NYT correction re: Spice Market review

[bpearis]

Hesser is interviewed in today's Gothamist. Key word being TODAY. Here's a quote:

Well, once I was ordered to review a restaurant in Queens and the taxi driver didn’t know where that was. And nor did I. How we laughed. I ate at the deliciously Vongerichten-inspired Vong instead.

[badthings]

Irony:

...But my choice of best candidate for the job?

Amanda Hesser.

Okay. I HATE the Mr. Latte stuff. But:

She's not "bent".

She can write.

She actually knows what she's talking about.

She appreciates the fine works of Fergus Henderson.

All the above distinguish her as far far better a choice than any of the names being bandied about....

From the thread Bourdain started to criticize Marian Burros's interim reviewing.

A thankless job indeed, though that does not excuse the JGV fetish.

[Daniel]

Hesser is interviewed in today's Gothamist. Key word being TODAY. Here's a quote:

Well, once I was ordered to review a restaurant in Queens and the taxi driver didn’t know where that was. And nor did I. How we laughed. I ate at the deliciously Vongerichten-inspired Vong instead.

Get out of here. That interview wasnt real was it.. That has to be some type of april fools joke. She answered every question with a jean-georges story. Who wrote that?

[iain]

A rather amusing parody of a Gothamist interview with Ms Hesser.

Edited to say that it isn't really all that amusing.

Edited April 1, 2004 by iain (log)

[tan319]

Irony:

...But my choice of best candidate for the job?

Amanda Hesser.

Okay. I HATE the Mr. Latte stuff. But:

She's not "bent".

She can write.

She actually knows what she's talking about.

She appreciates the fine works of Fergus Henderson.

All the above distinguish her as far far better a choice than any of the names being bandied about....

From the thread Bourdain started to criticize Marian Burros's interim reviewing.

A thankless job indeed, though that does not excuse the JGV fetish.

Oppps...

[Fat Guy]

As soon as there is any business relationship, and writing a major blurb for one's book is such a relationship and, not in my view at all insignificant, it must be disclosed.

How is writing a book jacket blurb a business relationship? Nobody gets paid to write book jacket blurbs. After a book manuscript is edited and before it goes to the printer, the publisher sends galleys around to various big-name food people and asks for blurbs. Most of them don't even look at the book, or just read a few pages, and then write some bullshit blurb. Vongerichten probably just told his publicist to do it as a matter of course. It's no different from saying something nice about someone else in print, anywhere. If Vongerichten had given a magazine interview to Vogue and said "I think Amanda Hesser's book is really good," would she have to disclose that in her restaurant reviews? Of course not, even though Vogue goes to a million people and Hesser's book jacket is only seen by the eleven people who bought the book.

The burning question, though, is what happens if Hesser is still the interim critic when Cafe Gray opens? Will she be able to figure out a way not to mention who the chef is?

(Sam, if you move the other posts on this tangent, please don't forget this one, though I'd prefer it if you would disclose our, um, relationship first . . .)

[mjr_inthegardens]

If Vongerichten had given a magazine interview to Vogue and said "I think Amanda Hesser's book is really good," would she have to disclose that in her restaurant reviews? Of course not, even though Vogue goes to a million people and Hesser's book jacket is only seen by the eleven people who bought the book.

[mjr_inthegardens]

Hesser is interviewed in today's Gothamist. Key word being TODAY. Here's a quote:

Well, once I was ordered to review a restaurant in Queens and the taxi driver didn’t know where that was. And nor did I. How we laughed. I ate at the deliciously Vongerichten-inspired Vong instead.

That interview is hilariously insightful.

[Bux]

That "interview" is humor. By the second question it should be obvious that it's satire. for a moment though, I thought it was Hesser putting on the interviewer. After a while it gets a little too heavy and tiring.

[russ parsons]

i do seem to recall a conversation not too long ago someplace very near here about the ethical difficulties of restaurant critics having friends who are restaurateurs. apparently, that goes even for blurbers who are chefs. it gets to be a very complicated little world.

