12 hours ago
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
50 Best Restaurants In The World
If you have not seen The List before, let me explain what is is. Every year Restaurant magazine releases a list of the Top 50 Restaurants in the World and then make everyone crazy because people like to disagree with what's on there. I'm not really one to bother with that (well, except that I can't seem to think of any reason why Momofuko Ssam is on #31) and I'm not big on making lists like that because you only set yourself up for failure. But seeing as to how critics are of the human variety (barely, because I normally imagine Bauer as Inspector Gadget and Bruni as a T-1000 robot) with a need to critique and rationalize EVERYTHING (as I am also hypocritically doing so here), they often find the necessity to create suffocating amounts of "best" or "top" honors type lists. And of course, the audience, being that of the sheep variety, normally eat this stuff up and can't wait to bitch and moan about every little detail. Here's the kicker, people who often complain the most about these lists, also know that this stuff is purely subjective fodder (sometimes at best) and mind-numbingly bias.
My issue is strictly geographical, how can you claim to have the 50 Best Restaurants in the World listed when you have not been to every inch of the World? For me the list is better served as an Most Important or Most Influential or Most Dynamic, but Best? Do we really know how restaurants end up on the list or how judging criteria works? By all accounts, every cuisine seems to have some kind of meatball in some for or another (my universal food language "meatball" example), but how do you compare one meatball to another?
Then again, if they asked me to go to the Artic to find a restaurant that could break the list, I'd probably decline.