Is a 6-course dégustation menu meant to be shared by two people?
 

I'm wondering if this would be considered ill-mannered or is it the norm?

you'll starve. the portions are too small.

I don't think the restaurant would even allow it. Many restaurants with tasting menus state that the whole table must have the same menu.

Very ill mannered and restaurants would not allow it.
For children maybe.

Certainly not the norm . Degustation - very small dishes . I doubt if a restaurant would want your custom . Perhaps ask the restaurant .

These degustation menus are usually stated on the menu "to be served to all guests at the table" or something similar so they are definitely not meant to be shared 1 between 2. IME they are usually very small portions, though we did have one once in NZ that would have served a small army. [I don't think that they had really understood the concept!]

@Whathello do you know what's ill-mannered? Charging $1000 for 6 plates of minuscule food.


A tasting menu at L'Atelier Joel Robuchon costs $1200 for two people.

I do appreciate the art and hard work that goes behind creating every dish, but I mean $1200?

And to think there are people in Africa and India eating from the trash. How unjust.

Loacker - you have taken one of the most extreme examples and run with it. No-one is forced to pay what I agree are ridiculous prices and more fool them if they do.

In fact the tasting menu at L'Atelier Joel Robuchon, Paris, is €189 pp

https://atelier-robuchon-saint-germain.com/?lang=en

I'm not saying that even that is a reasonable price to pay for a meal but it's nowhere near the U$1200 you mention. [it's more like U$450 at today's exchange rate]

'And to think there are people in Africa and India eating from the trash. How unjust.'

One could say buying a large house, or fancy car, or more clothes than one needs is unjust as well.

If fools are willing to pay 1200 then so be it. A fool and his money are easily departed.
Going back to the question I agree with Whatsapp....sorry Whathallo. Not acceptable to share plates no matter what the menu is.

Or indeed flying between continents when others walk to find water...

I also think $1200 for one dinner is obscene and -- no -- it is not like buying a house or a car or clothes, but there is something worse than unjust about conspicuous consumption that is justly criticised, and people who can't see the same of it might want to re-think. Not a great look.

shame, not "same"

People make their own decisions about what to spend money on.

$1200 for a meal is VERY expensive.

So is spending money to upgrade to first class when coach will get you where you need.

Or buying an expensive designer couch to sit on.

Or designer clothes and handbags.

In fact, travel is a luxury.

Do you need a ferrari when a ford focus will do?

Would eating out at McDonald's for every meal be acceptable even though it costs more than eating at home, but it isn't a fancy restaurant.

What people spend their money on is their business and what one person thinks is unjust could differ from what others think is unjust.

I spend my surplus money on travel, my brother spends his on cars and his house and my colleague just spent £1400 on a handbag. In the context of people starving around the world all are unjust.

It seems pretty silly for any of us to be talking about the injustice of what people eat in other countries as we sit on our computers on the internet discussing travel for pleasure.

So true, jamikins.

But to answer the original question, no, a tasting menu is not meant to be shared, and yes, it would be considered rude to try to do so, no matter what the cost.

BTW - I have NEVER spent that much on a meal and don't have the budget for it.

I think you should read annhig' comment.

$1200 - for one or for two - had been a false number.

The tasting menu in question costs €189 per person.

I am not sure I would characterize an attempt for two people to share a tasting menu as rude. It would be made clear when ordering that the menu price is per person. You may either agree and stay or leave and dine elsewhere.

"So is spending money to upgrade to first class when coach will get you where you need. Or buying an expensive designer couch to sit on.
Or designer clothes and handbags."

Yes, but 24 hours later, a couch is still a couch. A purse is still a purse. But the $1200 meal? It becomes .....

I just wonder how the waitstaff keeps a straight face while serving such largesse.

I don't think anyone is offering a $1200 tasting menu. The one in question, as mentioned several times, is not $1200, but rather €189, which is expensive for sure, but not unheard of. No one needs to work to keep a straight face when serving that.

If people have money to pay 1200 euros one meal who am I to disagree ?
Half the US people who think it is obscene vote for a guy who probably spends more for one meal one bottle of Whisky or one cigar.

Saying it is obscene to ask for a lot of money for something doesn't change the fact that is rude to share one Meal.

If you don't have the money to live like a prince then don't go where you'll be asked to pay what a prince will pay. And don't complain about what princes Pay.

