At last night’s common council session, there was more than one person who remarked that Whitewater needed an improved dining scene.
She does. Although there are some real gems here, we’ve not enough of the sort of dining that would attract people to Whitewater time and again.
A city of our size cannot have successful, flourishing restaurants solely from local patronage; we need to attract visitors. (This is probably hard for some to believe, and perhaps it’s generational, but a successful dining scene requires more than one familiar, but tired and long-in-the-tooth, local establishment.)
The secret of a successful restaurant that attracts visitors is that it makes the city more, not less, favorable for others. Popular dining is no zero-sum dynamic: having a few good restaurants makes it easier for others — typically of different cuisine — to thrive, too.
Whitewater can, and I think will, develop this sort of solid reputation by the end of the decade.
We’re on our way now, but there’s much more that we could be.
One of the best ways to market the city to visitors and newcomers is to emphasize a vibrant dining and social scene. One could argue about how important this is, but I’d say it’s very important for attracting competitive professionals. It’s a top-tier concern for many (along with a community’s overall economy, business and retail climate, schools, efficiency & fairness of government, natural beauty, and social tolerance).
Hip restaurants (that’s hip, not stodgy), coffee & pastry shops, fresh, organic produce:
How can we achieve this? Let restaurateurs experiment, in conditions of fewer restrictions, and with speedy permitting. Publicize fashionable restaurants at every turn. (There’s a tendency to back a given restaurant, but we’ll not be a successful destination until we’ve enough attractive restaurants that backing one here or there won’t be a concern.)
Needless to say, supporting good restaurants is nothing like advocating for good government. In politics, one advocates simultaneously for better policies and against poorer ones. This is because there’s no avoiding the bad in politics – it inflicts misfortune and mediocrity on all, until it’s gone forever. Encouraging the good alone would leave the bad untouched and entrenched.
Restaurants aren’t like this. There’s great value in encouraging good restaurants, but less harm in ignoring bad ones. Bottom-shelf restaurants don’t trouble everyone, but rather only a small, ignorant or undemanding clientele. Because they don’t afflict an entire community, there’s less urgency in writing justifiably unfavorable reviews.
(It’s not that there shouldn’t be unfavorable restaurant reviews; it’s that’s the reach and — of course — the actual harm of bad restaurants is so much less than for a bad politics.)
Whitewater could stand, of restaurants, more writing about the good ones in the city, leaving the rest unpublicized. That writing will always be best when it’s something more, by the way, than a reworked advertisement. The best recommendations are freely and independently made.