[Mayhaw Man]

I suppose that for me it all comes down to the readers ability to trust the reviewer to be objective. As there are so few "degrees of seperation" in the restaurant industry (and that certainly, in this day of Websites and Travel and Food Magazine proliferation goes much farther than just locale-so many chefs and food writers get around the country and see each other at industry events regularly that they all know somebody who knows somebody else) it is incumbent on the writers of the reviews to keep some kind of air of objectivity when doing reviews (some do and some don't). Surely something like this situation should have been disclosed (as it occurred recently and was bound to be noticed by many) and I am sure that she wishes she would have done it. On the other hand I believe that the reader should always read a review with a jaundiced eye (to some degree anyway) and get more than one opinion if a potential diner is going to give a place a "thumbs up" or "thumbs down" based on written reviews only.

Personally I would generally rather find out for myself. For example if I based my potential dining experiences on writers in the New Orleans Times Picayune (particularly when Gene Bourg was there, as our tastes are totally different) and stuff that I read on the web, I would have never gone to NOLA, a place that got absolutely mediocre reviews in the press (still does in some circles), but one that I like very much. I learned over the years when reading his pieces that he and I were looking for different things when we dined out and learned to read his excellent reviews to look for specific things that would appeal to me. Current Picayune critic Brett Anderson apparently have alot in common as far as dining goes, as I generally find that I like the same places that he likes.

Read the reviews and form an opinion-but don't knock it til you try it.

[Suzanne F]

Shouldn't it be the responsibility of the editor of the section to make sure that disclosure is there? Sifton (or whomever) had to have known that bit of information. I do not see it as an indictment of Hesser so much as of her superior. (But then, I also blamed the existence of the horrible "Mr. Latte" pieces in the magazine on the magazine's editor/s, too. Just as I blame him/her/them for keeping Jonathan Reynolds on to keep burbling out his egocentric nonsense.)

[Mayhaw Man]

I agree that it should ultimately be the editors decision to include or not to include information in a writers work (actually I don't agree with that at all as I am a writer and not an editor and have found myself on the short end of the stick more times than I care to think about ) but it is up to the writer (at least in the situations we are discussing here) to disclose possible conflicts of interest to the editor (many times, no matter the amount of editorial research done, there is no way for the editor to know about personal or professional relationships of writers). Inclusion is, I agree, up to the editor.

And incidentally, I am not indicting Hesser at all. Who knows? It may well have been an editorial error. I like to read her stuff. It may not be the deepest food writing ever done, but it can be very entertaining.

[Jinmyo]

It was satire?

[Pan]

A rather amusing parody of a Gothamist interview with Ms Hesser.

Edited to say that it isn't really all that amusing.

I thought it was...

[Pan]

I once reviewed a restaurant my husband was making desserts for and I said his tiramisu was mediocre. It was mediocre. He told me why it was mediocre, but that didn't matter to the readers. I was just doing my job.

He barely spoke to me for a week.

You have a lot of guts, Lesley!

[Suzanne F]

A rather amusing parody of a Gothamist interview with Ms Hesser.

Edited to say that it isn't really all that amusing.

I thought it was...

Sounds rather more like faux-Reichl. And not particularly well-written -- or amusing -- in any case.

(edited to be more negative, although less than the Gothamist piece deserves.)

Edited April 2, 2004 by Suzanne F (log)

[Marlene]

(actually I don't agree with that at all as I am a writer and not an editor and have found myself on the short end of the stick more times than I care to think about )

Ahem *cough*. Why then pray tell aren't you writing for TDG?

[Suzanne F]

(actually I don't agree with that at all as I am a writer and not an editor and have found myself on the short end of the stick more times than I care to think about )

Ahem *cough*. Why then pray tell aren't you writing for TDG?

Maybe he wants something more tangible than undying love and adulation by way of payment???

[Marlene]

(actually I don't agree with that at all as I am a writer and not an editor and have found myself on the short end of the stick more times than I care to think about )

Ahem *cough*. Why then pray tell aren't you writing for TDG?

