Every dish that leaves a kitchen is a record of decisions. The chef chose an ingredient, a technique, a level of doneness, a combination, a presentation. All of those choices are visible, or tasteable, on the plate. You don't need to have cooked a day in your life to read them. You just need to know what to look for.
This module is about giving you the literacy to understand what's happening behind the kitchen door, so you can distinguish between a dish that was cooked with real skill and one that just looks the part.
The Three Questions
When a dish arrives, before you even taste it, three questions are worth asking:
1. What was the chef trying to do? Every dish has an intention. A roast chicken is trying to be perfectly cooked, golden-skinned, juicy. A ceviche is trying to be bright, clean, fresh. A tasting menu course might be trying to surprise you or challenge your expectations. Understanding the intention lets you evaluate the execution fairly. You judge a dish against what it's trying to be, not against some abstract standard.
2. Did they succeed? This is the execution question. Is the chicken actually juicy, or is it dry? Is the ceviche bright, or is it muddled? Did the ambitious plate deliver on its promise, or did the ambition outpace the skill?
3. Was it worth doing? This is the harder, more subjective question. Even a perfectly executed dish can feel pointless if the concept isn't interesting. And a slightly imperfect dish with a genuine idea behind it can be more exciting than a technically flawless one that says nothing.
These three questions, intention, execution, and purpose, are the framework professional critics use, whether they articulate it that way or not. They work at every level, from a neighbourhood tapas bar to a three-star restaurant.