Stanley Park

An entertaining and offbeat Canadian novel about the food scene in Vancouver and a young chef who leads it, one Jeremy Papier, who spends his off hours grilling squirrels and sparrows for a group of homeless people in the city's Stanley Park, a group that includes his father.

It's a framework for interesting and often funny observations about the farm-to-table trend, the elitism of the moneyed "fooderati," the spiritual cost of global homogenization and the desire to connect with things local, non-corporate, authentic. (The villain in the piece is the CEO of a Starbucks-like conglomerate who wants Jeremy's soul at any price.) Also in the mix is a love story, of course, and a true-life 1953 Stanley Park cold case, which hovers thematically over the novel without overpowering it. That Taylor is able to handle the story with such control is a testament to his gifts.

Witty (one chapter late in the book is the much-struggled-over menu for Jeremy's new restaurant), fresh and sometimes disturbing as we follow Jeremy through good and bad choices, this is one of the best books I've read this year. In an era in which the individual is sacrificing more and more liberties to corporate interests, it is also one of the most uplifting.

Half about a young, idealistic chef with no business plan, and half about his father (an older, idealistic, widower who lives with the homeless for a while). Easy to read, and really fun at times (especially if you're interested in food). But I found the writing somewhat lazy at times, and the plot pretty predictable. The latter would be fine, except for I think that the climax was supposed to be shocking and surprising. I found it to be the inevitable conclusion of events.  But the food seemed really tasty!

This is a book that I read and greatly enjoyed.

There were so many things that annoyed me about this book that I am surprised that I finished it, and wondering why I did, though I will admit to a fair amount of skimming. I will not list all of the parts of this book that I found aggravating because I have spent too much time on this book already, and it would likely exceed the GR character limits for reviews. So, here are the bigger points that made me want to throw my poor, innocent e-reader across the room - I did refrain, but reading BLARGH! this book was like rubbing my mind with sandpaper. So, here we go:

>So, Jeremy and his partner in the first restaurant adamantly refuse to have vegetarian options, in Vancouver BC, but then wonder why they are struggling to stay afloat without one vegetarian option ever, in **Vancouver are-you-kidding-me-no-vegetarian-options BC**
-they lose all of those many potential clients, and often their friends but then wonder why they are struggling
-they lose all of those potential, return-business locals because of that ignorant decision
-and seriously, it's VANCOUVER BC AND THEY HAVE NO VEGETARIAN OPTIONS!
-that is just bad business

>Oh, but then they often make off-menu special meals for people involved in the TV-movie industry
-people they know are unlikely to be return customers, and highly unlikely to pass the word on to others, especially others who might be regular clients

>One of the characters actually says something along the lines of 'can't eat tofu because everyone knows it is only f-word for gay people who eat the stuff'
-yes, the author spells out the f-word in the book
-and yes, the author chooses the two syllable version of the word
-yes, it was part of the author's heavy-handed indication that the person saying it was a bad guy but protagonist Jermey laughed along with evil-guy
-and seriously?!? the f-word for gay people?!?!?
-and seriously?!? it's what people are if they eat tofu?!?!?
-and seriously?!?! what about women?!?!?
-and seriously?!?! do people still engage in that level of misogyny and homophobia, and am I supposed to be impressed he crammed so much of each into one short sentence?!?!
-oh, and the book is set in the late 90's so it is not 'just the times'

>and really what about women?
-the men in this book were so shallow but also so overdone that they were almost caricatures rather than characters but they were at least persons.
-the women in this book on the other hand are not really characters at all. Here we have:
--the dead mother, mentioned but not really a character in her own right
--the past love/sex interest about whom Jeremy can wax nostalgic
--the one-who-got-away love/sex interest who ended up with the best friend, and about whom Jermey can wax wistful
--the can't-be-with-you-because-we're-business-partners love/sex interest about whom Jeremey can wax martyrdom
--the add-ahem-'interest'-through-inclusion-of-another-woman love/sex interest about whom Jeremey can wax lust
--a female waitress who make occasional appearances, but whose main scene is to show her man-hating, ranting about males side
--a female culinary school student that Jeremey hires with four young men in the same class
---she is either listed entirely as one of three names along with at least two of the male characters
---while two of the male characters have speaking roles and character - ahem - 'development' this woman remains one of a group
---her only speaking role is to become the butt of an inside joke that the author forces his reader to participate in by having this female character declare that when she opens a restaurant it will serve tofu, having no idea that, apparently in her world, only f-word for gay people people eat it. Blargh seriously?!??
---oh, the news/magazine writer who might have been interesting but only showed up for a couple of pages and ultimately, where she could have had an interesting or important role apparently got scooped by others who were not there (and so how did they get the information?), and ultimately despite her 'bombshell' served the purposes of the evil one who normally would have been harmed by it (so the author was sure to take away any power/standing she had in the book by giving it back to one of the men in it).
-the level of misogyny and sexism in this book was disturbing

