Brett Anderson will review again

[TAPrice]

In a piece on NPR, Brett Anderson announced that he'll start reviewing restaurants again next month:

NPR: As Crescent City Recovers, So Do Its Restaurants

I know a lot chefs will be very happy to hear this.

[joiei]

And some of the rest of are also glad to hear this news. I trusted his reviews mostly. Only once in a while did I ever disagree with his impressions of a restaurant.

[syoung68]

What Todd, you do not put much stock into a certain radio host's reviews?

[TAPrice]

What Todd, you do not put much stock into a certain radio host's reviews? 

←

Me, I read everyone's reviews. Although I like Brett's criticism very much (and, full disclosure, he's a friend of mine), the importance is that the daily paper is back reviewing. I've written about restaurants for most of the other publications in town (Gambit, New Orleans Magazine and now OffBeat) and I'm well aware that the daily has a much, much louder megaphone that everyone else.

I should also say, if it wasn't clear, that when I say many chefs will be happy to have the reviews back, that's because they've told me this.

[syoung68]

I hear you. I read the Gambit frequently pre Katrina and liked your stuff. I was wondering where you were writing these days - I don't normally pick up an OffBeat. I do like Brett's reviews as well, and I totally agree that the Picayune has a much larger audience. I think Brett should have started back up sooner.

P.S. I was not really throwing Tom under the bus - though he does drive me crazy at times.

[TAPrice]

This time no kidding, it's for real, the reviews are really back. A big banner on the A section of the Picayune teased the return of the beans tomorrow.

Any speculation on the first place that will be reviewed?

[Fat Guy]

I disagreed with his self-imposed hiatus at the time, and still think it was the wrong decision. I sympathize with his reluctance to kick restaurants when they were down or to review restaurants that were in flux on account of disaster recovery, but ultimately it was a disservice both to readers and the industry (not to mention the cause of arms-length journalism) to stop his restaurant reviews for such a long time.

[MikeHartnett]

I agree. A hiatus for a bit afterwards was probably justified, but restaurants are back up and running, and have been for some time. If you're not back up to a level you're happy with by now, you're never getting there.

But I am happy to hear the reviews are starting again.

ETA: And while I really have no idea what'll go first, I hope it's something interesting. I want to try somewhere new.

Edited July 24, 2008 by MikeHartnett (log)

[TAPrice]

I bring you tomorrow's review today [spoiler ALERT, as they say]:

It's three beans for Mr. B's.

In this piece Brett explain why he waited three years to review:

or the first year or so, this decision required no explanation. Restaurants catalyzed the local economy, and rating their performance as they rebuilt from scratch -- in many cases literally -- never struck me as logical. Supplies were difficult to come by. (If you think you've had a tough three years, talk to a shrimper.) As giant swaths of the area lay in ruins, the population, having been reduced to almost zero, was returning, but at a slow crawl. And good luck finding a plumber, much less someone to roast bones for a demi-glace, decant a Chateau Margaux or wash the dishes.

....

And there was more. Treating oneself to the pleasures of a high-priced restaurant is a luxury few can afford. Only the most privileged communities support those who actually make their living analyzing these indulgences. My "skills" as a restaurant critic would not transfer fruitfully to, say, Uganda.

So as the recovery wore on, my reluctance to return to criticism wasn't because there was no great food to be had. By my measure, most of our highest achieving restaurants were, remarkably, performing at or near pre-Katrina levels around the first anniversary. I was, rather, uncomfortable with what the critical analysis of food and service could imply: that things were back to normal when they so clearly were not.

You could argue that they still aren't, that while the recovery continues, the overall condition of New Orleans isn't markedly different than it was, say, a year ago. And I would agree. But this aversion to restaurant criticism was becoming my personal version of post-traumatic stress disorder.

[Fat Guy]

It's interesting to me that there's no mention of any sort of consultation with editors, leaving one to think that this individual critic was allowed to grant himself a leave of absence and end it at his discretion.

[MikeHartnett]

I'm not sure if you've ever read the Times-Picayune, but it seems as though that wouldn't be too far-fetched.

[Fat Guy]

Kim Severson, the New York Times dining-section reporter who has covered post-Katrina New Orleans extensively, has a large feature in the paper (the New York Times, that is) today about Brett Anderson's return to reviewing. She does a much better job justifying Anderson's absence than Anderson does, but in the end I think that whatever convincing arguments there are to be made expired a year or two ago.

[MikeHartnett]

Two things in response to Kim Severson's article:

One, has anyone considered that, more so than a smaller population, the greater absolute number of restaurants may have more to do with the staff shortage?

Two, I have found that there are a shocking number of people here who cannot look forward, and cannot be positive. Comments seem to focus on surprise that the city is functioning, that progress is being made, that the city is livable again. With the kind of attitude that shows surprise at success, it's no wonder that things move so slowly.

Sorry for the rant. It's been building for a while, and when I can't just read about restaurants without "Katrina, Katrina, Katrina" penetrating every article, it just about makes me crazy.

[Holly Moore]

I find it reassuring that New Orleans locals and visitors were able to strike out on their own and dine well the past year or two without the guidance of a restaurant critic.

[Mayhaw Man]

I find it reassuring that New Orleans locals and visitors were able to strike out on their own and dine well the past year or two without the guidance of a restaurant critic.

←

This is, after all, New Orleans. We eat. We eat well. We eat alot. Reading reviews for many of us is much the same as reading the Monday morning wrap up of the latest Saints related disaster. We read it, we appreciate it for what it is, but no matter the situation, we'll be back in the Dome next Sunday watching them tee it up again, regardless of the latest, inevitable, mishaps.

I'm glad Brett's back at it. He's exceptionally good at what he does and I've enjoyed his work ever since he's been tapping it out.

I enjoyed the NYT piece, as well. Kim Severson, since the storm, has developed a great list of sources and has developed a solid understanding of the city, it's restaurants, and the way that things work here. That's a good thing for all of us. Many of the "hit and run" food writers who have come to town in the last couple of years have missed the point, again and again, by a wide margin. Kim seems to get it better than most.

[PopsicleToze]

On his self-imposed leave of absence, he said that it was his personal post traumatic stress syndrome. Believe me -- almost everyone in New Orleans is now familiar with PTSS, and while not pretty, it's real. In the end, you do what you can do. It is nice to see him back. It takes our New Orleans world back a little bit closer to normal. (Okay, we never were really normal, a little crazy maybe, but we were happy and we dined extremely well.)

I just finished his write-up of Mr. B's and it was a great (and accurate) review.

Great job, Mr. Anderson, and I'm looking forward having the beans back!

Rhonda

[Fat Guy]

One thing mentioned in the New York Times piece that I don't recall being mentioned in the Picayune review is that Anderson's rating of three beans is actually a demotion from the four beans the restaurant previously held. Do I have that right?

[MikeHartnett]

That's what I took from it. Does anyone know whether Anderson reviewed it the previous time, or if it was his predecessor?

[Mayhaw Man]

Who knows? Thanks to the unbelievably bad,even useless, website that the Picayune utilizes, as do a number of other Newhouse Publishing dailies, it's pretty much impossible to do anything but a web search and hope for the best. I honestly don't remember what they had the last time round.

I hate that website with a passion, as do many, including most of the employees of the papers that are stuck with it.

[TAPrice]

In 1996, Gregory Roberts gave it 4 beans.

Edit: Just for kicks, here is how NOLA.com looked back in 1996: Nola.com