Is food really that "subjective"?

[pingpong1]

In the many posts I've read over the past 3-4 years, several people have made the comment that "food is subjective". I've taken that statement to mean that we really can't discuss it too much, or critique it because after all, we know that "food is subjective". The statement has the effect of being rather "dismissive".

 

I also take the statement to mean that we can't really or fairly engage in any evaluation of the food (quality, variety, and serving of it) served on Regent and it was "off limits" since it was simply so "subjective". It had to be immune from any complaint or suggested improvement by anyone because after all, we know that food is simply too "subjective" to comment about.

 

I don't dispute the fact many folks don't like or eat meat, that others don't care for seafood/sushi, and that a few folks (like my own DW) don't really care much for Chinese food. Some folks, to even include one of our past presidents, don't even like broccoli! :p

 

But avoiding any discussions of food served on Regent at all, because it would just be "too subjective", seems a bit of a "cop out". A tremendous amount of advertising and emphasis surrounding the entire cruise industry focuses on "food", so how can we dismiss it as being too "subjective" for discussion? The offered excursions aren't too "subjective" to talk about and neither are the AR dance programs too "subjective" to talk about. So why should the food be "off the table" (how did you like that for a pun :D)?

 

We certainly don't have any problems discussing virtually everything else about our cruising experiences on Regent. So why should food be excluded from our discussions. How many threads have we had regarding the taste/quality/variety of the coffees served onboard?

 

Why can't someone say that the bowl of mushroom soup (intended to be served hot) was brought to their table and was too "cool" or actually "cold" when it arrived? Because food is too "subjective" to discuss?

 

Many threads have been started/attempted trying to compare the food service (and selections) on O vs. R. But the discussions inevitably end when someone says, "but food is subjective"! In other words, "we shouldn't/can't talk about that" anymore.

 

Can't we all agree (no matter what our individual food preferences are) that soup that was meant to be served "hot", and comes to the table "cold" (or not hot), is not good? Can we agree (even if some of us might be vegetarians) that beef, pork, or lamb served to us, which turned out to be tough, tasteless, or full of gristle and fat were simply NOT good and did not meet acceptable standards? And if we asked that our beef be cooked "medium rare" and it came to us cooked "well done", that this constituted a failure on the part of the kitchen?

 

When crab legs or Lobster are ordered, they should not taste "fishy", should not be tough, and should not taste like it sat under a heat lamp for an hour before it was brought to the table. Couldn't we all agree, even if some of us don't particularly care for shell fish, that this simply was "not right", rather than falling back on the old "saw" that food is too "subjective" to discuss?

 

What if the desert pastries had no taste, or the vegetables were overcooked and mushy, or the salads did not seem "fresh"? Is that all also "out of bounds" for discussion because "food is just too subjective"? Just wondering?

 

Regards

[Travelcat2]

Discussing food is actually easy - even though it is subjective. The first assumption must be whether it is meant to be served cold, hot, warm or ??? Once that is determined, if it is not served the temperature that most people expect it to be served, there is a problem.

 

People around the world are brought up with different tastes. In some cultures, food is meant to be spicy (Mexican, for instance), while other foods that one may believe is similar (Cuban) is not spicy at all. Some people adore fatty meats that are reportedly more tasty while others would be upset if they were served a fatty steak. (BTW, I find the Mexican food on Regent very poor -- but I was raised in Los Angeles and have a totally different standard for Mexican food).

 

It is not unusual for people dining at a restaurant (on or off of the ship), to have the same dinner and for one to find it to their liking and the other person finds it lacking. So, rather than my saying that the sashimi is wonderful -- you should try it........, I would post that I am a big fan of sashimi and find Regent's offerings to be fair/good/excellent. In other words, no one can really tell someone else whether or not they would enjoy any particular dish on Regent or anywhere else.

 

Interesting topic. I don't believe that anyone has ever said not to talk about food on Cruise Critic - simply that people's tastes are different

[diebroke]

Excellent point pingpong. The phrase - “food is subjective” - has too often been used to dismiss complaints about food on these boards.

If food were truly subjective, why does Michelin award stars, why does Zagat award points, why do most major newspapers hav e food critics who review restaurants & award stars, why does opentable solicit ratings? I believe there are generally accepted principles of food quality. Fine dining is an important part of a cruise experience for me and was the biggest disappointment of my one Regent cruise. I value reading well written opinions about food & doubt I will return to Regent until I read a significant quantity of credible positive food reviews.

[RachelG]

Food is subjective, but that doesn't mean we can't discuss it. There are restaurants here in town that people rave about, but that my husband and I hate (usually because they focus on quantity of food rather than quality).

I am not a huge fan of the steaks in Prime 7 because I can do better at my own home, but if you don't have your personal supply of grass-fed beef, the steaks in Prime 7 are probably great for you.

I agree with travelcat about the Mexican food on Regent--very poor, but I live in an area of the country where we have outstanding Mexican food.

Those are just my opinions--it is fine to disagree.

[wripro]

We should certainly be allowed to discuss the quality of the food, especially while dining at a table with three kids, two smokers and one person dressed in expensive jeans.

