One of the comments that Roland had made really sparked some thoughts for me in that he acknowledged that he had eaten that particular meal just to "get it and go", so to speak. For him, and myself, we ate just to get refueled. Nutritionally, we didn't do too bad and regarding taste, it was okay. And that's my point: Often, many of us eat with the thinking that the food is okay, satisfactory enough to make us have that satiated feeling (hopefully, not the kind of feeling that you wonder if you hurt yourself) and that it probably covered the basics nutritionally. And, we didn't spend more than a few bucks. That, to me, seems to be the main criteria of general American food consumption: we want fast, convenient, okay and cheap, with some sense of nutrition.
Roland knows good food and fine tastes but, living in the States, he understands why we have the food culture that we do; we eat what is okay, what basically satisfies our cravings and gives us what we want, energy.
As we were talking, I recalled how interesting it was to me that while we were in France this last time, I was more aware of how, during most meals, the French talk about their food. In fact, they talk often about their food just in the context of daily conversations. As it's common for people to talk about the weather here, in France, it's common for people, men and women of all economic levels, to easily get into conversations about food, what they ate , where they ate it and what they thought about their meals. Critiquing food is a serious activity for the French.
With that thought, I went looking around on the web for some information about critiquing food and I found one article that I think is very interesting. For me, this article demonstrates just how serious the French take their gastronomic culture. If you are interested in learning more about becoming a food critic, I would encourage you to do a little web surfing and read over some of the very interesing articles that are posted on the subject.