TDG:The Last Article You Will Read On Ferran Adria

[inventolux]

This article would carry more weight if the author had first hand experience of his subject. Instead he is essentially "copying" the opinions of others.

My point exactly, I would never write an article influencing others (positively or negatively)on say.........the microsoft windows operating system without at least gaining full literary and hands-on knowledge of the feasability/creative/inner workings of the system first. Its just too risky.

I still agree with your views tcd, I just wish you had at least experienced the restauraunt once. I do enjoy your enthusiasm for creative culinary progression and for taking such a huge gamble on allowing the hugest of critics (egulleters) dissect it into as you put it "its most basic elements."

My suggestion is to observe a restaurant closer to home with en extreme creativie view. There are few restaurants in the US that can match EL Bulli for forward vision. My personal favorite is Trio. Grant is a genius, and there is plenty to write about when it comes to his (as well as his staff's) vision of gastronomy.

No disrespect meant here, my apologies if any was taken.

[Fat Guy]

Again, if you wanted to write a product review of Windows, you'd have to use Windows. If you wanted to write an opinion piece about the antitrust suit, you would just as likely work from the sources relevant to that inquiry: news reports, transcripts, etc. This incessant bashing of Tim because he hasn't dined at El Bulli is getting old, especially since nobody has presented a decent argument for why one needs to eat at a restaurant in order to write a piece of social criticism about the world's most influential chef and his role in society.

[Special Ed]

A decent argument has been presented many times in this thread; you just refuse to accept it, Steve. It seems rather obvious to me that you're primarily concerned with protecting your editorial credibility in this argument. Sometimes, even eGullet makes mistakes.

[Jason Perlow]

Now, if we only had Ferran Adria to comment on this thread.

[timothycdavis]

Maybe we should agree to disagree, and get on to some eatin'.

I would offer that Mr. Shaw's hundreds of published articles (as well as my own) might give us some sort of insight into what is required in a certain type of article, and what isn't. I also understand some folks don't agree with that.

That said, I'll gladly take someone's reservations and do a before-and-after rewrite of the column. (though I bet it'd remain almost completely the same. )

Again, I was, to a great extent, using Adria as a sort of focusing point/lightning rod (which seems to have worked). I could have easily used Mr. Achatz (whose food I hope to get to try soon). I meant no offense to anyone. I was just hoping to make a point (or two). (And maybe score a table -- Ferran, you still listening?)

Mis más cordiales saludos,

TCD

[fresco]

Your piece made me stop and think a few times, which is one measure of its success. That it provoked a heated debate should be proof enough for anyone that it works, and works well. Congratulations.

[Fat Guy]

A decent argument has been presented many times in this thread; you just refuse to accept it, Steve.  It seems rather obvious to me that you're primarily concerned with protecting your editorial credibility in this argument.  Sometimes, even eGullet makes mistakes.

The argument has been conclusively refuted. Nobody has been able to defend it; only to repeat it. Find me one source, one tenet of journalistic ethics, one experienced newspaper editor, who will say there's anything wrong with writing a piece of social criticism about a chef without eating at that chef's restaurant. It's just not going to happen because the whole argument is a red herring. And of-fucking-course my primary concern is with protecting our editorial credibility! You say it like it's a bad thing. If our work is questioned, I listen to the argument and if it's sensible I make a correction, clarification, or retraction, whereas if it's wrong I'll explain why. There's no question about that. The question is why are others so committed to attacking that credibility through ceaseless repetition of specious arguments?

[Dave the Cook]

. . . If our work is questioned, I listen to the argument and if it's sensible I make a correction, clarification, or retraction . . .

In fact, I know of at least two occasions on which this has happened.

[Andy Lynes]

Adria's place in the culinary world isn't in question. He's at the top of the heap. The choice is between acknowledging that and being wrong.

Oh, go on then Fat Guy, I'll fall for it.

This years Restaurant Magazine 50 Best awards put Adria at number 2 to Thomas Keller. I'm assuming that you believe the voting panel to be incorrect in their conclusions and that you have adequate evidence to back up your position.

[Andy Lynes]

Find me one source, one tenet of journalistic ethics, one experienced newspaper editor, who will say there's anything wrong with writing a piece of social criticism about a chef without eating at that chef's restaurant.

My lord, the defence calls "common sense".

[Fat Guy]

Even assuming there's any legitimacy to the Restaurant Magazine list (on other threads we've discussed at length what was wrong with the methodology, and the notion that French Laundry outranks every Michelin three-star restaurant is rather nonsensical), it's nonethelss a ranking of top restaurants. This gets around to the same distinction I've been trying to draw all along: Tim's article isn't a restaurant review. Believing the food and dining experience at French Laundry is better than the food and dining experience at El Bulli is a position that, surely, is within the range of options for what a sane person could believe. But I don't think anybody is saying Keller is a more important chef than Adria from (as is the subject of Tim's article) the standpoint of influencing the concept of chef-as-artist.