[Hambagahle]

Being someone who cooks a lot of Indian food (from north to south and in between) I really do not think that Mexican food is very spicy - IF by what you mean by spicy is hot chilies. You could also mean that Mexican food has more spices in it than normal american or British food. (Which is true) But what is "hot and spicy" to one is not to another and so YES - I think that reactions to food are subjective. You bring your own background/training/education to bear and then make a statement. That is / has to be subjective...

[pingpong1]

Hambagahle - And how does this differ from all the various opinions expressed on this board regarding the type, quality, taste, variety, and ostensible "dissatisfaction" with the coffees served on Regent? Does anyone say "....but coffee is subjective"? :rolleyes:

[Travelcat2]

IMO, coffee is one of the most subjective items of all. There are so many different strengths and depths of flavors available. People seem to enjoy everything from deep, strong, almost "muddy" Turkish coffee to the watery blends used in cheap coffee shops. It is difficult to please everyone in terms of a "good cup of coffee".

[RachelG]

All coffe tastes bad to me as I don't like coffee.

[Emperor Norton]

It's hard to have a discussion about food when the person on the opposite side of the table is probably more than happy with TGIMcFunsters/Dennys/Applebees.

 

Unless you know where someones palette has been and what they consider good/bad/ugly its hard to know if what they're saying has any meaning to you.

 

It can be like reading a review for a restaurant known for its steak, seeing dismal notes and then finding out the author was vegan.

[JMARINER]

.................

 

It can be like reading a review for a restaurant known for its steak, seeing dismal notes and then finding out the author was vegan.

 

Most good high end steak houses (including P7) do very good with vegans and are very accommodating. They always have great potatoes, salads and vegetables.

 

j

Edited January 15, 2015 by JMARINER

[hondorner]

When I see reports or hear discussions about the same dish, at the same time, in the same restaurant, and hear one person say, "it's too salty", and another say, "it's not salty enough", then I know there can be no reconciliation because the opinions are based on individual taste. When something is based on individual taste, it's subjective. The definition of subjective is, "based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions."

 

All opinions about food (or dress or manners or anything else) are subjective. Saying so is an explanation of the differences in perception, not to shut off discussion. Discuss away, but take it with a grain of salt (pun intended) because it's always subjective.

[Les Picantins]

A little anecdote. Several years ago on Seabourn, we befriended a very nice Australian couple and spent lots of time with them. The Mrs. (otherwise very funny and friendly) turned into a real pest in the restaurant always sending things back and complaining. My husband and I found the food on this particular cruise to be the best we'd ever experienced at sea, and we are in the food business. When the Mrs complainer started going on about how she can't get a decent cup of coffee on board, we began talking about Nespresso (our coffee de preference). Well Mrs gourmet told us she drinks instant coffee at home:eek::eek::eek: She lost all credibility at that point.

 

Yes food is subjective and we are all critics.

 

To back up to the mention of Michelin stars, the Michelin inspectors are trained and have a certain checklist to follow. For example, a 2 star restaurant must have valet parking, double tablecloths, a fresh flower arrangement on every table, a sommelier... to mention a few. These amenities have nothing to do with the food on your plate but are part of the overall experience.

 

When cruising, I expect the food to be good to very good at best. I understand the challenges the kitchen team has at sea and respect their hard work. What I will not put up with are pretentious plates or service.

[Jay23]

Oh! I take "subjective" to mean "you can't please all of the people all of the time". !

 

Soup should be hot, but not so hot it burns your mouth! Steak should be tender, but it will always be more chewy if served 'well done' rather than 'medium rare'............... fish should be ?? but this is all my opinion, isn't it?

[hondorner]

Oh! I take "subjective" to mean "you can't please all of the people all of the time". !

 

Soup should be hot, but not so hot it burns your mouth! Steak should be tender, but it will always be more chewy if served 'well done' rather than 'medium rare'............... fish should be ?? but this is all my opinion, isn't it?

Yep! Thus, your comments, while interesting and informative, will likely not apply to me, because tastes are subjective. That's all that comment means.

 

However, much has to do wirh the presentation (pun intended) of the comments. If you ARE interesting and informative, then I the comment that "food is subjective" is simply saying that my tastes are different than yours. If you are pushy and declarative ("That food is garbage") then the subjective comment is intended - and should be - to end the conversation.

[TedC]

People are subjective - not food!

[TedC]

All coffe tastes bad to me as I don't like coffee.

 

I've never had coffee- I don't like to do what everyone else does. (I saw how the coffee drinkers turned out!)

[diebroke]

I think the take-away from the OP’s message is that when someone makes a negative post about food, it is not appropriate to rebut it by saying food is subjective. It’s like saying to the person who posted the negative review that your opinion does not matter. I find that offensive. Similarly, it should not be necessary for the person who posts a negative comment about food to add to their post that they realize food is subjective. That sounds too defensive.

I feel I am able to read reviews about food & make my own judgments without dismissing the reviews I don’t agree with by reminding everyone that food is subjective. For whatever reason, the phrase about the subjective nature of opinions seems only to be applied to food.

