And The Nominations Are ...

Oh dear, oh dear. One does have to be so careful.

The bar owners and bar staff of Alcúdia form a close community; they are a community within a community. Competition there may be, but mostly everyone knows each other, and many are good friends. This sub-community is alive with what has reached, absurdly you might think, the status of a cause célèbre (actually it hasn't, but do excuse a touch of hyperbole). It all stems from what, at first reading, seemed a pretty innocent piece in "Talk Of The North". If you're not up to speed with this, and many of you will be of course, the piece was in response to a question as to whether there were any good bar staff and waiters in the British bars and restaurants of Alcúdia. Yes, came the answer, and five bars and five bar owners/staff were named. It was at this point that levels of umbrage began to be taken.

There has been, in my opinion, some selective reading of this piece. What it actually says is "here's 5 of the best" (and then names them). What it does not say is "here are the five best". The implication is that the best amount to more than five. Six, seven, twenty, fifty, however many. The piece concluded by asking "who would you nominate?". On the face of it, therefore, here was a positive expression of examples of good service (but not exclusively these five) together with a request for the readership to name their own good servants. All good participative stuff, you might think.

However, selective reading notwithstanding, the interpretation placed on this by some is that other bar staff/owners/whoever are not good, or as good. To compound this apparent affront, the piece is headlined and footed with the words "watch and learn", which mean, one supposes, that the others should draw lessons from the (by-now) famous five. That is certainly an interpretation doing the rounds, one made, for example, and in a measured and perfectly reasonable way, by John Santana on the Barfly blog (and John, as many will attest, has a deservedly good reputation).

This may not have reached the levels it has were it not for another factor, and that is that the author of this piece is "John Nelson". I put the name in inverted commas, unsure as I am if this is actually a nom de plume. Whatever the case, herein lies perhaps the greatest problem. People do not know who John Nelson is. I am told that only a handful of people do. This anonymity has led to the creation of a Facebook entry asking "who the hell is John Nelson?".

"Talk Of The North" acts as a sort-of community newsletter. The word "community" is important, and the community is not that big. Its very smallness and tight-knit nature give rise to the rapid dissemination of rumour, of information (both correct and incorrect), and of pleasure or annoyance. And the internet has made this dissemination that much more rapid and the information more available; indeed without it, one could argue that the "famous five" case would not have developed a certain momentum.

A counter view, and one expressed to me, is that perhaps there are not that many who have taken umbrage at the piece; it is recourse to the internet that generates more heat than might have been the case and conveys the impression of something more important than it actually is.

Whatever the real situation, and setting aside what may be construed as some good publicity for certain bars over others - especially in the current climate - the crux of all this does perhaps boil down to two things. One. As nature abhors a vacuum, so communities abhor not knowing - in this case, the vacuum of anonymity, i.e. who the author is. The author may be of the wider community, but he appears to be apart from it as well. Two. The mere fact of naming people and bars makes the whole thing personal. Though it was not intended to be personal in a different sense, that of implying criticism of others, this is how it has been perceived. And within the small community of Alcúdia's British bars and bar staff, to be seen to be taking sides with certain bars and staff, even if this was not intended, is almost bound to have repercussions. One should not lose sight of the fact, however, that this was one person's opinion, and it is an opinion he is entitled to offer. Perhaps it could have been couched differently and, if so, therein lies the fault of the piece, nothing more. Let it not be denied, furthermore, that reaction has been provoked. Negative some of it, but not necessarily a totally bad thing.

One does have to be careful. Praise for some is criticism for others. There again, let's not get carried away. Had this been about the five worst, then there really would have been grounds for a stink. Who would you nominate?


QUIZ
Yesterday's title - Billy Ocean, "Get Outta My Dreams": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d0rDz3PKX0.

(PLEASE REPLY TO andrew@thealcudiaguide.com AND NOT VIA THE COMMENTS THINGY HERE.)