.
I like your reviews Coco, and you actually know a lot more about food than people on here may realize. When parlie first told me about this site, he said, “It’s cool but they’re way too nice in their reviews.” Nobody wants to read a bunch of gushing and asskissing. On the other hand, don’t set out to purposefully be negative about a place. Not that you do that, you’re just critical. Oh and it’s a critique. See how that works? I get it.
Keep on keepin’ on nut!
you see? i gave my own negative word-of-mouth review of cvillain! and now shenanigans reads it 30 hours a day, 18 days a week!
the system is working overtime! OVER! TIME!
@31: Thanks for reminding me that I need to get back to work
Coco,
I have to agree to large point with your dad - a good man, I’m sure! Some of the best advice I was ever given regards this very point; “The true test of GOOD communication is to be both totally honest AND totally kind at the same time.” Hmmmm. Yes. It is wickedly easy to be blatantly honest, especially when one hides behind the curtain of a psuedonym on a blog, but the difficulty comes with the kindness. You, dear reviewer, are given the freedom of little or no true repercussions from your “honesty” while the restaurants receiving your potential venom are left standing naked…and probably unduly hurt from the ruthlessness.
Being a foodie myself and having the luxury of living in Cville with more than one dining choice on any given day, I cast a wary eye toward ANY restaurant where I am less than wowed with ANY part of the dining experience. However, being in food service, I usually give the restaurant a second chance…but then that’s it! I can, and will, take my money elsewhere if need be.
So, for what it’s worthy. Honest AND kind. Kind of an alien precept for most bloggers.
There is nothing harder to do in the food critiquing world than to write a positive review that entertains.
@28: yes it was a large group and there were many things sampled besides the tartare. And for the record, the comment on water from Norway was an attempt at sneaky humor…perhaps all of YOU have a problem with Norway hmm!? I was actually pumped to go to Boheme and was completely let down, if you like hotel food served at a wedding, then go to Boheme, you might just like it. And 4fuxs8k if you have such a bloody good palate and writing ability then throw a food review on the site.
@33: well said! I try to say it as it is, and you know, I have to throw in some flair, or else we would be like every other media property no?
oh, I don’t like this, if it means what I think. our “flair” is to be … mean? I mean, we’re jerks on here for sure, to others and to each other, but that is when our cleverness falls down and skins it’s knee. must cVillain traffic in assholery as it’s calling card?
mc, you obviously have a bone to pick with the entire site. i don’t think assholery is our calling card, its about being real. villains, yay or nay?
ps, by flair i meant being real…and if we’re not that then please do call us out!
@28, I seem to remember lending a few phrases to that debate. The Tartare was served european style, ironically the reviewer (not that being european makes you a tartare specialist) decided this was “dogfood” while I another european heralded it is the best in town. I miss it still, and I had it even after it was off the menu. The chef would chop a piece of fine meat when I requested. (Way to make me feel like a special guest!)
I am with mc, and what is with these bellybutton picking articles about how to write articles about how to write articles.
Ok, a negative review should be based on the experience of the reviewer. One time, two times if they’re feeling generous, but any review should honestly be based on whatever their experience was. No “do-overs” are required…
@37: why do you think that? is it because I declare my open hatred for the internet approximately 2.5x every week and then quit? that could be why. In any case, I’m addicted to this blog, so I hate it as much as a heroin addict hates his junk. ie: a lot and also none at all.
really, I just miss the cleverness and intelligence (although floozy and belmont ALWAYS bring it) and lament that we’ve slipped into a pattern of bellybutton picking (nice one 2o4) and name calling that is plaguing the BLOG lately. “you’re slutty, you’re boring, you’re too serious, you take nothing seriously.” Just read the threads you like and get over it. my dream for the BLOG is that we can take criticism as easily as we dish it out, but cvillain management has been particularly sensitive as of late. evil? live!
can we be funny and snarky and *real* without boldfaced mean girl antics? i fucking hope so. I’m a pacifist, I just want us all to get along. and I realize I’m a hypocrite, what with calling everyone dickheads yesterday, and yelling at newbies a few weeks ago. I know I know. but it’s all in the hope, the dream, of us just being funny and smart and weeding out the unfiltered spewing of opinion and hostility that we so often devolve into.
/vodka, people. it makes all this possible.
//sorry sorry sorry for the manifesto. mission statement. yikes. bedtime.
In soviet Russia newbies yell at you.
I miss when Thor was actually Thor. I think he’s next to go. Talk amongst yourselves.
@41…shit, couldn’t agree more! I think we have matured as a community though no? I mean, when things start to get out of hand its usually passerby/stalkers and someone from the forest of SpicyBear comes in and lays the smack down.
@44: that isn’t my experience, no. i mean, sometimes people TRY to, but it’s highly inconsistent and doesn’t really work.
I think we have matured as a community though no?
Oh yes. Definitely.
/penis!
Maturity is overrated.
k results are in, mc you in or out? despite inconsistency, you know you get a warm squishy feeling when you log onto the site.
what you’re describing is not inconsistency, that’s incontinence. but I don’t understand your claim of “results.” whatevs, you guys know I’m not quitting…
@49: At least not for another 4 hours.
I wish I could quit you…
mc, don’t quit. We need you here. And the alternative to posting is not pretty…
cue big ol’ naked neighbor across the street
@52: ha! I love that guy. he’s like the corporal manifestation of cvillain. funny, inappropriate and impossible to ignore.
guys, I’m just smiling all day today! believe it!
oh! and this…. this is just perfect.
Darby Conley, right?
yesh! brother of tim conley, one of our former neighbors.
Naked neighbors? ewwwwww
This naked neighbor of mc’s is very ewwwwww-able. The only thing weirder than mc and I having warm beers on her front porch at 3AM is the nake-o neighbor across the street. God bless that window unit.
oh, I didn’t realize that was all up in the same thread. no, no, different type of neighbor.
k, whatever happened to reviewing?
/off topic, just a little bit
sorry sorry, i tried to bring back the topic a little bit with 54, but everyone just wants to talk about my ugly naked guy which, honestly, I can’t blame them because he’s awesome.
@61…I’ll bring back the topic for ya.
As far as Coco’s review…I took my kids (very well behaved, youthful foodies - not to worry for any waitrons out there!), to Boheme for what I anticipated was going to be a delightful brunch. This is one time I decided not to give a restaurant a second chance - there was too much that was wrong to even attempt to have things corrected with the management. It was just mediocre all the way around. ‘Nuff said.
Two thumbs down from Bucky Kat.
Yo. Belmont yo.
Word up in Belmont. Holla if you’ve ever bought hangover recovery items at Stoney’s Grocery!