Secret to success

Restaurant service is not brain surgery!

Before you go in to a rage in case you are in the business your self, please listen.

Anyone who's worked in a busy restaurant intimately knows the physical and psychological stress that comes with it. I'd say even more so if you happen to be a part of the chef team. It is truly a skill to handle this environment on any level.

Yesterday we had perhaps the busiest night since I started working at a local hotel. They've certainly had busier times but it cemented a few things for me. As it got a bit pressurised during a certain hour when private functions and public restaurant all ordered food at the same time it's easy as part of front of house staff to get high strung and severely stressed, especially since you have to deal with the kitchens frustrations as well as any unhappy guests. But you don't have to.

When it comes to guests I have a golden rule that is more or less full proof: 

- The most important thing as a waiter is to be your self. By being your self I mean caring. Listen, treat every person/table the way they want to be treated. It may be a few business people who don't want charm and won't want to be disturbed. Or it may be a couple, new to town who are quite talkative and curious about both you and the surrounding area. Feel your way. If it's a bigger group usually they have enough to talk about and you simply act as a preschool teacher and keep it organised and clean. 

As I mentioned, last night was fairly busy. Well busier than normal (since working as part of the sommelier team in a Michelin starred restaurant in London I know what busy is and more importantly - feels like). But personally the more busy it gets, the more calmer I feel. 

That comes from experience I reckon. 

Besides the technicality to service my secret is to win your guest over as soon as possible. Make them care about you. If they care about you they won't mind waiting a little extra for their food or even if you make a full on mistake. Just be honest and sincerely apologies. What people get angry with is the management or the company but if they like you they'll have much more sympathy. You become part of their evening. As humans I believe it's easier to get angry with someone or something that you haven't made a connection with. So waiters, make a connection and your guests will be on your side for the rest of the evening. If you know the food is going to be late due to a pressurised kitchen inform the table in question and apologies before hand. They will appreciate your sincerity and can only get positively surprised from now on. It is very important in that instance to lower expectations and over deliver. 

Some may disagree with me here but I believe it is more important to dare to take enough time with each table rather than run around trying to be efficient (if you're experienced enough you can do both). If they see you are being caring and skilful you've won them over. If you run around like a headless chicken and do less good all over - no one feel attended to, no one has recognised you and you'll end up having a whole unhappy room or station. 

Back to the initial statement.

Restaurant service is most certainly a great, great skill. I've worked hard learning to get better and better, but it is important to remember that it's people you are dealing with. Someone like you. People who are out to have a nice time. No one is gonna get hurt if they wait a little extra for their food. You can always keep them entertained or give them a little something on the house. There is no need to get stressed out due to a pressurised kitchen screaming at you. Understand their situation and the incredibly hard work they do, don't take it personally. Any issues should be dealt with after service, not in.

In my opinion - quality and human relations are both far more important than impersonal service and quantity.

x Charlotte

Do You Love Bubbles?

I had one of the most eye opening learning experiences earlier today while being part of a research project at Plumpton Wine Center College.
Told time and time again by seasoned wine judges galore - judging sparkling wine is bloody difficult! It's funny or even ironic since most of the wine appreciating world thoroughly enjoy the celebratory bubbly tipple.
By celebratory I mean  - whenever it is you may fancy affording it!

So why is judging quality in sparkling wine so tremendously difficult?
Well in the words of Richard Marchal, a Champagne Professor of Reims University, representing a somewhat too good to be true expertise on the subject: "Sparkling wine judging is like a punishment to many wine judges. The problem with judging bubbly wines are - the bubbles!

You gotta have an almost completely different approach approaching this subject. The tasting technique is based around having two glasses in front of you of the same wine. One that you nose, smell and taste beside one that is purposefully designed to show of and keep the mainstream of bubbles and foam for a maximum period of time. One glass you observe and one you taste.
Another important aspect is that you gotta start assessing the wine poured. Yes, the pouring time and effect in the glass is of tremendous importance judging the quality of the CO2 foam. It is the aspect and journey of the foam that determines any sparkling wine:

- First of all the shape of the glass makes a difference. Every glass actually has on a micro level a cracked base. What you want is a wide shape in the bottom to enable more cracks that becomes gas pockets. While the wine is poured these gas pockets form the basis of the effervescence we all desire in sparkling wine to develope. The triangle shapes of some wine flutes serve as an almost non existence base therefor deemed useless.
 Apparently the pouring technique is directly related to how long the foam will last. It's important to judge the first expression. Meaning both the foam in the glass and the initial foam/explosion in the mouth. Then you smell quickly without swirling. The first sip should be quite shallow in judgment. Focusing on foam explosion, texture of bubbles and balance between acidity and sugar. The next step is to watch the settlement of foam displaying and unravelling the showcase of crown and disc for a few minutes. Then you smell and might even swirl to evoke the "wine" in the wine. Taste again. Most probably you'll experience less foam and more aromatics. Look at mouthfeel quickly then spit. This is the important part in regards to intensity, length - even bitterness as that only shows at the end. Richard put weight on informing us acidity masks bittereness. The way that sugar masks acidity and vice versa.
The last thing you should do is to smother the inside of the glass with the last drop of wine. Heat and time should thoroughly and truthfully display the essence and quality of the base wine behind the bubbles.

