"I’ve always found
that the dullest people in the world
are the ones who cannot eat
(or for that matter,
enjoy themselves at anything else)
alone.
And there is nothing quite so rewarding
(speaking of indulgences)
as a little dinner party to which you
and only you are invited."
Catherine Seelye
(a librarian, Literary researcher, and great eating companion)
Cover from the article in Worcester Living, Fall 2016 edition
For the above article on us
in Worcester living magazine go to:
worcesterliving.ma.newsmemory.com/ (page 58)
Our Awards!
None received or sought except for our return customers.
Our View of Reviews of the Bistrot and others
We appreciate reviews if they are accurate and true (with apologies to Stanley Fish). It takes time and effort to write them well, and we are fortunate to have people who have gone to the effort to write them. You may find reviews of The Metro Bistrot on the TripAdvisor, Yelp, and Google sites. Thank you to all of the people who took the time to writer these reviews, even those of you who write the exceptional, nasty ones.
However, this page, besides celebrating our lack of awards, is also for our brief reviews of local restaurants which we encourage people to go to. The reason for this is that we are often asked these two questions by customers: 1) Do we ever go out to eat in our area, and 2) if we do, where? Also, we believe that the Quiet Corner of this part of New England has some good dining experiences to be had, but they are not always the easiest to know or find.
So for now, here are a few quick recommendations of places in the area where we enjoy eating.
Southbridge:
1) Dynasty--for their shao-mai, hot and sour soup, and luncheon specials
2) Fins and Tales--for their calamari and fried oysters
3) Southbridge Village Pizza--best pizza dough around; their bacon pizza is the best
4) Fedele's--best breakfast eggs and lunch sandwichs in the area; a classic greasy spoon
5) The Thai Orchid--run by a Lao family, people swear by it, and Siri is the most literate restauranteur around
Sturbridge:
1) Kaizen--for their fried baby squid, gyoza, walnut shrimp, tataki, and tempura lobster
2) Cedar Street--good small plates, good cocktails
3) Sturbridge Seafood--great seafood when the chef puts his fusion hand to it
Putnam:
1) 85 Main--for their oysters, raw seafood platter, steamers, steak and fries, and Devon Point beef hamburgers
Woodstock:
1) The Inn at Woodstock Hill--for their seafood chowder and grilled shrimp or sea scallops
2) Sweet Evelina's--good breakfasts, famous pizzas, and the summer smell of fried seafood
Webster:
1) Point Breeze--for their cherrystones and lobster rolls and view and when you feel like an inexpensive lobster
Thompson:
1) Monte Bianco--we have heard good things about this Italianate restaurant in Wilsonville but have not tried it yet; also another BYOB
However ...
If you want to destroy a restaurant's business, there are two things you must say. These are: 1) that the food they serve is not only bad but rotten and hence dangerous, and 2) if it has good reviews, they have to be false. We received such a review from someone whom I believe never ate at the Bistrot. Still, with its appearance, we began immediately to feel its effect. So, I took the time to post a rebuttal, and here it is below.
From Yelp posted 14 August 2016 from Ari X of Charlton (1 review; 0 followers)
"I have to believe all these great reviews were obtained by dubious means. This place still doesn't have a liquor license after being in business for nearly 2 years...point #1. #2 everything tastes like it came from a package or was a kid's cooking experiment. They served my father a literally rancid piece of quail with 1 bite of meat on it served with plain steamed broccoli & an incredibly bland seafood spread thrown on some plain supermarket rice crackers for over $32, not including tip.
My ratatouille was decent but nothing special & the tomato soup was bland. And #3 the decor is...wow. We wanted to get out of there too quickly to get dessert, so who knows maybe that's wonderful.
Upon leaving we joked we would have payed the money to *not* have to eat there, so"
My response which I originally wrote on Yelp is below.
This public comment is not going to be short or pleasant, but it will be specific.
To begin, we have received none of our great reviews on Yelp, TripAdvisor, or Google over the past 3 years by any "dubious means." For you to insinuate such with nothing more objective than your intuitive belief, I take as a personal and professional insult. And if I could identify you with the help of Yelp, for this comment alone, I would sue you for libel.
However, a discerning reader will realize that with only your ONE review here, no friends, a picture of the Metro Bistrot lifted from the Yelp site, and your lack of basic knowledge of the Bistrot, there is a good chance that you have never eaten or visited here, and certainly that you do not seem to be a serious restaurant reviewer. Let me elaborate and point out your particular lack of knowledge in relation to the Metro, and why I find it hard to believe you were actually ever a customer.
First of all, let me address your most serious, and other, libelous charge. We do not and have not ever served anything "rancid," for obvious reasons. To claim that your father was served "a literally rancid piece of quail with 1 bite of meat on it" is disgusting and false. Each dish goes out or is returned through my hands, and I am always there. To say I cooked and served something rotten (I cook the quail), is not true. If you complained or sent it back or did not eat it, I would have remembered this. You did none of this (in fact no one ever has), and all I can conclude, if I follow the logic of your claim, is that you allowed your father to eat something you thought was "rancid". It is only now with this review that you decided to speak out in the world of reviews to say we serve "rancid" food. Really?
More to the point, to put in question your review's credibility by using specifics, we never serve a "piece of quail." Quail in the Bistrot is served whole, boneless, stuffed, with a sauce, and roasted by me for each order. Also, there is certainly more than just one bite of meat on an entire stuffed roasted quail. So, in your claim that you were served "rancid quail," you should not be believed.
Secondly, we have not been in business for "nearly 2 years", but 3 years this August. Of course, you could not know this, because this fact has not been made public on any site, and you would only know this by going to the Bistrot, eating there, and asking someone how long we have been open.
Next, we never have and do not serve "plain steamed broccoli" (which would be warm and all our vegetable dishes as sides on the main plates are cold). In addition, we have not served a broccoli crudité since April, and that is always made with our house mustard vinaigrette and garlic. Are you sure you have the right taste memory for us? Maybe you are confusing us with another restaurant? But of course it is hard for you to know what we serve as vegetables as this is also not on any site, and we change them regularly, but as I said before, they are always served cold.
Finally, your price for a meal of quail is not right. Our quail is $21 (now stuffed with foie gras, it is $23, but this was before you could have dined with us, if you ever did), and even including a $6 soup or $7 salmon rillettes, you are inflating the price, and hence are wrong.
And as for your complaint about the décor (i.e. "#3), you write "wow". Given your derogatory and negative tone, the implication is that it is bad too. You do not say how it is bad, because I hold that if you did, you actually would have had to dine with us. Or if you actually did, to criticize it you would expose an aesthetic ignorance that would reveal that most likely your culinary taste is also ignorant. So, when you offer just mediocre criticism of the food (i.e. "incredibly bland seafood spread"--not able to distinguish that it is not a spread but rillettes made from Faroe Island salmon flavored with chives from my garden and single malt scotch; "ratatouille was decent"; "tomato soup was bland"), your literary trick here is to lend weight to your devastating criticisms sprinkled in the review. This rhetorical device of yours should be ignored so not to give any credence to this review. This nasty review is only intended to stir up the still waters of overwhelmingly positive reviews and experiences of the Metro during the last 3 years into public distaste and hate.
In conclusion, dear reviewer, I have to say that I rarely wonder about people like you who take pleasure in trying to destroy a hard-working, small business, and everyone connected with it. I guess I don't, because my make-up does not allow for much or such contemplation of evil trolls. In this instance, for me, the reflective life is not worth living.
