but you are supposed to go and say it was fab and amazing when you go to these trendy places.

they all suck. i hate going out. I prefer to do the hard work and host people

Anonymous wrote:continuing...

But if you think you're going to find some hip new DC restaurant that serves decent sized entrees for a reasonable price, then you might as well believe in unicorns.

OP again. $100 with a drink, tax and tip is very reasonable. $100 to leave unsatisified is not -- especially when they rush you out of there. I guess there is a sucker born every minute.

FWIW I love Zaytinya and Graffiato and will suck it up there. Mockingbird Hill and Daikya...I truly felt ripped off.

I am happy to pay mid-level prices or higher (think Proof, Vidalia, Central, etc.)

If I want diner food, I will go to a diner. Clearly, that is not what this thread is about, nor is it about "filling to the brim" -- which was made clear.

I would prefer a full-size meal, but our unicorn likes the small-plates places.

continuing...

But if you think you're going to find some hip new DC restaurant that serves decent sized entrees for a reasonable price, then you might as well believe in unicorns.

If you're talking about DC, then you're going to pay a fortune for a meal no matter what. You're assuming that if the same restaurants had regular sized entrees that they'd be priced accordingly. Nope. You'd still pay $100.

I like tapas, because I'm picky, but I like to try new things. I hate paying a fortune for one entree only to realize I don't like it.

If you don't like tapas, don't go to a tapas restaurant. Go to Cracker Barrel where you can get a heaping portion of whatever you want and fill yourself to the brim.

But if you think that you're

I agree. I'm tired of paying a fortune for a meal that leaves me hungry at the end of the night.

Almost as predictable as the next "small plates to share" restaurant. Which they keep calling a "concept." The concept is stinking old.

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I read that piece and then the counterpoint in Slate. I think it is silly for the Slate writer to imply that main dishes are declasse (nice Chilis reference -- he must lurk here)! Sometimes you want dinner --not three bites of six things.

Slate annoys the fuck out of me with its knee-jerk contrarianism. It's really tiresome and painfully predictable.

I think one reason why the small-plates thing is so tired is that it has now been around a long time. Tapas came first but that was an early wave probably 15 years ago, mezze, and then the small plates phenon, including Italian which is really not an Italian thing at all. It feels like restaurants have gotten a bit boring and all too similar -- the farm to table thing was the next wave but it is often more fake than real (e.g., Founding Farmers) and sometimes is found on small plates too. It is time for a change to be sure.

I liked the way Gabrielle Hamilton put it: "I have an attention span. I can eat a meal."

OP here. I read that piece and then the counterpoint in Slate. I think it is silly for the Slate writer to imply that main dishes are declasse (nice Chilis reference -- he must lurk here)! Sometimes you want dinner --not three bites of six things.

I don't get the concept of "small plates for sharing". So a table of 4-5 gets a portion of 3 bite-size meatballs - how are they supposed to be shared? A standard-sized appetizer would be enough for everyone to get a taste.
In my opinion, tapas is a good format for couples, but not for a group.

OP, you will enjoy this article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/28/the-case-against-small-plates/

I am with you! Chose the last date night restaurant based on this --and was surprised and annoyed by how many do this. I think it's fun with 4+ people, but hate it when it's just the two of us.

Agree! I disliked the restaurant Range for this very reason. While the food was good, I hated the small plates and hated paying over $20 for some of them! Just make something good and serve it as a decent size.

I don't want a trough of food, either. Just a normal-sized entree. WTF. Maybe it wouldn't be so bad if each small-plates place didn't insist on bringing all 5 or 6 plates at once. Thanks for making me spend more than $100 in the time it takes to eat a sandwich from Panera.

Must one go to a terribly old-school restaurant these days to enjoy an appetizer and an entree? Anything open recently that feels fresh and modern but actually serves main dishes?