Few living people ever dined at an Escoffier restaurant, yet we can have a perfectly intelligent discussion about Escoffier's role in culinary history. We don't attribute more weight to the opinions of people who happen to be old and rich enough to have dined at the Ritz in the Escoffier era. But the more imortant point is that were Escoffier alive and cooking today, dining at his restaurant would still be non-essential to a discussion of his stature, influence, and place in society.

[mags]

Find me one source, one tenet of journalistic ethics, one experienced newspaper editor, who will say there's anything wrong with writing a piece of social criticism about a chef without eating at that chef's restaurant.

A pretty basic tenet of journalism is that you don't rely on some other journalist's interpretation of what the story is. You don't take the Washington Post's word for it that somebody's car is blue, you don't take People magazine's word for it that Ben Affleck and JLo are still an item, and you don't take the Times' word for it that Adria thinks the most important principle is "Don't copy." You do actual reporting. You get the quote yourself. And if for some reason you can't, you make it clear, in big fat neon letters, that you are relying on someone else's reporting. And you credit that someone else.

This is particularly important in a column or an op-ed piece -- which is basically what Tim wrote -- because you're basing your entire analysis, the entire point of the column, on someone else's story. You asked, earlier, if it would be impossible (or immoral or naughty) to write an article about Iraq without having been to Iraq. Of course not. But if you're going to write an article about, say, the geopolitical implications of the war in Iraq -- roughly analagous to writing an article about the culinary-world implications of Adria's cooking -- then you damn well better base your analysis on something more substantive and first-hand than the nightly news.

I would be perfectly happy if it turned out that Tim had read Adria's book or stuff Adria has written. I would be happy if it turned out that he had interviewed chefs about their reactions to what they knew of Adria's cooking. Hell, I'd be happy if it turned out that he had interviewed the guy who wrote the damn Times article. For all I know, he may have done all these things. But none of them are mentioned in the article he wrote, so as far as I'm concerned, it's just so much navel-gazing.

[Jinmyo]

Even assuming there's any legitimacy to the Restaurant Magazine list (on other threads we've discussed at length what was wrong with the methodology, and the notion that French Laundry outranks every Michelin three-star restaurant is rather nonsensical), it's nonethelss a ranking of top restaurants. This gets around to the same distinction I've been trying to draw all along: Tim's article isn't a restaurant review. Believing the food and dining experience at French Laundry is better than the food and dining experience at El Bulli is a position that, surely, is within the range of options for what a sane person could believe. But I don't think anybody is saying Keller is a more important chef than Adria from (as is the subject of Tim's article) the standpoint of influencing the concept of chef-as-artist.

Few living people ever dined at an Escoffier restaurant, yet we can have a perfectly intelligent discussion about Escoffier's role in culinary history. We don't attribute more weight to the opinions of people who happen to be old and rich enough to have dined at the Ritz in the Escoffier era. But the more imortant point is that were Escoffier alive and cooking today, dining at his restaurant would still be non-essential to a discussion of his stature, influence, and place in society.

So there!

Nice article, Timothy. I enjoyed it. At least as much as all of the other Adriania I wade through just about every bloody day. Which is I think the point of the piece: Adria's influence is not just on the haute cusinastas who dine at El Bulli, and not just on inquisitive and exploring chefs, but on media's image of what a chef is or can or should be.

Excuse me while I go and breathe some prime rib.

[tommy]

with all this excitement, i haven't even had time to read tim's article.

[Jinmyo]

with all this excitement, i haven't even had time to read tim's article.

Here, I've foamed it. I'll PM a picture of it to you.

[Fat Guy]

You do actual reporting.  You get the quote yourself.  And if for some reason you can't, you make it clear, in big fat neon letters, that you are relying on someone else's reporting.  And you credit that someone else. 

This is particularly important in a column or an op-ed piece

Tim's essay is neither a restaurant review nor a news report. It is a piece of social criticism. A good comparison would be to the writings of someone like Dave Barry: he's a humorist and social critic who shoots from the hip and tries to entertain while delivering some serious messages.

And contrary to the above-quoted claim, op-ed pieces and columns do not necessarily involve reporting at all. They are often opinion pieces based on news reports. Take a look, for example, at the lead editorial in today's Washington Post. It's about terrorism. Its content is unimportant from an eGullet perspective. But it is significant that it seems to be mostly an analysis of news reports. There's no actual reporting. I'm sure there was some fact-checking, which we do here at eGullet as well (though certainly not with the rigor of a fully funded international newspaper), but it's just an opinion piece that could have been written by any savvy writer who reads the newspapers and watches TV news. Is that bad journalism? Of course not. It's standard operating procedure.

But we should also be clear that yours is an entirely different argument from the one we've been hearing, and that you've answered a question with an answer to a different question. I asked for a source that says there's "anything wrong with writing a piece of social criticism about a chef without eating at that chef's restaurant." You answered with, in essence, "Tim's essay is bad journalism because he probably didn't read Adria's books or conduct any interviews." And maybe someone else will come along and say it's bad journalism because Tim isn't a professional food writer, or hasn't been to culinary school, or doesn't speak Spanish, or hasn't netted one of a thousand other red herrings.

