Monday, February 6, 2012

Why I can't write about the Raeburn tasting

Given I haven't posted for over a month I didn't intend to start with a rant but having been blackballed from the Raeburn Fine Wines tasting today I think the matter deserves an airing.

The problem appears to be a somewhat critical review I wrote of Hedone six months ago - the restaurant where the tasting was taking place. Having been urged to come along (and even bring a chef friend) I suddenly got a frantic email this morning asking me "not to attend today under any circumstances" as my presence "would probably result in a disagreement in public, which he [the presumably mortally wounded chef] and we would prefer to avoid."

There are several issues here:

* I would have been there to taste wine not to review the restaurant so it doesn't really matter what I thought of the food and the ambience.

* Why should the fact I've written a critical review result in a 'public disagreement'? I certainly wouldn't have mentioned it.

* In any case why should he care? I'm not a restaurant critic and there are plenty of critics and bloggers who think his restaurant is the bees knees. (And a few who agree with me.)

* Isn't this a bit of a slippery slope? If only people who write glowing reviews - of restaurants or wines - are allowed to tastings that seems to me a pretty unhealthy state of affairs. Granted if I incessantly went to Hedone and banged on about how awful it was the chef might reasonably ask me to leave. But just the one visit when I was by no means critical of all the food and said I should probably go back and eat there again? A bit extreme, surely?

OK. Let's look at it from Mikael's point of view. Some customer comes in, writes an unfavourable review and it's up there on the internet in perpetuity. He obviously cares passionately about what he does. But if it rankles that much (and I'm still at a loss to see why) why not simply get in touch and say 'you ought to take another look at what we do'.

Should I have turned up anyway? Well there's an argument for that but at the end of the day a restaurant is someone's private property. You can't insist on being admitted and Chiswick is a fair way to go on the off-chance.

The outcome is I've missed what by all accounts sounds a fascinating tasting featuring exactly the sort of wines that interest me most. I'm sure I'll write about them in the future - assuming I'm ever allowed to taste them. In the meantime I suggest both Raeburn and Hedone devote a little more attention to PR.

18 comments:

  1. Fiona, I entirely agree with you. It seems some people just can't the truth and good old fashioned honest criticism - be it a wine or restaurant review.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I thought it was hilarious when you tweeted that earlier.

    They must buy a huge amount of wine from Raeburn in order to hold that much power over them. I doubt it though.

    Totally short-sighted.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Once again a Chef is showing his arrogance. My father always said "when climbing the ladder of success, be very careful who you step on, on your way up, because those are the people you pass on your way down." Great post. Following.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I haven't been to Hedone, so can't comment on the restaurant or its food. But the point here is that you (or anyone else) are entitled to your opinion on the restaurant without fear of in effect being barred from ever going there again. I'm sure this strange act of panic from Hedone or their PR people will soon be seen as short-sighted and ultimately unproductive.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I saw this through Twitter. Wow, Hedone, if you were upset about a bad review, I can only imagine how much worse you will look after this! Blacklisting a blogger, really? My symptahies to you, Fiona, but I think Raeburn and the restaurant will rue its decision.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Totally ridiculous response to your review which even states "I should probably give it another go". So instead of actually stepping up to challenge and either speaking with you about "how one can improve" or even possibly inviting you back for a drink, they ban you.....

    Perhaps the well worn phrase applies:

    "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen......"

    ReplyDelete
  7. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It does seem slightly bonkers. Shame. As I say, Raeburn has a strong list and Hedone is an interesting restaurant - albeit one that polarises opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Sorry @anonymous I don't think you can really say that!

    ReplyDelete
  10. I saw this via twitter and thought I misread the post. I can't believe a restaurant, that obviously finds your views important and of value, would not invite you back. I hope someone apologizes to you over this.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Makes me even less inclined to trot down Chiswick High Street to try it. And I eat out in W4 a lot. A total PR fail (as someone who has worked in the industry).

    ReplyDelete
  12. Read the original review, and found it a reasoned and fair account of your experience. Someone needs skin that is thicker than that mackerel's, otherwise Hedone might not be open that long. Unfortunate, misguided response to important feedback, that was his chance to give you another as well.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I hadn't even noticed that Hedone existed and I'm in Chiswick every week. So this is the first I've heard of it. Own goal for Jonsson, i would say. By the way, his blog has been suspended.

    ReplyDelete
  14. A shame that an oddity of behaviour like this causes a shiver. Speaking as a local ... this is usually a neighbourhood of welcoming restaurants, where good-willed owners, alongside deserving and knowledgeable clientele, and expert journalists and visitors alike, all keep the food scene thriving with their honest opinions.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Sometimes I think the hardest part of being a chef isn't the hours of backbreaking toil for next to no money, it's having to suck up criticism from paying customers. I feel for Mikael, he seemed like a nice guy when I met him and he's obviously put a lot of heart into this restaurant, but he has to understand that not everyone will love his food. And especially considering reaction from all the "important" people (no offense, but Maschler, Gill, etc) has been so positive, you'd think a couple of middling (though by no means catastrophic) blog reviews would be like water off a duck's back. And the fact that he has reacted so badly to your review betrays not just a perfectionist's attitude but also a bit of an ego. Again, hardly unknown in chefs but still not nice to see.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Wow, what short-sighted and seemingly spiteful move - don't understand what they saw they would GAIN by acting in this manner.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Spot on Chris. A lot of it seems to ber to do with anger at people not sharing his particular vision. But to ban someone who has by no means written a damning review from not even eating in the restaurant again but a wine tasting seems way over the top to me.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Sorry I missed the Tweet and blog traffic yesterday. I agree also with Chris and Fiona. Many of us have been there (especially owner operators), working all the hours to launch a restaurant, then lapping up the good reviews but also whincing at the inevitable not so good. It's so difficult but vital to quickly accept criticisms, as a helpful suggestion on how to improve further. Be they press reviews, blogs or Tripadvisor comments, they all have to be embraced if a restaurant is to survive. Perfect example of how today's bad news travels to 10,000, whereas 10 years ago it would have only reached 10, when handled badly. Whether it's an occasional faulty wine during a meal or a massive PR 'own goal' like this, every restaurant has to somehow turn a negative into a massive positive and, ironically, a wine tasting such as this could have had such a positive result for the chef and his restaurant. Ouch!!

    ReplyDelete

UA-3466976-5