We've had many discussions about what a food writer did or did not know about a chef or a dish before writing their piece.
What kind of research would you as a writer tend to do? As an editor, how knowledgeable do you expect writers to be? As a reader?
Research
Started by
Jinmyo
, May 24 2002 07:56 AM
1 reply to this topic
#1
Posted 24 May 2002 - 07:56 AM
"I've caught you Richardson, stuffing spit-backs in your vile maw. 'Let tomorrow's omelets go empty,' is that your fucking attitude?" -E. B. Farnum
"Behold, I teach you the ubermunch. The ubermunch is the meaning of the earth. Let your will say: the ubermunch shall be the meaning of the earth!" -Fritzy N.
"It's okay to like celery more than yogurt, but it's not okay to think that batter is yogurt."
Serving fine and fresh gratuitous comments since Oct 5 2001, 09:53 PM
"Behold, I teach you the ubermunch. The ubermunch is the meaning of the earth. Let your will say: the ubermunch shall be the meaning of the earth!" -Fritzy N.
"It's okay to like celery more than yogurt, but it's not okay to think that batter is yogurt."
Serving fine and fresh gratuitous comments since Oct 5 2001, 09:53 PM
#2
Posted 03 June 2002 - 02:51 PM
Are you talking about restaurant reviewers? I think they should learn as much about a chef or a dish as they can to convey their opinion of it to a reader, which I guess means I don’t think they have to know if the chef trained with Paul Bocuse.
But as for any type of journalist, and his or her reporting, I think they should know as much as they possibly can before they even talk to a chef. We’re always surprised when we go to interview book authors and they’re surprised that we’ve read their book!
But as for any type of journalist, and his or her reporting, I think they should know as much as they possibly can before they even talk to a chef. We’re always surprised when we go to interview book authors and they’re surprised that we’ve read their book!




This topic is locked