If you think small live small and eat small.

"Joel Robuchon's tasting menu for two at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas will almost certainly cost more than $1,100 after wine, tax and tip."

http://thepricehike.com/post/1397068...ricas-priciest

Also, I don't think you can equate travelling with a $1000 meal.

A person who travels to Europe is seeking to enjoy their time and explore new cultures.

A woman who buys a $100,000 Birkins bag is doing so only to flaunt her wealth.

Why did you even bother to ask this question when you knew full well what the answer would be?

Were you asking for your mythical friend again?

<<<But to answer the original question, no, a tasting menu is not meant to be shared, and yes, it would be considered rude to try to do so, no matter what the cost.>>>

I always share plates with friends at the more casual restaurants. It's not like we order one main course. I mean we order many two main courses and a few starters and share them so we can get to try different dishes. It's our "poor man tasting menu".

<<<<Yes, but 24 hours later, a couch is still a couch. A purse is still a purse. But the $1200 meal? It becomes .....>>>

You, sir, has just won the internet.

Loacker you are what we call in French an éteignoir.
It means a person who used to shut off the the light.
Since electricity we don't need these guys anymore and it has now taken the meaning of somebody who kills a party.
By being so negative so empty of life that everyone is driven away or sink into some kind of stupor.
I w s right when I said you drive me away from forums. You post threads that can only elicit a negative reaction.
You are a bore and a troll since you do it on purpose.
The goal of thread ?
To ask a question?
Nah.
You knew what would be answered.
You just wanted a thread into which you could inject ... hollowness.
Such a person full of bile, one so devoid of life.
If you hate life don't try to disgust the others !
Moi je kiffe ma Life.
And so much good if people are so much richer than me that they can but of bottle of champagne for 2000 € !
Good for them !

Money is made to spent one way or another.

However, it is indeed quite pertinent to mention that certain items will last a longer time (handbags, automobiles) and others will be gone the next day (a meal or the 14th of July fireworks).

I am nevertheless trying to imagine the description of an ultra expensive meal that would actually make it sound like it was worth it. I think the Danish film <b>Babette's Feast</b> comes as close as possible to justifying a gigantic splurge, but then again the whole point was to show a very austere religious community that they had been missing a lot of the pleasures of life.

Whathello on Aug 2, 17 at 6:30pm

Such a person full of bile, one so devoid of life.
If you hate life don't try to disgust the others !


Loacker may or may not be a "party pooper", but you certainly are a drama queen.

I think the question is legit. And I'm with those who think that such indulgence is foolish and decadent.

<i>I'm with those who think that such indulgence is foolish and decadent.</i>

Some have modest income levels at which such expenditures might indeed appear decadent. For others, it´s just another restaurant which may or may not be as good as others to which they are accustomed.

An amazing meal may be gone the next day, but the memory lives on, as it does with many travel moments.

Yes, I can totally picture myself in a couple of years reminiscing about that overpriced asparagus I ate at Atelier Joel Robuchon. ��

Wife: Do you remember that one summer in Paris?
Me: Yeah, I still dream about that asparagus.

Some people are indeed that superficial. Let them fuel the economy. It's wonderful that some people are willing to pay 100 times the price of the ingredients and that food critics are there to confirm that it is the right thing to do. It isn't just the proletariat that lives in total manipulation.

I'm with Whathello here. The OP's original post had nothing to do with what he wanted to talk about, which was to demonstrate his superiority to anyone who wants to spend $1200 on a meal.

Bait and switch in fact.

If I'm not mistaken, Babette had won a lottery ticket.
I showed this film to my 4th grade French class and they appreciated the beauty of it.

WhatHello and kerouac - "Laissez le crapaud dans son trou."

If I'm not mistaken, Babette had won a lottery ticket.
I showed this film to my 4th grade French class and they appreciated the beauty of it.

WhatHello and kerouac - "Laissez le crapaud dans son trou."

Lui c'est une allumeuse, pas un eteignoir, en fait.

Lol@Fuzzbucket I think you meant allumette.

Une allumeuse means a flirty woman.

Thank you Kerouac, Massimop, Tomboy, and Offtoeurope for agreeing with me.

And of course thanks to the others for weighing in with your opinion (however flawed it may be)