The joy of booths
Once again our Shallow Thought guru John Lindner has come up with a subject I should have thought of first. However, he didn't have art of Rafael's, and I didn't either, so the photo to the right will have to do as an illustration. Here's John. EL
I’m almost too excited to write, as I have just taken possession of a quarter pound of Uganda Gold bourbon vanilla beans. More on that later.
For now, It’s Rafael’s in Westminster. Charmed, I’m sure.
It’s a great place. Why not stop in sometime and try it. And if you do, a note to the sensitive: ...
Booths — restaurant booths, not dunking booths or phone booths or kissing booths or Powers Boothe — hold a strange attraction. I like them. I think it’s because they offer a sort of physical boundary, a demarcation of personal space, a near surrounding, like a cave, that tables sticking out in the middle of everywhere do not. You sit at a table. You occupy a booth. I like occupying.
Booths offer at least the illusion of safety. From booths, you can only be approached from one front. Whereas with tables, you can be snuck up on from any line — unless the place is too snugly packed, which of course introduces yet another drawback of tables.
And booths, in my experience, tend to offer more creature comfort than do chairs. Cushiness is frequently a factor in favor of booths.
I do not wish to denigrate tables, however. In terms of quality, I’m pretty sure all of my best meals have been enjoyed at a table, with chairs. For whatever reason, high-roller restaurants don’t offer booths, nor do friends’ homes (exceptions only prove the rule). Perhaps it’s because they’d have to be really nice booths and no one would ever want to leave them.
I like booths. When offered a choice, I’ll take a booth. Alas, there are times when the booth proves a most regrettable decision. Booths, like hand grenades, are fun and effective only when everything goes right.
Booth failures, on the other hand, can leave lasting trauma. Ever climb into a booth, find the table too close, cutting into your torso, possibly restricting your breathing if the table’s too high (or benches too low)? Try enjoying that meal.
Ever adjust the table by pushing it away only to watch the eyes of your opposing dinner mates bug out from the sudden pressure of having the table thrust into their solar plexuses? (They always act like you thrust it.) It can ruin what would otherwise have been a pleasantly ho-hum meal.
Booths can also present psycho-philosophical problems. Do you prefer the outside or wallside of booths? Wallsides can terrorize the claustrophobic: up against an immovable object, sealed in by a fellow diner; you’re the hands down loser in an elbow-room gambit. It’s practically a coffin.
Or do you acquiesce and spend the entire meal bathed in dread? Or worse, do you cross your arms over your chest and stand your ground, stake out the open end and thereby ennervate your companions, make a scene, and spend the rest of your mealtime being pointed to and commented upon sotto voce by giggling waitrons? Whether you’re an insy or outsy, I sympathize. Booths are not for the faint. The very characteristics that make sanctuaries of booths, magnify their potential for disaster.
Rafael’s in Westminster presents a case in point.
Everything about Rafael’s is pleasant. It’s got a hint of Baltimore rowhouse-turned-restaurant/bar charm. Staff impeccably genuine. Long-trod hardwood. Clientele amusing. Medium rare ordered, medium rare served. And it has booths! And I sat in one! And the booth back moved every time the woman behind me breathed, exclaimed (she was an inveterate exclaimer), talked, listened, lived … I swear she had squirrel genes. The booth back moved like a paddle in an old British boarding school. The bloody thing felt like it was on hinges. I spent the entire meal pushed forward or tensed up waiting for the next assault.
I like booths. Therefore, when I return to Rafael’s, which I hope to soon, I’ll insist on a table.
Or better yet, those two guys in feed caps made the bar stools look curiously inviting….
(Kenneth K. Lam/Sun photographer)
Comments
Great post jl!
I agree, I like booths too. They just seem more private.
Posted by: PCB Rob | December 16, 2009 11:44 AM
jl, you have captured the true essence of booth dining, both positive and negative.
Posted by: Trixie | December 16, 2009 11:49 AM
My family prefers booths, also. I agree with your psychological assessment of why people like booths. I find that the Outback Steakhouse seats are too far away from the tables.
Posted by: NotableM | December 16, 2009 11:59 AM
Brilliant post, John. The essence of good humor, capturing thoughts we've all shared but never been able to put that way.
Posted by: Michael A. Gray | December 16, 2009 12:07 PM
Maybe she had a squirrel in her jeans.
Posted by: RayRay | December 16, 2009 12:13 PM
RayRay, that happened to me once...Never mind, long story.
Posted by: Trixie | December 16, 2009 12:17 PM
I've always preferred booths. They are more conducive to conversation....
Posted by: ruth | December 16, 2009 12:17 PM
I like booths too. However, in addition to the negatives you mentioned, I invariably get seated at a booth next to a booth with small children. And invariably, said small children will find the happenings at my booth much more interesting than the happenings at their own booth.
Posted by: TheBeav | December 16, 2009 12:42 PM
Everything about Rafael’s is pleasant. It’s got a hint of Baltimore rowhouse-turned-restaurant/bar charm
I like the deck at Rafael's. It reminds me of rooftop deck in Canton or Federal Hill. Of course, since it currently 30 degrees, any talk of decks in either Westminster or Baltimore is strictly academic at this time.
Posted by: Robert of Cross Keys | December 16, 2009 1:13 PM
TheBeav,
The children that hang over into my booth invariably have prodigious colds and operatic vocal capacity.
Captcha: duelists 1968
Posted by: jl | December 16, 2009 1:31 PM
Powers makes the list but you omit John Wilkes and Shirley?
I don't like booths because I invariably end up on the inside and the waitress can't come up, touch me lightly on the shoulder and say, "What'll we have today, Sweetie?"