Do you see the importance, complexity and difficulty of judging this type of wine?

x Charlotte

Previous blogg-post continued

http://www.csicop.org/si/show/biodynamics_in_the_wine_bottle

Why are some so ANGRY about BD? To the point of going out of their way to disprove it? Who is it harming? The article pointed to costs and labour. Well isn't that up to the grower it self to determine value? By pointing towards prices being higher in the market for these wines you are disrespecting the consumer suggesting it would pay for anything (well that could be correct for some). Whatever practise you as a vigneron choose to adapt, in the bottle - making good wine speaks for it self. Why are you then so worried about which of the agriculture philosophies that gets the most column inches?
Well I read the link you provided and, of course I understand the need for scientific proof and investigation. I am personally and proudly more spiritually lead. As I understand it Steiner actually based (used) his whole mission statement on historical farming techniques developed by people a hell of a lot older than us. (Paganism. Compare with how Romans, for instance, used established beliefs based on paganism to fuel power over people.) A time when men lived intimately closer to nature then we "modern" folks in general do now - living in concrete environments. I am not saying I have a firm belief. That's not the point I am making, The point I am making is that who are we to judge! Why can't there be different types of beliefs in agriculture? The same we have Buddhism, Christianity, Voodoo etc etc. Why are you so against respecting old practises? What is so fundamentally right with the new chemically cemented reality we live in? Concluding. My point is that I am tired of and not interested in pie throwing. I'd like to see as many different vine growing techniques coexist, all for the better of diversity and expression. The same way art does. The same way different human cultures do. The Natural movement shouldn't attack conventional practitioners - they should gladly share their knowledge but just do their thing - and let what's in the bottle speak for it self. And that goes for organic, lutte Raisonnee and conventional advocates too. C

Biodynamic, Organic, Lutte Raisonnée Conventional

I feel frustrated and worried.
The words above written all feel very loaded in the wine industry at the moment, and not in a good way.
I keep finding myself repeating the same phrase every time there's a debate or discussion between the different advocates: "Why are we looking at this subject in black and white, when surely most issues in the world range over different shades of grey?"
If you were to translate the war between different faiths in wine making and vine growing - to the war between different faiths in our human world. You'd be on very dangerous territory. So why is it acceptable to be so close minded and fearful in regards to some cosmic practises?

First of all I am in no way knowledgeable enough to take any stand scientifically or academically. But then again very few is. The reason for BD being a faith is because it has not yet been proven, let alone, disproved. Surely those who practises this labour intensive, long term and often low yielding practise are doing it because they feel it works? What part of the philosophy, preparations and moon fixation, that does or does not work is another question altogether.
In my view so far the most important thing in producing good quality wine, is through growing good quality grapes. Good quality grapes tends to grow on a well balanced healthy vine. Soil health and balance seem to be of vital importance and acts as base to the rest of the alchemy.
So saying that aren't one of the most important parts of the wine production the decision on how you treat you soil? Whether that is through biodynamic, organic or lutte raisonnée shouldn't really matter as long as the vigneron spends time in his/her vineyard in order to intimately know what it needs to thrive.
In humanity it seems we know so much about everything and if it's not scientifically proven it stands no ground. With all due respect we should all remind our selves of how little time we have graced this planet and this universe to dare to claim we got all the answers.

My aim in life is to keep open minded, always listen and learn.
As I understand it the Natural and BD movements are a response to the really badly conventionally grown vines out there. There seems to be a real fear and anger towards these movements, when there really should be none. Is it fear of lowering sales if the general public catches on?
At yesterdays "Great Grape Debate' between Monty Waldin and Richard Smart, none really got to the meat of things. It was more a rambling of different opinions. Such a shame. I hope there will be other organisations organising similar debates in the future.

Monty argued for the obvious sustainability focus in BD.
Richard Smart often agreed to these statements while at the same time expressing his concern that: "Biodynamics are only PR. Someone needs to take a stand for conventionalism."

Through my wine/vine studies at Plumpton College I will learn about the conventional way. I need to read Rudolf Steiner, Monty Waldin, Nicolas Joly and Olivier Humbrecht MW  in my spare time. Then I can take a stand. Till then I choose to be openminded towards both directions.

x Charlotte