Inconsistency is underrated

There's a concept that many chefs strive for: consistency. I'm posting tonight to say that consistency is overrated. One of the things I like about my favorite restaurants is the fact they have very little consistency. Consistency is boring. Even if the chef is consistently amazing in his product, he does himself a disservice to think that we, the foodies, like the same delivery every time.

One of my favorite restaurants is Zorba's. They're a Greek joint down in Chula Vista (of all places). They offer a buffet every day and sometimes the spanakopita is served as a giant sheet/pie that is sliced up, or individual pieces. Sometimes the spices are a little sweeter or a little more savory. I can see how not knowing what you're going to get when you go there for a meal would drive some people crazy, but it gives the wife and I something to talk about. We analyze each of the dishes and try to figure out what is different. Now sometimes, a dish is just dry (it is a buffet after all), but that's a risk I'm willing to take. It may be a matter of who is in the kitchen that night or the inspiration of the cooks that affects the variations of the dishes.

If nothing else, I think we can appreciate inconsistency for the sheer fact that to be inconsistent is to be human. I don't want the chef to mask the fact that he's in a different mood today. I expect variations in the food because he's human. He has to be affected by the things that happen in his day. Maybe he's even tweaking the dish, experimenting with a different approach. That novelty is far more precious to me than any lofty goal of consistency.

Food is art not science. Good art cannot be reproduced.