Just read an article in the NY Times that describes the fare in Napa
Valley restaurants as "food without attitude." What do you think that
is intended to mean? About when did "attitude" take on a special
meaning of its own, without the need for the modifiers "good" or
"bad"? How would you describe its connotation? If one is said to "have
attitude," does that mean "bad attitude" or something a little
different? A fiesty, in-your-face attitude? If so, what does that
imply for "food without attitude?"

---

Clarification of Question by nautico-ga on 09 Nov 2004 06:23 PST

Has attitude = combative?

---

Clarification of Question by nautico-ga on 09 Nov 2004 07:58 PST

Methinks I've broken the code re the intended meaning of "food without
attitude." It's not the food itself that does or doesn't have
attitude, it's the servers of the food. Stated otherwise, Napa Valley
eateries have restaurants where one can eat [good] food without having
to endure servers with attitude. Make sense?

Also, whereas "she has an attitude" = she has a bad attitude, "she has
attitude" = she has a combative attitude, but one that's not entirely
negative in effect. What say you?

---

Clarification of Question by nautico-ga on 09 Nov 2004 08:03 PST

"Napa Valley eateries have restaurants"?! Argggh. My fingers outran my brain!