2 replies to this topic

[Shinboners]

Larissa Dubecki has now had the job of restaurant reviewer for the Age for the past month or so. What do people think?

For me, Dubecki has always been a very good journalist. She argues well, has a good style, an eye for detail, and you're not left wondering where she stands on an issue. Following on from Lethlean would not be an easy gig. Her first few reviews could easily have been written by Lethlean, such was the similarity in structure. But in the last few weeks, she has started to find her own voice. I was very impressed at how she described a dish she had at Jamon Sushi (the dish was an oyster on a slice of nashi pear) as "like being inland on a hot day and having a cool whispter of the ocean flutter in your ear".

But for some reason, she seems to be missing something. Personally, I think it's this. If you look at Matt Preston's reviews, it's obvious how much he loves the food industry. Late last year, I remember Lethlean writing a story on how he spent a day trying to make blood sausage. As professional as Dubecki is, it seems to me that she doesn't quite have the same passion as Preston, and I can't imagine her trying to do what Lethlean did.

[lamington]

Daniel, I've been struck by how enthusiastically she needs to write with big words or foreign words or cute high-falutin' idioms. Sticks out like a sore thumb. Whether or not people liked Lethlean's writing, it at least felt uncontrived. Perhaps Dubecki will settle in to the role and her prose will gel better. I love a decent vocabulary, but it has to feel natural in my opinion. A Melbourne blogger has already commented on some of the more strained attempts at fancy prose.

[Shinboners]

A Melbourne blogger has already commented on some of the more strained attempts at fancy prose.

It's interesting how the blogger noted that after a perceived negative review of the Stokehouse, she gave it 15/20. Today, she gave what I felt was a negative review of the Flower Drum, but scored it at 16/20.