>Somewhere around 80% of they way in the first and only decisively non-white character makes an appearance
-not much more than an appearance
-this is a man from Latin America, who is (as the author carefully points out) is very grateful that Jeremey gave him a minimum-wage job as a dishwasher at the new restaurant, because hey, why not also play that are-you-kidding-me stereotype card?

>that's not how homeless people do

>I hated Jeremy
-he is just so completely and utterly annoying, but also just completely and utterly stupid and dishonest and pretentious

and so on, but I am just so utterly done with this book that I refuse to spend any more time on it. I am glad I can return this one to the library and I will not be looking up anymore work by this author.

The audio version is put together very well with ambient noise that enhances but never distracts. It was like listening to an old time radio play.
Stanley Park is a funny story that juxtaposes fine dining and homeless dinner. A chef that tried a bistro his way before having to toe the corporate line and his resulting frustrations. Helping him back to what is important are his sous chef (love interest), and his voluntarily homeless father.

Interesting at first with descriptions of Vancouver and Stanley Park, intriguing relationship between chef Jeremy and his somewhat estranged father , a Professor. However, went down a strange and winding path on an old murder mystery, homeless encampment in the woods and bizarre food journey of chef. Way too much time wasted by author showing off his foodie knowledge, felt like a cooking book at times. Would not recommend, just odd and boring at times and then some outright weird content

So Timothy Taylor’s *Stanley Park* was on the list of books recommended to me when I moved to Vancouver. Not surprising, perhaps, as the book spends a lot of time describing the city: the disparity between rich and poor, the exceptional natural beauty, the pretension of the foodie-hipsters who live here and then, in great detail, the landscape of the largest park (and biggest tourist attraction), Stanley Park.
The protagonist, Jeremy, is an idealistic young chef who owns a hip restaurant and cooks (magnificent) locally sourced meals. The plot thickens as his restaurant struggles to maintain financial solvency, and thickens further as the plot detours to follow Jeremy’s father, “The Professor” who lives IN Stanley Park as part of an ethnographic study of homeless folks who live in the park AND investigating a cold case murder of two children.
I suppose there are some ways in which these two plot lines intersect: Jeremy visits his father in the woods, thematic parallels around local food and local/post-national belonging. But for this reader it felt very much like two plot lines jammed together without the necessary exposition making it clear why a murder mystery and foodie romance belong together. Indeed, even with careful reading I’m still unsure about who/how the murder was committed, why it was significant for Jeremy and what implications it had for The Professor.
So here’s how I take it:
The restaurant plot and Jeremy is great. The writing is decent, the descriptions of food and cooking are great and the questions around independent/small business v conglomerate are interesting and worth exploring.
The Stanley Park plot is terrible. The descriptions try so hard to be literary and poetic that it’s entirely unclear to this reader what is happening, to whom and why. More importantly, I still don’t know why I should care about this plot line. What does it have to do with the local food? with food security?
Hmm. I’ve been telling folks this is a great read (and it did help me past my “Let The Great World Spin” hangover) but in writing this I’m not sure its great so much as the one strand of the novel is great. Can part of a novel be great and the other part terrible and the sum be something like average? I don’t think so. I think it’s still worth reading for the gorgeous food bits, just don’t be surprised if you’re reading and wondering what the hell this Czech guy is doing living on Lion’s Gate Bridge. And maybe also don’t be surprised if you’re a little annoyed with the editor of this book who failed Taylor in not telling him that you can’t just jam two plot flavours together and hope for a satisfying read.

Colourful cast of characters- found myself laughing out loud at times . Made me smile . My favourite 100 pages were the last 100 pages , those were entirely enjoyable and entertaining.