“Hmm, what looks good?” Jason says slowly, glancing at the menu.
I am at Bymark with three friends of mine: the affable Jason Rogers, an economist friend whom I met through debating and who is going to New York for a foodie equivalent of the Hajj; the lovely Rux Tugulea, a friend of mine from law school who just wrote the bar exam (and is sporting a subtle tan from her post-exam trip to Hawai’i); and the easy-going Josh Stark, a friend from law and debate who enjoys progressive blogs and the kind of music that Voldemort would listen to.
So the four of us are at upscale and pricey Bymark (located in Toronto’s downtown) for a weekday lunch. Fortunately, it is also Summerlicious – where 150 Toronto restaurants offer three-course prix fixe menus – so the lunch will be upscale, but also somewhat-less-pricey-than-usual.
Munching on some multigrain olive bread, my eyes settle on the line for the BC halibut in banana leaf. I am a huge fan of fish, especially when it’s not salmon (not that I don’t love salmon – it’s just that it’s too often the only good fish at restaurants). Coupled with the fact that the other two options are a pan-roasted chicken and a turkey sandwich, my choice is glaringly clear.
“The halibut looks good,” Rux says.
“I’ve tried the halibut and it’s quite good,” Jason remarks.
This is a classic collective problem.
[Note: if you don’t want to read about economics, as applied to Summerlicious, skip over this paragraph.] Because the halibut is the best item on the menu, there is a large private benefit to each individual who orders the dish (both in terms of (i) the deliciousness of the dish and (ii) in terms of “winning” – by ordering a better item than your friends). However, the cost of ordering the halibut is mostly external; for each person who orders the halibut, the benefit to the other three diners of ordering halibut is diminished (a social cost, because the dish you’ve ordered is now less unique). Therefore, all individuals will order the halibut (because PB > PC), but the utility to each diner will not be as great as it would be if that diner were the only one ordering halibut (because of the SC).
Since the four of us are rational actors, we all order the halibut.
We decide to split two beef Carpaccio and two appetizers of tuna tartar with spring rolls and avocado salsa among the four of us. For dessert, we order ice cream sandwiches and chocolate marquises.
After hearing about Rux’s trip to Hawai’i, I quip that it will be a shame she will be in Ottawa next year (where she will be completing her clerkship after articling), since it’s food options are more limited than Toronto’s.
“I know,” she says, sighing. A look of dissatisfaction rolls across her face.
I immediately feel awful. I meant the comment half-jokingly, along the lines of “Too bad you can’t be in Toronto next year so that we can hang out and you can be on my blog again. Ha, ha, etc.” The damage has already been done. Speechless, I don’t express my guilt at the time. Hopefully, when Rux reads this blog, she will know the guilt I felt for that brief period of time. [Rux: if you are reading this, know now that I am truly sorry.]
The appetizers arrive. The tuna tartar is phenomenal, and makes the beef Carpaccio taste disappointing in comparison. The spring rolls and avocado salsa on the side really give a lot of flavours and given textures to the whole appetizer.
Josh and Jason talk about social networks and the pending world war between Facebook and Google+. Considering the issue’s topicality, plus the fact that both of them are huge tech junkies (Josh was even the one who gave me the “invite” to Google+), this conversation was completely anticipated. While the two of them like a lot of the new Google+ features, Jason cedes that Facebook has an incredibly powerful incumbent advantage (namely, the huge network of people who already use Facebook). Indeed, Rux acknowledges that she won’t create a Google+ account until there are sufficient numbers of her friends using the site.
Four plates of mains come to our table. The presentation is pretty cool: using a knife, the waiter unwraps each person’s banana leaf package, unveiling the halibut one by one. The fillet and light-coloured sauces lie at the centre of the grilled banana leaves.
The halibut is delicious. The soft fillet sits atop potato fingerlings, golden beets, and steamed leek, and the ginger and coconut sauce give a savoury and slightly zesty taste to the dish. I would highly recommend ordering it. While the entire three-course meal (sans tax and tip) costs $25 for the course of Summerlicious, the halibut alone regularly costs more than that.
Dessert is pleasant too; my adulthood affinity for ice cream sandwiches is also validated by the fact that they appear on a moderately expensive menu.
I have to run to a meeting to, and say bye to my friends while they finish up their ice cream and chocolate. I was surprised we were able to have three courses (including liberal helpings of olive bread while discussing collective action) in under an hour. The restaurant’s service is good, the atmosphere and decor are really cool, and the food is excellent.