Penelope Corcoran needs to simmer down

[Schielke]

I just read Penelope's latest column, and while I respect what she is trying to say...she just needs to be a shade more tactful about alienating her readers. At the end of the article I got this mental image of her doing a Z snap and wagging her head from side to side. hehehehehe.

Woah mamma, take it easy!

Ben

[nightscotsman]

Ya, I can definitely see the "Z snap". I don't really see this article doing any good other than making herself feel better by venting. Her job is to write about food and restaurants, not to write about her job. Not that I don't completely agree with what she's saying, but she should get a thicker skin and stop whining. IMHO, of course.

[tsquare]

From her column:

Q: "In your 'Best Sandwiches' column of Oct. 23, you forgot (insert name of favorite sandwich shop)."

I want to go on record that this non-question did not come from me, for the benefit of a certain lurker! But it did give me a good laugh.

(Private joke, airing publicly, thanks eGullet!)

[girl chow]

Yikes! That was a yowza of an article.

I think the telling point is in reading some of the questions from her readers, particularly the comment/slash/question:

"In your Oct. 23 column, you wrote about several sandwiches, but you only liked one of them -- the $2 Vietnamese sandwich. How does that help me?"

This tells me that a lot of food writers like Penelope Corcoran and her editors probably don't understand the notion that readers want more information and less hot air. I think it's true that readers want to hear less about the personal experiences (and blah blah blah personal stories) of critics and want more information about food and dining. And that doesn't mean there should be less criticism, the information just needs to be balanced with the criticism. Like maybe Penelope Corcoran could have told the reader where ELSE should could have gone to get a better sandwich, including the address and phone number of the other place...yada yada yada. Information like that is useful.

We're living in an information-laden world. I can look up a whole bunch of stuff about the Patagonia Toothfish (aka Chilean Sea Bass) at 3 a.m. on the Internet if I want and food journalists at newspapers have to compete with the vast amounts of food information on the Internet. To keep up, I think food journalists and restaurant critiques need to keep in mind that they must be as informative as they are critical.

For the record, I have liked many of the things that Penelope Corcoran has written. I like her honesty.

Just me $.02 for what it's worth. I'd love to hear what you all think food journalists and restaurant reviewers SHOULD be writing!

[thelastsupper]

I thought the article was hard hitting and spot on. Personally, I tend to trust someone who will explain why they don't like a meal. Then, by all means, tell me what works well. Too many reviews around here are glowing and soft. I am glad to be told where to avoid. If only someone had told me about Earth and Ocean before last night, blech!

It's funny, girl chow, I read the $2 Vietnamese sandwich comment as "who wants to eat a $2 Vietnamese sandwich?" the first couple times. I was like, wha?

Though I wonder at your comment regarding information vs. hot air . . . what did you think about Min Lao's recent article in The Stranger on Falafel in Seattle? Her writing seemed to reflect Penelope's comment:

"f something isn't described in 100 percent glowing and positive terms, this person doesn't see that thing as "good." In actuality, there was only one sandwich I said I didn't like, the rest I liked -- with varying degrees of enthusiasm. In some cases, I made suggestions for improvement. For this reader, my suggestions and "negative comments" completely outweighed any "good" I mentioned."

To me, all of that stuff is good, soild information. Not perhaps positive, but valuable. Hot air? Nah.

[Jaymes]

Just me $.02 for what it's worth. I'd love to hear what you all think food journalists and restaurant reviewers SHOULD be writing!

I think that depends entirely on who you are working for, and what they want. If it's some cutting-edge publication, perhaps they are paying for hard-nosed, witty, savage, no-holds-barred reviews. Or maybe the very latest in trendy, stylish places. Or celeb-chef gossip.

On the other hand, I wrote restaurant reviews for several years for a local senior citizens' magazine. Their readers wanted info on restaurants that offered features that appeal to the older crowd: good food and plenty of it, lots of vegetables, no loud rock music, senior discounts, easy access (no stairs), and an Early Bird Special.

Often, I'd visit five or six places before I'd find one that I knew would interest them. And then I'd write about it.

It's just a different gig.

[girl chow]

I agree: a reviewer should tell me what they don't like, then tell me what works well.... and where to go to find what works well if the place they're reviewing doesn't offer it!

But if a reader writes, "How does that help me?" about a roundup of a bunch of different places and their eats, well that tells me that the reviewer probably didn't do an adequate job. Or maybe that means the reader needs someone to hold their hand because they're too stupid to see that just because the word "stunning!" wasn't used, doesn't mean the food sucked.

Let me clarify, I find criticism useful, but usually only when the reviewer tells us their foundation for their standard as well as the place locally that set their standard for them (and where that standard is located!). Of course, this requires a reviewer who has a great deal of experience and vast knowledge in the restaurant community in which they work. Frankly, a writer in a new community (like Corcoran) probably can't give that perspective. She simply may not know where to go. So it's easier for her to say, "This is a bunch of places I've eaten lately and what I found" rather than, "I went to Restaurant X,Y and Z, but you know, they weren't nearly as good as Restaurant A."

Just another $.02 from me, the rambler.

