...
Show More
“Sex in the City,” restaurant critic edition; pretty antithetical to my vision for criticism, but why should I rain on Reichl’s parade? She’s America’s food writer par excellence and reading her is like watching a holiday romcom chock-full of genre clichés past its moment of cultural relevancy (something else I did yesterday): the magic is mostly (although not altogether) gone; the joy in the experience comes rather from picking the making of the myth apart — in this case, a colonial myth of self-discovery of white womanhood through exploring the wider world through food. What I’ve written makes this sound like an unpleasant book, and it is not!
(I, too, however, would look at my mother askance if she told me a calves’ brains recipe was “mixed up with my destiny,” and politely reject.)
A few additional notes: Reichl clearly knows way more about food than her insecure narrative voice would suggest. Is this because she is attempting to affect a critical naïveté that she had as a budding restaurant critic? I prefer a more confident critic as a matter of personal style (even when they may not be that sure of themselves in reality!) but evidently readers enjoy being taken along the ride for Reichl’s bumbling incertitudes (being dazzled by and shy of fame, feeling unfit to write for the LA Times, failing to fact-check a basic claim, etc… it all becomes fairly exhausting for me). Her invention of the “Reluctant Gourmand” is quite ingenious and so is her comment that it is possible to measure change in a society through tracking the availability of ingredients.
(I, too, however, would look at my mother askance if she told me a calves’ brains recipe was “mixed up with my destiny,” and politely reject.)
A few additional notes: Reichl clearly knows way more about food than her insecure narrative voice would suggest. Is this because she is attempting to affect a critical naïveté that she had as a budding restaurant critic? I prefer a more confident critic as a matter of personal style (even when they may not be that sure of themselves in reality!) but evidently readers enjoy being taken along the ride for Reichl’s bumbling incertitudes (being dazzled by and shy of fame, feeling unfit to write for the LA Times, failing to fact-check a basic claim, etc… it all becomes fairly exhausting for me). Her invention of the “Reluctant Gourmand” is quite ingenious and so is her comment that it is possible to measure change in a society through tracking the availability of ingredients.