From the illustrious pages of the New York Times (reporting by Peter Thompson in Chicago):
GEORGE SANTIAGO, a 23-year-old nightclub promoter, wanted to impress Danielle DiCantz, 22, whom he had met at a club, on their first date. So on a recent Thursday night he took her to Reserve, a lounge and dance club that is a favorite of the trend-setting crowd here.
To break the ice, Mr. Santiago ordered a $350 bottle of Dom Pérignon. After they had swilled the Champagne dry, Mr. Santiago returned to the bar. This time he ordered her an exotic concoction called the Reserve Ruby Red.
Served in a traditional martini glass, the cocktail is made with super-premium Grey Goose L'Orange vodka, Hypnotiq liqueur, orange and pomegranate juices and topped off with Dom Pérignon. The coup de grâce: a one-carat ruby affixed to the stirrer. And the bar tab for a Ruby Red? An eye-popping $950.
Was she impressed?
"It was the best 950 bucks I ever spent," Mr. Santiago said. "Let's put it that way."* * *
If Mr. Santiago spent $950 for a cocktail on a first date, how much would he pay for a drink on a second or third date, or even for his engagement? "You can't put a price on love," Mr. Santiago said. "I'd spend countless."
David Bernstein, "Hey, Bartender, Can You Break $1,000?" published in The New York Times (12/18/05).
My initial reaction to this article, and particularly the story of Mr. Santiago and Ms. DiCantz excerpted above, was intensely negative. As I sketched out the logical grounds for my instinctive skepticism and cynicism (much of it focused on the way people can be beguiled by money), I became very unhappy. So I began again, this time looking for a more innocent interpretation, and my mood lightened. A series of short meditations follows.
Okay. If it is love that Mr. Santiago is looking for, I'm not sure he is going to find it by buying $950 cocktails.
But he is clearly satisfied with what he did get for his money.
So the question is whether Ms. DiCantz, if and when she reads about herself in The New York Times (or possibly her local rag, The Chicago Tribune), will be comfortable with this statement.
And - assuming she still harbors warm feelings toward Mr. Santiago as of December 18, 2005 (apparently not long after the "recent Thursday" in question) - I wonder whether those warm feelings will survive Mr. Santiago's decision not only to divulge details of their first date, but also to give her name to a journalist for an internationally known newspaper.
I'm feeling a little cynical and sad, I suppose. They are both quite young, and there is time for their values to deepen and mature.
In a more optimistic mood, I suppose a $950 cocktail is a way for a man to stand out from the crowd and demonstrate the strength of his interest; after all, he is investing a sizeable sum on his date's pleasure - with no certainty of return.
And in turn, his willingness to spend extravagantly on her signals a number of things, many of them potentially positive (including some hope of financial security in a future with him). The most powerfully optimistic view is that he has, um, "put his money where his heart is". That is, if his largesse is interpreted as an expression of his strong and genuine interest in her, she may well find herself more readily opening her heart to him.
Unquestionably, the opening of one heart to another, that is, emotional intimacy - however it can be achieved - is the necessary precondition for love.
In any event, I wish them well.
No comments:
Post a Comment