Maybe he wants something more tangible than undying love and adulation by way of payment???

Didn't I hear the offer of quarts of yogurt from FG? What more could one want? Besides, there's something to be said for undying love and adulation. If he wants tangible, I could probably talk Jason into sending him a thong

Edited April 2, 2004 by Marlene (log)

[Bond Girl]

Today's page six is continuing the public flogging of Amanda. For the most part I agree with Lesley about keeping things separate. I once reviewed a restaurant where my insignificant other ran the kitchen, and I thought the food was over rated for what it's worth because the food was over rated. But, all our mutual friends just thought I was being a bitch.

[Mayhaw Man]

Actually I found the editors at TDG to be brilliant. Caring, friendly, and not too quick to hit the delete key. What a bunch of great people they are.

I am, however, still waiting anxiously for my yogurt.

An example of some of the fine editing available at TDG

[Fat Guy]

The Village Voice ran a piece on this issue today:

http://villagevoice.com/issues/0414/cotts.php

They didn't manage to find this thread, though. Only the one on the Spice Market review.

[bourdain]

OUCH!!

Mea culpa. And boy, was I wrong.

Hesser stepped into the shit fast, frequently--and big time.

Not disclosing that the chef of the restaurant you're reviewing lavishly blurbed your book when you're the critic for THE NEW YORK TIMES is a muuuch bigger deal than the usual log-rolling ( an offense, I should disclose here and now--of which I am myself frequently guilty*). By the standards of the Times , however, it's a serious "oversight". To argue that those standards have been "eroded" by Blair etc. or other perceived factors does not mitigate the facts.

The Times don't LIKE printing editor's notes. It's embarrassing for them. Fat Guy makes it sound like a vindictive public ass-whupping, a gratuitous humiliation of a loyal staffer.When the Times print an editor's note like that they know they open themselves up to the kind of controversy they try very hard to avoid

That they chose to publicly flagellate themselves (along with Hesser) is--to my mind, infinitely preferable to leaving that job to the Post or Poynter. So good, appropriate and fair--if late-- reaction by the Times in my opinion.

I agree with Fat Guy that the earlier "drink at Asiate but eat at Jean Georges" reference--and the Curious Case of The Disappearing Kunz are perhaps more fruitful ground for criticism.

In any case, I plead mea culpa in making the case for Hesser as permanent critic. In spite of the fact that she wrote a long ago piece for Slate which was less than charitable to Kitchen Confidential (something I guess I should also cop to here), and the rotten Latte stuff--and the apparent absence of any kind of a sense of humor, I thought she'd be good at the job, deserved it--would do it well.

She hasn't. The prose has been wretched. And the whole Vong affair, if nothing else, sure gives the appearance--if nothing else-- of being "bent".

I'm beginning to agree with the "get somebody from out of town" contingent. As long as it's not the San Francisco guy.

Appendix: Common Examples of Log-Rolling (and my varying complicity in same)

* You blurb me? I blurb you. ( Done it)

* I like you personally AND I like your food? I say so in print. Often. (Done it--often. Meant every word--but still.)

* You're my pal and my last meal at your place sucked? I'll probably shut up about it--unless it keeps happening. ( Done that too--but there's a limit)

* I owe you a big one but I hate your food. So I avoid the whole subject of your restaurant unless pressed. ( Yeah..I hate when that happens. I'm sure I've done it.)

* Become friends with you AFTER I've reviewed your book--or written about your restaurant--not having known you before? ( This, too has happened)

Conclusion? I should never write restaurant criticism for ANYONE--much less the Times. In fact, if I write ANYTHING on restaurants for the Times, my copy should be looked at extra hard by editorial staff (as it has been). Or my relationship to subject loudly and explicitly made apparent in print. (As has happened).

Hesser was a bad choice.

I backed the wrong pony.

Edited April 7, 2004 by bourdain (log)

[Fat Guy]

Dude, even though I think you're nuts, you're still going to blurb my book, right?