Post #416007 by bigbrotiki on Tue, Oct 28, 2008 8:10 PM

But hell, I just love a good argument, so here:

On 2008-10-28 18:57, gonegoannas wrote:
The Luau has done a great job, in my opinion, of presenting what may be considered an "upscale tiki inspired" restaurant. Is it Tiki as defined by YOU, maybe not. But perhaps it is Tiki none the less.

Good, you can have your Tiki, and I can have my Tiki! :D Taste is in the eye of ...and so on.

If I still have not made myself clear, I am sorry. Perhaps this could work as a new version of a "Tiki Bar"--any Tiki Bar, that is. But he is not calling it a Tiki Bar (which the original Luau was), he is calling it THE LUAU.
As I feared before, and elaborately explained on the previous page, this place just doesn't deliver what the tradition of the original entails. And THAT I can determine from my desk. No matter what the lovely Ms. Crane, who has been a high end realtor since the Luau closed, says.

On 2008-10-28 18:57, gonegoannas wrote:
No picture can give you a true representation of what it is like to be in a successful tiki bar.

And I also can determine from here that an image of a wall of Buddha hands, like the one on the opening page of the L.A. Times article, sends a mixed message to the many people that will never go to visit this place, just like the images in my Book of Tiki sent a clear message (judging by what they inspired all around the world, in places that never HAD Tiki bars). Images are not the experience, no, but they are equally (or even more) powerful.