The eating experience

When you're interested in food, I have noticed that each and every meal you eat takes on a slightly different inference.

I don't just "have breakfast". I give it a lot of thought. I will have already cleared the way for the highest potential for enjoyment, whatever I decide to have, by having already stocked my fridge & cupboards with the basis for same.

I have fuelled for the day (breakfasted) over the last week at Machine, Lansdowne Cafe and Ugly Duckout (Swansea). All meals were, as breakfasts go, fine. But there seemed to be something lacking.

I haven't discussed this with Nellie (the Hobart Breakfast queen), even though two of those three meals were eaten with her, but am pondering about the validity of my feelings.

Is it that for the ideal meal, no matter what the content, you need to have done as much as you can to set up the scenario in order to ensure THE most perfect dining scenario as you can possibly hope for?

For instance, let's pretend that the brekky we had last week at Machine was the Marque IV experience of all brekkies. Is it that I didn't feel that because I was busy assisting Nellie Jnr with her Baby Ben (kiddy sized Eggs Benedict) therefore I wasn't totally focussed on the sheer enjoyment of the actual food itself? If the food had been outstandingly, blindingly fabulous would I have noted this, preoccupied as I was?

I'm just using the kiddy experience as an example. Setting yourself up for a negative dining experience can also equally apply if you happen to be depressed, or have a fight with your eating partner, or be on a budget and are stressing about the cost of the meal or don't feel comfortable in the environment, or there's someone present in the restaurant that you dislike (ie an ex-boyfriend - this IS Hobart!) or any number of assorted things.

I don't know the answer. I just feel that the more you set yourself up to have a positive eating experience, probably the more it will actually BE one.

By the way - that was the first time I had breakfasted at any of those venues (Machine, Lansdowne & Duckout) so I'm not coming from the perspective of 'been there, done that countless times before & I'm now well and truly over it'.

The question I could be asking is: when you have a disappointing or negative eating experience, is it the fault of the food itself, or the way it was cooked or prepared, or could the circumstances above contribute?

In which case how do we tell, when we read a food review, exactly what the surrounding circumstances are? How can we ensure a level playing field for all food reviews? In fact - could there possibly be a level playing field for food reviews? I suspect, with all the best of intentions, that there isn't.