Round One of Counterpunch, a new weekly Calendar feature of commentary and opinion. Leaders in arts and entertainment and related fields will offer their perspectives on vital issues of the day and their responses to columns and reviews. : Restaurateurs Give a Second Opinion and a Third, Fourth

A restaurant’s reputation is all it has. You cannot buy a reputation. You cannot get a reputation by paying for advertising. We made our reputation years ago through long, hard work and excellent word-of-mouth. What I have done in Los Angeles represents 30 years of my work. I do not believe any one food critic can be an expert in all cuisines. Each is different. It takes years of research and education to become an expert in the food of one particular country. It is impossible for one food critic to adequately judge cuisine from Italy, France and China.

Much of Reichl’s criticism centered around price. All details involving a restaurant make a difference, and the details cost money--the look, the flowers, the china, the silverware and the service, as well as the food. We try to provide the very best cuisine we can no matter how much it costs us, and to stay in business, we must pass our cost on to our patrons. Food is only a percentage of our costs. We spend close to $60,000 a year on flowers alone. Glasses cost us between $2 and $17 apiece, china up to $25 a plate.

It is unfair to criticize the price of a dish unless you know exactly what is in it. Reichl praised our “extremely swell salad,” but said that she “had yet to meet the salad that is worth $17.” That salad is expensive because the white-truffle olive oil that dresses it costs $29 for eight ounces, or $120 a liter. No item is too expensive if you enjoy it and can afford it.

Reichl also complained that we served lotte --she called it “the poor man’s lobster”--and sliced it “so thinly” that the texture was nothing like lobster. Now lotte is lotte and lobster is lobster. The main question must be: Did she like the meal? She liked the lotte and she loved the sauce. Why is the cut of the lotte so important?

One would also expect a food critic to know the difference between foods. She referred to “caramelized leeks.” Those were not leeks. They were onions.

She complained that the sorbet didn’t have enough taste. The sorbet she had may not have been as tasty as other sorbets because it was made with organic fruit and without sugar, which makes it more delicate--and more healthful.

We emphasize health in everything we prepare. We are among the serious restaurant owners who feel a responsibility to serve food that is both good and healthful. Most of our patrons are aware of what we are trying to do, and they applaud our efforts.

Our customers are passionate about their food. They come back again and again. Many have been with us for the last 10 years.

Once in a while, it is possible that someone may not have an ideal experience. But if you open a bottle of Lafite Rothschild and it is not too good, are you then going to conclude that Lafite Rothschild makes bad wine?

In the end, every person who comes to any restaurant is a food critic. The people who eat in your restaurant judge you all the time. They are responsible for its success--or failure. I believe the patrons who come to L’Orangerie, many of whom travel and dine in the very best restaurants around the world, are among the most critical in Los Angeles.

I feel the only way I could get a good review from Reichl would be to marry her. Fortunately, I am already married.