I've been intrigued by recent postings by Wilson and others, regarding a sort of reverse snobbery in Seattle. I'm not sure I see it, but maybe I just have particular kinds of friends, who will eat anywhere as long as it's good.
The statement has been made that we seem to categorically dismiss expensive restaurants, based solely on price, and not on the merits on which we critique other restaurants. Do we?
Quoting Wilson in a recent thread:
"There seems to be a contingent on this board that objects to expensive restaurants and calls them "pretentious" based solely on their prices. I haven't been to the Herbfarm, but I've been to most of the rest of them (Canlis quite a while ago, too, but not in the past 6 years which is why I asked about it in a recent post) along with extensive business travel worldwide.
I can report that I have yet to find a pretentious restaurant in Seattle with the possible exception of Lampreia, which is one of those self-consciously new-wave sort of places. And the dining prices in Seattle are righteous compared to other big cities."
Now, I know that I have been to places in Seattle that I have found to be pretentious, but it's not based on price, but rather an attitude.
In a previous posting on this topic, there is a reference to Canlis, which, to be fair was posted as a debate. The link is attached.
How about it? Are Seattlites, particularly Chowhounds reverse snobs? Is an expensive restaurant inherently less worthy than a cheap one? Is the humble humbow more rightous than foie gras?