[fresco]

You do actual reporting.  You get the quote yourself.  And if for some reason you can't, you make it clear, in big fat neon letters, that you are relying on someone else's reporting.  And you credit that someone else. 

This is particularly important in a column or an op-ed piece

Tim's essay is neither a restaurant review nor a news report. It is a piece of social criticism. A good comparison would be to the writings of someone like Dave Barry: he's a humorist and social critic who shoots from the hip and tries to entertain while delivering some serious messages.

And contrary to the above-quoted claim, op-ed pieces and columns do not necessarily involve reporting at all. They are often opinion pieces based on news reports. Take a look, for example, at the lead editorial in today's Washington Post. It's about terrorism. Its content is unimportant from an eGullet perspective. But it is significant that it seems to be mostly an analysis of news reports. There's no actual reporting. I'm sure there was some fact-checking, which we do here at eGullet as well (though certainly not with the rigor of a fully funded international newspaper), but it's just an opinion piece that could have been written by any savvy writer who reads the newspapers and watches TV news. Is that bad journalism? Of course not. It's standard operating procedure.

But we should also be clear that yours is an entirely different argument from the one we've been hearing, and that you've answered a question with an answer to a different question. I asked for a source that says there's "anything wrong with writing a piece of social criticism about a chef without eating at that chef's restaurant." You answered with, in essence, "Tim's essay is bad journalism because he probably didn't read Adria's books or conduct any interviews." And maybe someone else will come along and say it's bad journalism because Tim isn't a professional food writer, or hasn't been to culinary school, or doesn't speak Spanish, or hasn't netted one of a thousand other red herrings.

I don't see why all sorts of tests have to be applied to this piece, or any other piece, to determine whether it is "good" or "bad" journalism. It has a point of view sufficiently original and diverting to hold one's attention; it is written with some style; and it raises some interesting ideas. Isn't that enough?

[mags]

AGGGHH! Ok ok ok. Uncle.

[Fat Guy]

Okay, that does it. This is the last article I will read on Ferran Adria. Today.

[Andy Lynes]

Even assuming there's any legitimacy to the Restaurant Magazine list (on other threads we've discussed at length what was wrong with the methodology, and the notion that French Laundry outranks every Michelin three-star restaurant is rather nonsensical), it's nonethelss a ranking of top restaurants. This gets around to the same distinction I've been trying to draw all along: Tim's article isn't a restaurant review. Believing the food and dining experience at French Laundry is better than the food and dining experience at El Bulli is a position that, surely, is within the range of options for what a sane person could believe. But I don't think anybody is saying Keller is a more important chef than Adria from (as is the subject of Tim's article) the standpoint of influencing the concept of chef-as-artist.

Few living people ever dined at an Escoffier restaurant, yet we can have a perfectly intelligent discussion about Escoffier's role in culinary history. We don't attribute more weight to the opinions of people who happen to be old and rich enough to have dined at the Ritz in the Escoffier era. But the more imortant point is that were Escoffier alive and cooking today, dining at his restaurant would still be non-essential to a discussion of his stature, influence, and place in society.

So there!

I set 'em up, he whacks them out of the park.

[Fat Guy]

Okay, that does it. This is the last article I will read on Ferran Adria. Today.

In order to keep this promise, I waited 27 minutes and then re-read Robert Brown and Jonathan Day's first-hand account and analysis of their meal at El Bulli, published earlier this year. Then I checked in on the follow-up discussion in the Symposium and in the Spain forum. In addition, as you all might recall, Robert Brown wrote an exclusive report in the Symposium on his visit to the El Bulli "Taller" -- that laboratory where Adria and his team work during their six-month off-season to create the dishes for the following season. Run a search for topics on eGullet that mention Adria and you'll find that the number is in excess of 500. That's 500+ topics, not posts. Some of those topics mention Adria and El Bulli in passing, while others contain 100+ posts and represent the most significant English-language discussions about various aspects of Adria's work (including the important pastry work of A. Adria). And that's not to mention the content we've provided regarding Adria disciples like Grant Achatz, who is a heavily involved eGullet member and who has been the subject of TDG articles as well as a Q&A guest. I see Tim's article as yet another piece of Adria-related content that eGullet and its users have provided, and I look forward to providing diverse information, analysis, and opinion regarding Adria, El Bulli, and avant-garde cuisine for a long time to come. Perhaps one day I'll even eat there.

[MatthewB]

I set 'em up, he whacks them out of the park.

It's "I set 'em up, he knocks 'em over."

A bowling (ten-pins) metaphor.

[Andy Lynes]

Ok then, how about "I pitch 'em, he knocks them out of the park", a baseball metaphor.

(I should have known not to stray into sports talk, especially American sports talk).

[MatthewB]

Ok then, how about "I pitch 'em, he knocks them out of the park", a baseball metaphor.

(I should have known not to stray into sports talk, especially American sports talk).

I like "I pitch 'em, he knocks 'em over."

[Jinmyo]

Ok then, how about "I pitch 'em, he knocks them out of the park", a baseball metaphor.

(I should have known not to stray into sports talk, especially American sports talk).

Sticky wicket, what?