Texas Monthly Restaurant Reviews

[fifi]

Our own Robb Walsh reviews an Italian restaurant and doesn't particularly like the sauce.

A tide of jamlike red sauce splashes over the cuisine at Terra Bosco's

Ok... Reading along... well written revew... enjoying Robb's writing as usual... THEN...

But I can't ignore the place anymore, because Terra Bosco's was recently named one of the top ten new restaurants in the state by Texas Monthly. The magazine's restaurant critic, Patricia Sharpe, included only new restaurants in her annual roundup, which she calls "Where to Eat Now." Why on earth would she rank Terra Bosco's fourth in the state in this category? In an interview on the Texas Monthly Web site, Sharpe credits the magazine's Houston reviewers with keeping her in touch with the local scene. Then she adds, "I have to say that we also depend heavily on press releases from the restaurants."

Here is the interview that Robb referred to.

Wooo Doggies! Maybe I have been spending too much time under my rock. Words fail me. Let us discuss with our usual eGullet candor.

[Mayhaw Man]

Now this is the kind of review that I can get behind. Talk about not "mincing words"-

According to a press release from the restaurant, "Richard White's secret 16-ingredient meatballs have made quite an impression, as has the lasagna (anything with the red sauce really)." A brick dropped from a six-story building makes quite an impression, too. But don't let your face get in the way.

I bet his keyboard sounded like an AK-47 as he was slapping out this piece. Rarely have I seen a thrashing that was more fun to read. It looks like he did his best to make sure that he was fair (3 visits, many dishes, some of them several times).

Thanks for the link Fifi.

[Mudpuppie]

Hmmm. I trust Robb Walsh's opinons on food more than most other reviewers, and I always enjoy reading his pieces. I found this one over-the-top, though. The food was bad, consistently. Point well made. But is it fair to connect the horribleness of the food with the stupidity of the cooks' wardrobe? To me, that just smacks of extreme criticism, and it's not really something that belongs in a restaurant review. If nothing else, it just proves that he wants to slam the place.

And part of the reason he seems so invested in slamming the restaurant is the Texas Monthly review. I mean, come on, is it just me, or is Texas Monthly geared to Junior Leaguer cognoscenti wannabes? IMHO, the only reason it's a "serious" publication is that it's the only Texas-interest magazine that's distributed statewide. They haven't cornered the market -- they are the market. They still have the occasional hard-hitting political article, but good journalism isn't the focus anymore. Rather, the magazine sells itself to new-money Texans who are probably disproportionately interested in NY fashion trends. It sounds like this restaurant would be perfect for the average TM reader.

You can't perfunctorally trust the restaurant recommendations (or literary recommendations) of a magazine that features bluebonnets on the cover at least twice a year.

Edited February 21, 2004 by Mudpuppie (log)

[Mabelline]

I've always read Texas Monthly for Skip Hollingsworth stories: I've a slight aquaintance with him, and he's very good at crime stories. But it amazes me that they are sent up here without being polybagged, and I still get them.

Edited February 22, 2004 by Mabelline (log)

[fifi]

So... What is not to like about bluebonnets? They are pretty.

I think the point is that Texas Monthly has a distribution much wider than just Texas. I read the stats a couple of years ago in some article in our newspaper business section and was really surprised. I just find it pitiful that a magazine such as that would put up with this kind of nonsense from a reviewer. The fact that they "depend heavily on press releases" for this kind of feature is unsupportable. After all, it isn't the first time that they bombed on a high profile annual feature article.

It looks to me that Robb chose to invoke the "3 strikes and you are out" rule. After all, he did say that it was so bad that he wasn't going to revew it, until the feature came out. I have a lot of respect for Robb's reviews and he does NOT dump on a place unless they are a truly deserving dumpee. I talked to a friend this afternoon that went there basis the Texas Monthly feature and was going... "WTF? And what is with those silly bandanas?" (No. He had not read Robb's review.) Sounds like Robb nailed it.

[Mabelline]

Yeah, and why'd it take her 3 days to go from Austin to West Texas, eat, and come back? And then decide it wasn't worth writing up? Then she picks a top 10 by their publicity releases...

[fifi]

Yeah, and why'd it take her 3 days to go from Austin to West Texas, eat, and come back? And then decide it wasn't worth writing up? Then she picks a top 10 by their publicity releases...

Good summary. Oh the burdens of actually eating in a restaurant before we put it in the annual list. What in the hell do you do for 3 days going to West Texas from Austin? Hell... Austin to San Angelo doesn't even consume a six pack.