[thelastsupper]

Let me clarify, I find criticism useful, but usually only when the reviewer tells us their foundation for their standard as well as the place locally that set their standard for them (and where that standard is located!). Of course, this requires a reviewer who has a great deal of experience and vast knowledge in the restaurant community in which they work. Frankly, a writer in a new community (like Corcoran) probably can't give that perspective. She simply may not know where to go. So it's easier for her to say, "This is a bunch of places I've eaten lately and what I found" rather than, "I went to Restaurant X,Y and Z, but you know, they weren't nearly as good as Restaurant A."

I think she is trying to set her standard. Clearly she's laying down the law on what she is all about: no cheerleading. Her old reliable-- Etta's-- doesn't work for her anymore. She needs to find a new standard.

Obviously she needs to get out to Le Gourmand.

I agree that it will be interesting to read her reviews as she gets to know the area better (assuming that she doesn't know it well already).

[tsquare]

I think she has been in the area for a few years - working at Amazon, as I recall.

But what's with the Times and PI reviewing the same restaurant on the same day so often since she started? Can't be coincidence.

[tighe]

For whatever reason I haven't paid much attention to Ms. Corcoran's reviews over the past year. Probably because I find eGullet to be a more reliable and useful source of info on restaurants that any reviewer in town. Today however I found myself perusing the PI's food and wine page online and started to skim her reviews. Given the "I'm just a hardass, no BS food critic" attitude that started this thread, the long series of puff-pieces is amazing to me. Does she just not write up the places she doesn't like, or is she on an amazing lucky streak? There seem to simply be NO out and out bad reviews. She even had good things to say about Dish D'lish, a place that just sends me fleeing on SO MANY levels. Maybe Penelope has just gotten soft from spending a few years here in Seattle.

[tsquare]

For whatever reason I haven't paid much attention to Ms. Corcoran's reviews over the past year. 

Because she is boring and the reviews are not well written?

Edited July 16, 2003 by tsquare (log)

[tsquare]

Can you say, "bye bye?"

[tighe]

Should we start the write-in campaign to get mamster hired for the position?...

[elswinger]

Is she leaving the P-I? (I prefer Nancy Leson anyway).

[cookingclassjunkie]

I heard that she's going back to work at Amazon.

[lala]

I think she has been in the area for a few years - working at Amazon, as I recall.

But what's with the Times and PI reviewing the same restaurant on the same day so often since she started? Can't be coincidence.

←

If you backtrack from those double reviews, you'll usually see that that restaurant was discussed in food forums about a month before...like here on EG. Sometimes I just pull up the reviews and our thread and laugh and laugh and laugh...

While I generally like Penelope's work, this was a bit much. It's good to lay down your parameters, but not to bitch slap your entire audiance. I lay this at the feet of the editor, who has also been letting a lot of crap through in Hsiao-Ching Chou's pieces, too.

Edited August 4, 2005 by lala (log)

[kategoldston]

I found the article that Penelope Cocoran wrote in response to the readers inappropriate. It is one thing to justify the reasons for reviewing restaurants in such a manner and blantantly treating reader response's to her style as ignorant and more or less treating them (by repeating things 3 times.) as children, and stupid ones at that. I thing P.C. wrote this piece in response to the fact that next week is her last week and she wanted to go out on her own terms. However, her terms seem to involve treating the rest of her audience to her opinion of them, which unfortunately seems to be along the lines of the restaurants she has been eating at, substandard and lousy. I have worked at my fair share of restaurants in this city and the only thing I had learned about her is that she holds grudges and if she does not like the chef/owner then she in turn also does not like the restaurant regardless of whether or not the food is excellent. Etta's may be her go to, but she has a LONG standing grudge against a certain chef and reviews that follow are consistent with that. I don't know, I just have a real problem with authors that make it their job to begin to judge the people involved in the organization of the restaurant or ownership in this case, because whether or not the owner is a schmuck, which in this case I do not believe is, the food and service is what makes a restaurant and should be the determinant. I know that as human beings it is hard not to let feelings and drama enter into the workplace, but taking offense to genuine questions posted by less educated or knowledge seeking readers is just ridiculous. While, P I think you have made your opinion heard loud and clear and am glad that you will be saying ciao.

[elswinger]

I thought her last column for the P-I was a big F-U to the readers.

[tsquare]

I thought her last column for the P-I was a big F-U to the readers.

←

Gee, I never cared for her writing or her attitude, but I just don't read that into it.

(On the other hand, Nancy was hilarious today!)

[tighe]

While I love many of the places on Penelope's list, I think the fact that her list of "favorites" consists entirely of middle and lower end places is indicative of her limitations as a reviewer.

[LEdlund]

What article are we talking about here? The one where she gives her list of favorite Seattle eateries? If not, where can I find the one that is in response to the readers?

[geoff]

It's official. Penelope is Ghandi.

[tsquare]

What article are we talking about here? The one where she gives her list of favorite Seattle eateries? If not, where can I find the one that is in response to the readers?

←

See first post in thread.

[elswinger]

I was mixing up the two articles when I posted.

Anyway, Blue C Sushi? For the same price you can get better sushi at any number of places.

Edited August 5, 2005 by elswinger (log)

[olivina]

OK, here I go again with the contrarian thing. I thought the article was kind of interesting. I've often wondered what makes food critics tick. It may have been self righteous and too defensive, but I think it was a bit brave for her to come out. How do we know that other critics don't feel the same way and just don't want the bad publicity by fessing up?