Blogs : Food Media
Food Media CHOW's roundup of food-related news from blogs, newspapers, magazines, cookbooks, and film.
Turnabout Is Fun to Read
“We thrive on negative journalism, which is fun to write and to read.” —Anton Ego, Ratatouille
This quote—an elegant expression of the sometimes addictive power that comes with reviewing restaurants—sets the tone for a recent and much-blogged blast of backlash directed at Minneapolis-St. Paul supercritic Andrew Zimmern. The specific details are grounded in the Twin Cities food scene, but the broad strokes—critic versus creator, egotism versus objectivity—are universal.
It’s rare to see a chef savage a critic, so the original anti-Zimmern Rake magazine post makes for a fascinating read. Penned by Mitch Omer, proprietor of the well-respected Hell’s Kitchen restaurants in Minneapolis and Duluth, the post isn’t self-defense against a negative review. It’s a surprise attack on Zimmern, host of Bizarre Foods on the Travel Channel and chief food writer for Mpls.St.Paul Magazine.
Omer’s charges? Among other offenses, Zimmern is “inaccurate and tremendously negative,” “a self-professed Alpha Male of food writing,” “smug,” and “pseudo-objective.”
Omer’s evidence? A copious pile of quotes from Zimmern and Omer’s own experience as a restaurateur and chef.
Is he right? Omer’s post is such a writhing mass of serpents that it’s impossible to describe it with any one word. That said, there was at least one point that connected for this Twin Cities–based food writer. Omer quotes Zimmern’s writing thusly:
Most of this year’s crops are conundrums wrapped in half-baked concepts. Crave is a fancified Green Mill and not as good, Picosa is missing identity, Bank under whelms, and Amazing Thai fails to rumble me. Black Bamboo, Café Ena, Harry’s, Fogo de Chao, Spill the Wine, Café Maude, Wasabi, Bulldog NE, Bagu, Toast, Manhattan’s, and Landmarc all fail to rouse me from my desk.
Any given restaurant is an ever-changing, multifaceted ball of personalities, food, and atmosphere. It’s tough enough to do a restaurant justice with a timely 600-word review; to summarily dismiss 16 with a weary shrug does a disservice to readers and restaurateurs alike. Speaking from specific personal experience, Maude, Ena, and Bulldog NE—at the minimum—offer engaging and often delightful menus that merit repeat visits, if not high praise. Amazing Thai is an oasis of decent, more-authentic-than-usual Thai food in a region that sorely needs it. And Picosa ... well, anyway. I digress. Omer’s attack, for all its shambolic savagery, is a rare public assessment of a powerful local critic. It’s gripping, offensive, and thought-provoking reading for the new year.
Posted by | Wednesday, January 2, 2008 at 5:45pm | 6 comments
« Previous Post: Orangina as an Aphrodisiac Next Post: Carrot, Meet Fig » |
I've been to the twin cities three times. Each time I was reminded of my misplaced Coastal bias. I was impressed on the most recent trip by the currency of food scene and the genuinely good food I had. One of the favorite stops was Hell's Kitchen. I'm not the least bit surprised at the roller coaster ride of Omer's post and I was entertained by it. I think your selection is the pithiest one, hoisting AZ on his own petard. Nice job. Any food writer who can't get roused from his desk deserves to give that desk to someone willing to earn that privilege.
I'm glad someone took the restaurant critic to task in such a public manner. I'm predisposed to think that restaurant critics (and some Chowhounds) rate a city only on the number of successful, French-technique, high-end restaurants. This leaves out a lot of fantastic food cities (like Minneapolis and, yes, Los Angeles) from their radar.
I grew up in and around New York and live near Los Angeles now. I still look forward to trips to Minneapolis, because what I get is affordable, good food with a minimum of attitude (Minnesota's state motto being "Make nice!"), no stupidly long advance notice required for reservations (even in the heyday of Cafe Un Deux Trois you could get a Saturday night reservation the same day), etc.
Perhaps we can banish the food critics to the Ile St.-Louis in Paris, where they can take day trips to the gastronomic temples they wish we had, and the rest of us can eat and enjoy the food we have -- and post our finds here, on Chowhound.
I agree, Das Ubergeek - banish them all. Either they hold restaurants to a 3-Michelin star standard, or like my local critics, seem to be more concerned with free meals and don't actually "critique" the restaurant.
Zimmern has always annoyed me - don't know why, I don't even watch his show. Call it women's intuition...
James thought you'd like to know I had to post on this. Thanks for the tip.
http://theleatherdistrictgourmet.word...
-Jackie
The Leather District Gourmet
Personally, I think it's time for the local food media to step away from the blog-fighting --this isn't the first blog scuffle we've had in local food media in that past few months, involving some of the same personalities, no less--and return focus to reporting on the chow.
I understand that every food writer needs a blog these days to seem "interactive," but I'm guessing the original intent of those blogs was to interact with the public, not with the rest of the media. I know it's titillating and oh-so-urgent, but rise above it, ladies and gentlemen, and get back to discussing the chow.
~TDQ
Don't you think Zimmern should get back to the chow, too? How do you dismiss 16 restaurants as a critic without deigning to eat there?
-LDG