[John Whiting]

Do Texans select their top chefs the way they select their . . . STOP RIGHT THERE!

[Mabelline]

Well, fifi, she did admit the staff at the hotels knew her by name. Hmmm, mebbe she was wringing that expense account pretty dry. Then she woke up one day, looked at her palm pilot, and found out,eek, deadline for the ten best is due tomorrow. So what the hey, those p.r.s sounded real good....This is all speculation, of course....

Edit to add: Go ahead, John, nobody'll bite you.

Edited February 22, 2004 by Mabelline (log)

[fifi]

Mabelline... I think you are gettin' close. And they PAY this person to destroy their credibility?

[Mabelline]

We won't be speculating no further, will we? I say let's start a write-in campaign to get R.W. that job. I hear they pay good.

[Richard Kilgore]

I liked Robb's piece and find nothing unusual about the negative review including the comment on the odd attire -- after all reviewers usually comment on the decor and ambience. I think, however, people are assuming some things that Patricia Sharpe was not necessarily saying in the brief piece linked above. She said she relied on their Houston reviewers and press releases. Okay, that's not so unusual in and of itself. Every media outlet gets releases and relying on them for an heads up about a new restaurant opening is no big deal. My reading of the situation is that part of the problem was waiting until the last minute to check them out. It's not clear (but it may be in the "Best New" piece in question) whether she visited each place on her final list, and whether she visited them three times. Three meals at one restaurant could account for a three day trip to West Texas. We don't know, do we?

The larger and more puzzling question is how her views have been the opposite of other reviewers in this case and others. Best vs terrible is not subtle. Watery pasta and sweet gloppy red suauce is not subtle.

[fifi]

The larger and more puzzling question is how her views have been the opposite of other reviewers in this case and others. Best vs terrible is not subtle. Watery pasta and sweet gloppy red suauce is not subtle.

And is this also true of the other nominations that bombed? I think I see a trend here.

[Mabelline]

You are right, Richard, and it does smack weird, maybe that's what is prompting our hen peckin' session. It just ain't right somewhere, almost like eating the same things in two different restaurants. And R.W. did give them more than a fair chance, to me.

[John Whiting]

Edit to add: Go ahead, John, nobody'll bite you.

I was going to say, the way they select their rodeo stars.

[Mabelline]

No that's a stop watch, not a coin.

Edit to add, fifi, 3 days to West Texas and back to Austin sounds like a bar bounce to me.

Edited February 22, 2004 by Mabelline (log)

[Jaymes]

Three meals at one restaurant could account for a three day trip to West Texas. We don't know, do we?

Hey, maybe the lil' gal just likes cowboys.

[Pickles]

But is it fair to connect the horribleness of the food with the stupidity of the cooks' wardrobe? To me, that just smacks of extreme criticism, and it's not really something that belongs in a restaurant review. If nothing else, it just proves that he wants to slam the place.

I agree. That was going a bit far as was:

Brandishing their whisks and spatulas in their white jackets and colorful sweatbands, they look like a band of sissified pirates.

I think he's got some other "issues." That are NOT about food. Nothing worse than a thick, sweet "Ragewwww" like pasta sauce, though! And slathered on all the dishes...bleh!

[Mabelline]

Perhaps the reason R.W. went so far out about the uniforms, is on account of that's how Pat Sharpe started her paean to a #4 restaurant, to wit: "The guy prowling the dining room of Terra Bosco's in a chef's jacket with a rolled bandana around his head is owner Richard White, and judging by the smears of red sauce on his jacket, it's not for show."

So it seems to me that R.W. might have accentuated that aspect in order to point out how her article had started.Don' know. But it made sense to me...

[Richard Kilgore]

Never mind....

[fifi]

I am really just wondering how there could be such a discrepancy in reviews repeatedly.

[Mabelline]

To me it all kind of boils down to this: as she has done previously with a couple of top picks, Ms. Sharpe has chosen a restaurant (that another well-respected food critic tried three times, and was more dismayed each time) as #4 in a state as big as Texas, for cryin' out loud. And now people are disputing her judgment. And, for what it's worth, her meal there was sauteed red snapper with a lemon-chive butter sauce,topped with lump crabmeat and grilled oyster mushrooms. Dessert was tiramisu.

Her closing remarks: "Of his name, White says,"Doesn't sound Italian, does it?" Could have fooled me. "

So I still feel R.W.'s review was indeed frustration that once again, she is making some real odd picks.