Small Plates?

[The Ironic Chef]

I'm kinda getting lost in this small plate thing. I'm getting the idea that if I am going to make a chicken, I should cut it up, make maybe some fried pieces, some bbqed pieces, maybe some Buffalo wings, a few chicken tenders and so on just to not serve a whole plain baked chicken for dinner. I guess the choice of white meat or dark, thigh or drum stick, breast or wing is just to boring or not fancy enough. Why bake a ham when I could serve a ham salad too. People are to picky as it is and it's hard enough to cook a meal with out hearing some one complain about something. I'm not going to start preparing something 20 different ways just to make everyone happy. If you don't like what we are having for dinner, be quiet or get off your butt and cook yourself is what I think.
If I go out to eat, an appetizer is usually big enough for my whole family to pick at while waiting for a meal. At times in a busy place it can take up to 45 minutes at times for a meal to be served. I can see that as a problem for 1 or 2 people. When I go out I look forwards to having a meal. Not 3 or 4 appetizers. I want a salad or soup, my entree and dessert with coffee. If I bring home a piece of my steak it will not be the end of the world. Going to a bar to hang out for a bit with friends, drinking beers,appetizers are ideal.

[KYHeirloomer]

"....I should cut it up, make....."

There's no "should" about it, IC. Each of us makes his/her own decisions as to how we wish to dine. Doesn't make one right and one wrong, just different strokes.

For instance, some of us plate dinner. Some just put the various dishes in serving plates and pass them around. Some of us begin with an appetizer of some sort. Others don't.

"If I go out to eat, an appetizer is usually big enough for my whole family to pick at while waiting for a meal."

You're kind of proving my point about size. If an appetizer is designed to feed four it should say so. I shouldn't, as an individual, have to order one that would stretch that far. Appetizers, to reiterate, are supposed to stimulate the appetite, not sate it.

"At times in a busy place it can take up to 45 minutes at times for a meal to be served."

You actually sit for 45 minutes after placing your order? I don't know what sort of places you go to, but if the management expected me to sit that long, they'd better comp the appetizers at the very least.

[chubbyalaskagriz]

Large Appz/Small Appz? Go-Boxes and Doggy-Bags? I think like most things cooking-related, it's all in the eye of the beholder. That's the coolest thing in the world about food- there's hardly ever a real wrong answer... Food is a forgiving medium- and there are aften just as many "right answers" as there are cooks.

Me? I'm a fat guy who is also frugal, so you'll never catch me complaining about being served too much grub. But I also totally see things from Brook's point of view.

[Cook Chatty Cathy]

I love all the different ways we can view this subject! As Kevin points out it all the answers are right!

[cookie]

You all have some interesting thoughts on "Food portions" you all make some good points. I agree I can be frugal too, left overs are good when u just don't want to cook the next day and eating out isn't cheap. I do agree when u order an appetizer it shouldn't kill the appetite and they should tell you how many it will serve.

That's why there all different kinds of restaurant's people are different and they want a choice. Cookie