[pingpong1]

Diebroke - "5-Stars" You most correctly and very accurately explained exactly what I was trying to say. Best Regards and "Thanks"!

[Hambagahle]

When I see reports or hear discussions about the same dish, at the same time, in the same restaurant, and hear one person say, "it's too salty", and another say, "it's not salty enough", then I know there can be no reconciliation because the opinions are based on individual taste. When something is based on individual taste, it's subjective. The definition of subjective is, "based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions."

 

All opinions about food (or dress or manners or anything else) are subjective. Saying so is an explanation of the differences in perception, not to shut off discussion. Discuss away, but take it with a grain of salt (pun intended) because it's always subjective.

 

Absolutely agree, Don! One inevitably brings one's own perspective to any decision and that includes food and drink. and that makes it subjective. One man's meat...

[Travelcat2]

Must disagree regarding the use of the term "food is subjective". There have been repetitive comments about posts that sound as if they are stating facts rather than their opinion. Actually, what most people state are their facts - based on their experience. If we start making statements about the quality of the food without adding a comment about the subjectivity of food, some posters will take the opinion as gospel. For instance, coffee is bad on Regent ......... food is better on Oceania .......... Mexican food on Regent isn't good etc.

 

Thankfully, what is being expressed on this thread are opinions and everyone can continue to post their "facts" or "opinions" in a way they feel comfortable. The subject of food is of particular interest to me at the moment as I plan on really looking into the food onboard the Mariner in April (pictures, reviews, etc.)

[PaulaJK]

While we may have a range of food preferences and palates, I don't find food any more subjective than entertainment, decor, mattresses, pillows, room temperatures,etc.

 

If easy over eggs have been cooked to the discus state or a supposedly hot soup is served barely tepid or the lettuce in the salad is brown, there is only a small amount of subjectivity and a lot of fact. The spice/garlic/whatever index may be a different issue unless you find the vast majority of folks making the same evals. That's why I enjoy lots of posters.

 

I,too, am tired of that refrain. Paula

[diebroke]

If we start making statements about the quality of the food without adding a comment about the subjectivity of food, some posters will take the opinion as gospel.

 

1. Apparently, I judge the readers of this forum to be much more intelligent than you do. I believe people who find their way to this forum, are bright enough and experienced enough reading restaurant reviews on yelp, yahoo, tripadvisor, opentable, & all the other forms of social media that they will not take one negative comment as “gospel” unless there is a disclaimer that “food is subjective.” If people are so stupid they require that disclaimer, how did they earn enough money to take a luxury cruise?
    
   
2. I don’t understand why food is the only opinion that requires a disclaimer.
    
   
3. For you foodies out there, I just watched a fun movie last night – "The Hundred-Foot Journey.” It is a bit silly & not very deep but entertaining nonetheless & has some great food scenes. Even those of you who require a disclaimer about the subjective nature of food opinions might enjoy it. Warning: do not watch it on an empty stomach.
    
   
4. My judgments about the intelligence of the readers of this forum and my opinions about movies are totally subjective.
    
   
5. If you found item 4 above helpful, everything I have written on this thread is wrong.
   

[Travelcat2]

Really do not want to get into an argument about this. This isn't about people being stupid or not. Some very intelligent people take cruises without doing any research whatsoever. They either lack the time or the interest.

 

A CC member cancelled a Regent cruise this past week due solely to what was posted on a particular thread (about the Navigator). This is a well traveled individual -- not a newbie to cruising that seems quite intelligent. The thread hit heavily on children being on the ship as well as anything that you can think of that might go wrong if you sail on the Navigator. Unfortunately, posters that love the Navigator and could have easily posted the "other side of the story" either weren't around or didn't have the time to post.

 

Unlike CC's sister company, TripAdvisor, looking at "reviews" for a particular ship isn't easy on CC (in my opinion). While CC has a "review" section, not enough people post there. Instead, they post their reviews on the general Regent board where it fades into the archives. If the Navigator were a hotel on TripAdvisor, a person could easily go through 2 or 3 pages of recent reviews and would easily spot areas of concern.

 

In terms of what is subjective on Regent, I will agree that just about everything is. However, there are certain subjects that appear repetitively on the Regent board -- food is one of them. Regent can have the largest suites at sea, have the most beautiful décor, great service, etc. However, if food is not up to par with other luxury cruise lines, perspective customers may go elsewhere.

 

In any case, this thread, while interesting, is not going to change anyone's mind. For myself, I like to see as much honesty and openness as possible on CC. RachelG discussed "open faced lobster ravioli" fairly recently. Several of us wanted to learn more about it. It was a good discussion (and yes -- a few of us did try and enjoy the lobster ravioli).

 

For now, I'll continue to look forward to having Miso Glazed Sea Bass on the Mariner in April. This is a dish that one tends to love or really dislike (I suppose you could call that subjective ;) )

Edited January 16, 2015 by Travelcat2

[wripro]

Everything everyone posts on CC is his/her opinion and his/her "facts." Why should food be any different.