On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 20:50:01 -0500, "jmcquown"
> wrote:

>I can appreciate the irony: Say, for example, three broiled sea scallops
>with 3 stalks of marinated grilled asparagus, a little drizzling of sauce in
>a circle and maybe a piece of turned-into-a-dove radish on a plate being
>ridiculous. Particularly if that plate is going to cost you $40 at a
>restaurant.

Ah, but those places seem to be based on the idea of eating all of the
"formal" courses. Of course, that gets spendy too, but that's the
idea. For "fine" dining, I don't mind, because it's more of an
atmosphere/entertainment thing...a pleasure to eat, versus sustenance.
Still many of the more "common" restaurants could still do well to
reduce portions a little (or have some kind of 2-level portion system
with their meals. You want a platter of mashed potatoes as big as
you're head, go for it. You want what you can actually eat...that's
alright too.

Bob