Daniel Rogov

Nothing more egoistic than quoting oneself, but some might care to read my little article at: http://www.stratsplace.com/rogov/criticize_the_critics.html Best, Rogov

Several additions to my earlier thoughts. With regard to culinary criticism, it might be said that there are three kinds of critics - the naive, the knowledgeable and the phony. Naive criticism, which we all do when first starting out is perfectly acceptable for it implies that the writer liked or disliked something and then goes on to give the reasons for that. Fair enough, for here full disclosure is indeed made. The knowledgeable, who has built a repertoire of experience is capable of making more absolute statements, those based on comparisons to earlier dining experiences and to standards is certainly acceptable and is or should be the goal of the naive critic. The phonies on the other hand (and there are many of them in food and wine criticism) are never acceptable because they are basically betraying their clients (i.e. their readers) with false information. With regard to those people writing about food (and sometimes food writers are also food critics), I agree with the earlier comment that one may publish an untested recipe so long as that is loudlyand clearly stated for the reader. The problem here is that too many writers do that too often and readers sooner or later realize that their recipes don't "work". In my own case, one of the few untested recipes I gave was a classic for making whale steak that started out: "With the assistance of 12 strong men, crack the jawbone of a large blue whale". I forgive myself that lapse.... Best, Rogov

I think it is necessary to distinguish between two categories of professionals - the food writer and the restaurant or food critic. Within the category of food writers are two types of people - those whose task includes the presentation of recipes and those whose writing is more of "color" pieces. The person presenting recipes (even if those recipes have come from supposedly great chefs) should be prepared to test every recipe printed either in their own kitchen or in a professional kitchen at their disposal. Even the recipes passed on by great chefs can have mistakes and must be tested. A recipe that is untested by the writer should remain a recipe unpublished. No question but that such writers should be talented cooks. The individual writing color pieces (chef interviews, previews of new food items released to the market) need not have that talent but should have a good palate and the ability to discriminate between new and existing products as to their qualities. The restaurant critic need not him/herself be a good cook but they must have a deep knowledge of what happens in the kitchen, of ingredients and how they are combined, and of all that happens as a dish makes its way from raw products to a masterpiece, a catastrophe or something in-between. The critic also needs a great deal of experience in dining out in order to make comparisons. Criticism should never be based on personal likes or dislikes, but only on comparison to given standards and to know those standards dining out on a regular basis is critical. One cannot for example, criticize a Bearnaise sauce unless one knows how that sauce is made, what the limits are on which it can be called by that name, and the standards of a well made sauce. If I wanted to be a true curmudgeon (which I can sometimes be), I would also say that the restaurant critic needs at least some knowledge of psychology, sociology, history, philosophy and the arts in general, for all of those are an integral part of the dining experience. More than this, the critic must know how do divorce his/her personal likes and dislikes from the realities of those standards. One cannot write a critique of a resturant based on how personable the chef may be or of how friendly the critic is with the owner. Of course here we are talking about the question of ethics...... Oh yes - the critic must also be an optimist. People who do not gain great pleasure from dining out should not be critics, and people who do not have the hope, every time on enterng a restaurant that this will be "the meal of the week/month/year/decade" should restrict themselves to dining at McDonalds. Best, Rogov

Chuckling. The name of the shop is "Siach Cafe" (translates to "Coffee Bush" or "Coffee Shrub" and the name was affectionately given to the owner because he has a certain set of rules by which, if one fails to abide you will findyourself being rushed rather quickly to finish whatever you may have ordered. Truth is this is one of the most delightful places in Tel Aviv, the owner importing his own coffee, making his own blends, blending by methods he claims to be uniquely his and refusing to share them. The term was indeed adapted from Seinfeld's "Soup Nazi". As one of my readers put it nicely once "some may see it as peculiar that they have to justify their right to become a valued and served customer at a cafe". Let's keep in mind the Seinfeld line (or was it Kramer) saying to the Soup Nazi - "I am the only one who understands you - you SUFFER for your soup" When in Tel Aviv for sure visit Sheinken Street, have a snack first at Orna and Ella and then coffee at Siach Cafe. One of the truly fun ways of getting to know the city. Best, Rogov

Interesting to note that not too many foreign fast-food or cafe chains have succeeded in Israel. Wendy's, Dunkin Donuts, Kentucky Fried Chicken and others have all managed to go belly-up in fairly short order. The case of Starbucks in Israel was a special one, in my opinion caused more by hubris than anything else. When the company first opened it was with a massive advertising campaign that implied that Starbucks had come to Israel to teach us how to drink good coffee. That was not well received in an area where coffee has been a way of life for far hundreds of years before Starbucks opened its first branch in Seattle. More than that, as Swisskaese says (I do like that name!), they forgot that when it comes to coffee, the country already had several well-loved individual and chain coffee shops (Arcaffe, Ilan's Cuppa Joe, and of course the famous and beloved (despite his name) coffee Nazi of Sheinkin Street). And finally, to add insult to injury, despite hiring a well known local chef as their consultant, they insisted on serving sandwiches that while popular in the USA are somewhat scorned in the Middle-East. As might be said - hubris kills. Best, Rogov

Jason, Hi... You commented that "the Israelis take their breakfasts VERY seriously". Although the huge (some might even say humongous) Israeli breakfast is still offered at hotels and on the kibbutzim, an increasing number of Israelis have fallen into one of two habits - a croissant and coffee at a neighborhood cafe, or Kellog's or a local brand of breakfast cereal with milk at their home breakfast table. For better or for worse, the days when most Israelis would sit down at their table wih two tomatoes, two cucumbers, a bunch of parsley and spend half an hour cutting those into miniscule cubes before tossing them together with lemon juice and olive oil. By the way, to support my earlier argument about "Israeli cuisine", such salads are known here as "salat aravi" - that is to say "Arabic salads" and that because they originated in the villages of Arab farmers throughout the land. Best, Rogov

Hello to All..... It took me a bit of time to figure out that registration was a prerequisite to posting but register I did. I've peeked at Jason's forum from time to time and often found interesting discussions going here. If there are questions that I can answer, don't hesitate to post them. I won't promise to look in every day but if you notify me by email that questions have been posted and give me the appropriate URL, I'll get to them as quickly as possible. Best email for me is drogov@cheerful.com (Personally, I like to think of myself as a curmudeon so the cheeful.com address is merely a quirk of fate) I do thank several for the warm words of welcome. Best wishes, Daniel Rogov