You know, this guy really makes my blood boil. Because he's so good. This guy is a world-class writer, and I'm quite pissed off about it.
I would be glad if I were the editor of Gourmet, but I'm pissed off because he's ostensibly my competition. His reviews are so sharply hewn, so concise and to the point, that he transports us to the place he's reviewing -- a very hard thing to do, as I can safely attest.
His is the best food writing (and I'm sure all his other writing would come up to snuff) that I've ever seen in Montreal. Oh, okay, anywhere -- and I've seen 'em all.
Watch this guy. He is going to go very, very far.
I stopped reading Ruth Reichel (sp?) in the Times after she said a meal "leapt off the plate" and "exploded in the mouth."
ReplyDeleteThat was supposed to be a compliment, by the way.
God, food writing is a peculiar art. Really, really, in a way it's like porn.You have to have the vocabulary down and you can't fuck with it.
ReplyDeleteFor example, in my mind, you can never have the word "rotten" in a food review -- positive or negative. It just looks bad. Just like in a porn novel, you can't have the word "deflated". It really is a highly structuralised form of writing that you definitely NEED to be able to do but you just cannot carry it too far.
I once actually assembled a list of "food words" and put it in a file and perused it a couple of times back when I was writing lots of food reviews. And it was notable for the absence of certain words, like "yummy", "delish" "zuzzed up with", "fashionistas" and so on.
However, "good" and "tasty" are equally taboo, just like "huge tits" and "round ass" are in porn writing.
But maybe it's pretty much the same discipline. Some articles in food magazines just scream "PORN!" or for that matter, travel magazines as well.
But this guy seems to have a good balance and measured tone . . . not hysterical or overly romantic like some writers.
Like I said, it's an art . . .