Posted by: Bucky | December 16, 2009 1:44 PM
I like booths, but agreed, a wiggler on the other side of a flimsy booth is worse than sitting at a table!
I find myself faced with the overwhelming urge to take my elbow and shove it backwards into thier back as hard as I can! Not that I'd ever do such a thing, of course... or at least admit to it!
Posted by: Joyce W. | December 16, 2009 2:03 PM
What's the difference between a booth and a banquette?
Posted by: Owl Meat Gravy | December 16, 2009 2:33 PM
How about Clare BOOTH Luce?
Owlie, to me a booth is enclosed, but a banquette could be one-sided. I'm sure hmpstd will set me straight on this.
Appropriate Captcha: at galas
Posted by: Dahlink | December 16, 2009 2:48 PM
What's the difference between a booth and a banquette?
About $20 per person
Posted by: Amanda C | December 16, 2009 3:05 PM
Rafael's is a great example of a classically trained chef who buys everything from the Sysco catalogue. My wife met some friends there and said the crab cakes are served with a sauce over them! It's basically a grade above the plethora of chain restaurants that line route 140 through Westminster.
Last year I made two trips in one to Rafael's - my first and my last!
Posted by: Edg | December 16, 2009 3:34 PM
Sauce over the crab cakes?!?!? That's terrible!
The last time I was at the Jersey shore I had two beautiful soft crabs ruined by being drowned in some kind of perverse wine/butter/garlic sauce. I refused to eat them, and the chef got huffy, telling me they were the most popular item on his menu.
I can understand this in New Jersey, but in Maryland a chef should know better.
Posted by: Jack Ziegler | December 16, 2009 4:17 PM
Point to Amanda C. (According to Merriam-Webster online, a banquette is an upholstered bench. The upholstery alone could be worth $20/person at dinner, judging from the discomfort built into many a restaurant bench I've had to sit in over the years.)
Posted by: hmpstd | December 16, 2009 4:19 PM
The wall/aisle seating debate can often times be determined by who eats left-handed and who eats right-handed. As a southpaw who uses his left hand for the fork, I choose the position which will not have me crashing my elbow into the wall with each bite. If there are just the two of us, my wife then gets the seat opposite and she avoids the wall, too. Win-Win for us.
captcha -- and deviant. Yes, but I didn't think anyone knew.
Posted by: bra1nchild | December 16, 2009 4:34 PM
Bucky, I was already woefully over my word limit.
Captcha: clara meanwhile (Cleatus, is that you?)
Posted by: jl | December 16, 2009 4:59 PM
Good point about handedness and seating arrangements bra1nchild. My father was one of six children, four of whom were lefties.
House Roscoe: Cleatus's name when he's down home?
Posted by: Dahlink | December 16, 2009 5:40 PM
Dahlink, if we're getting into Booths, pro and con, how about Tarkington and John Wilkes?
Posted by: Michael A. Gray | December 16, 2009 6:30 PM
RayRay, you need to look up ferretting. Maybe Trixie, too. The rest of you, probably not.
Last time I was seated at a booth was at Oceanaire. I was surprised, because it was just two of us, and this booth would have fit a fishing crew.
It was very nice, though. As an introvert, I appreciate the hiding space.
Posted by: Lissa | December 16, 2009 7:43 PM
Lissa, the huge booth thing?, Love it! Especially in the winter so I have room for my coat as so many places now don't have coat racks or those convienent hooks on the side of the booths that used to be everywhere.
Posted by: Joyce W. | December 17, 2009 6:35 AM
Michael A. Gray, I'll accept Tarkington, but can we leave John Wilkes out of this? My mother's maiden name was Lincoln and that is still a sore point with our family.
Posted by: Dahlink | December 17, 2009 6:37 AM
If my memory serves me correctly, didn't Danny's have quite a few booths.
John L.; I always found hand grenades effective but never very much fun.
Barbara fixate....
but I dislike Streisand
Posted by: Hue | December 17, 2009 8:49 AM
This might be my favorite of John's posts.
Posted by: Leeann | December 17, 2009 9:34 AM
Hue, but what about Streisand spells her name Barbra. Must be Bush.
Reigious Rowdy - Really!
Posted by: Joyce W. | December 17, 2009 10:37 AM
Hue, I disagree. Hand grenades are the best instant gratification around. Throw one, and you'll feel the earth move!
Posted by: Lissa | December 17, 2009 10:38 AM
my god, I must have been having a grammer seizure!
Streisand spells her name Barbra, must be Bush.
There that makes sense!
Posted by: Joyce W. | December 17, 2009 10:39 AM
Joyce W
re the "huge booth"
I think there should be a law that booths may contain no more than 4 patrons.
This said, after having been forced to occupy the middle seat of a booth with six patrons total.
NOT a fun time even if the food was great.
Posted by: Lone Lady | December 18, 2009 11:11 AM
Great post jl, but you neglected one glaring debate of the booth that I have always wondered about.....
Does anyone else think it strange when the dining party consists of two and they both sit on the same side?
Posted by: Lone Lady | December 18, 2009 11:15 AM
Lone,
Strange and pathetic. Excellent point. I've seen it happen. Throws off the balance of the universe. But I imagine if one is agoraphobic and craves enclosed spaces, it's the only solution to dining out.
Captcha: had Gasped
Posted by: jl | December 18, 2009 5:44 PM
Lone Lady, my husband and I have been known to sit side by side in a booth. It all depends on the ambient noise level and whether we can hear each other without having to shout.
Posted by: Dahlink | December 18, 2009 7:57 PM