Article on Rachael Ray

[lperry]

In this morning's New York Times: (register for free)

Being Rachael Ray: How Cool is That?

Though the nation's food elite might cringe, Ms. Ray, 37, is one of the most influential people cooking today. Let the big-name chefs fuss with foams and sous vide. She'll stick with hot dog nachos and "jambalika," a dish that is kind of like jambalaya. With more than 4 million books in print and four shows on the Food Network, Ms. Ray has shown America the way back to the kitchen.

Are you cringing? Or are you happy that more people are cooking because of her influence?

In the four years since, with not much more than her outsize personality and tenacity, Ms. Ray has built an empire. She has nearly 4.5 million books in print, a $6 million book contract with the Random House imprint Clarkson Potter, and four shows in regular rotation on the Food Network. In addition to "30 Minute Meals," she cooks with celebrities on "Inside Dish" and offers inexpensive food travel tips on "$40 a Day." Its companion, "Tasty Travels," went on the air in August. In the network's 12-year history, only "Iron Chef America" had a debut with higher ratings.

Is all the hate mail just sour grapes?

-Linda

[Mayhaw Man]

Sour grapes. Everybody loves to hate a winner.

I don't watch her (actually, after 7 weeks without TV and just getting it back, I just realized that I haven't even turned on the Food Network-not much there for me anymore, I guess). She's not doing anything that I (or 99% of you) can't do, and I find all of that chirpiness a little irritating, but I kind of feel like if she gets a few people into the kitchen, and out of the drive through line at Taco McNuggets, well, I guess that she is kind of doing a service.

I have to say I've only seen her cooking show and one single episode of the $40 a day thing. That one was in New Orleans and was, for a local, excrutiating. I suspect it might be that way when she comes to anyone's town and you are forced to watch her.

On the whole though, I guess if people are watching her cooking show and heading into the kitchen she is probably doing some good, somehow.

[Gifted Gourmet]

"She's opportunistic, but not in a planned way," said Ms. Dullaghan of Sur La Table. "I don't think she'll sell her soul to the devil, but I think she sees opportunity and goes for it."

I think there is less of the "accidental" falling into things than it appears on the surface. She has had some good breaks but she has talent, humility, and knows how "to work the room" ... smart woman!

[lperry]

I found this quote particularly significant.

"She's so not stressful at all," Ms. Baker said. "I love those other TV chefs, but I would never make what Mario Batali makes. I don't have veal cheeks."

[redglass]

After seeing the photo the times put of her in the print edition (the entire space above the fold), I feel sorry for her. I'm cringing- because if I were her, I'd be irate over that horrible photo.

Yeah, she's kind of perky and happy, but what's wrong with that? I've never cooked any of her recipes, but if she opens people up to getting in the kitchen and trying out new things, then more power to her.

[Gifted Gourmet]

After seeing the photo the times put of her in the print edition (the entire space above the fold), I feel sorry for her.  I'm cringing- because if I were her, I'd be irate over that horrible photo. 

←

I doubt that RR spends much time in the Land of Irate actually ... but she did manage to terminate some of those who worked for her, or so the article mentions ... can one be perky and irate in the same breath?

[Megan Blocker]

Agreed on the photo - it seemed to me that it was definitely meant to catch her in a way that exaggerates her perky, loud-mouthed personality. Perhaps a bit of editorializing via photograph? Or something to spark conversation - I find it unflattering, but maybe other people like it? Kind of like the woman herself.

I agree with the general sentiment of people who've replied so far - I am very impressed by Rachael Ray's business acumen, though a little tired of seeing her everywhere (over-exposure is always a danger of great success, no?). I have always said and will say again that she presents cooking in a way that is accessible to the masses, and I like that about her. For the most part, her food is healthy, solid, and relatively yummy - and affordable to make, which is important to the vast majority of people in this country (who don't want to spend money on, say, veal cheeks).

Is she a little grating at times? Sure. But at least she advocates fresh herbs and cooking from scratch when possible.

[Rinsewind]

Ok, so I'm currently at a conference (American Folklore Society), and several people are mentioning some article either by or about Rachel Ray, supposedly in the NY Times in the last day or two. Her "office" apparently contacted one of my colleagues about it before it appeared. Curious about what the Times might possibly have to say about Rachel Ray (or what she might have to say that would get published in the Times) I searched for it on their website, and haven't turned up anything. Anyone know about this? Since my paper mentions Food Network, I am making an effort not to appear unduly ignorant to my colleagues.

Thanks in advance for any assistance you can give...

-Rinsewind

[dmede]

You're probably not finding the article because you've misspelled her name. It's Rachael Ray. Search for it on nyt.com, and it's the first story that comes up. Basically, it's a review of Rachael Ray's rise from Macy's countergirl to talentless multimedia superstar.

[Michael Ruhlman]

it's a good article, on the money.

[tommy]

for some reason the New York Times is interested in a media (TV, books, and who knows what else in the future) star that has amassed a fortune rumored to be in the 6 million range and who has sold hundreds of thousands of books and has a multi-million dollar contract on the table, all in a few years with no real "training." go figure. i wish i were as "talentless".

[Rinsewind]

You're probably not finding the article because you've misspelled her name.  It's Rachael Ray.  Search for it on nyt.com, and it's the first story that comes up.  Basically, it's a review of Rachael Ray's rise from Macy's countergirl to talentless multimedia superstar.

←

D'oh! Yep, there it is. Thanks for the help!

[JohnL]

Her talents are as a communicator.

They are estimable and there is little debate over her effectiveness.

She has a passion for food and cooking and communicates this well.

I believe that the endless criticism of her is focused upon what she is NOT rather than an appreciation/recognition of what she IS.

Most everyone would agree she is not Charlie Trotter or Thomas Keller in the serious foodie credential area. Nor does she possses the dry wit and literary skills of Anthony Bourdain. One certainly can't fault her for claiming to be either.

What she does do is turn on a lot of people to cooking and food who might otherwise not be. (they may move on to appreciate more "serious" levels or they may not.)

She is at the entrance --drawing people into a very large and growing funnel of culinary appreciation.

I agree with Mr Ruhlman--the article was well done.

Edited October 20, 2005 by JohnL (log)

[dmede]

for some reason the New York Times is interested in a media (TV, books, and who knows what else in the future) star that has amassed a fortune rumored to be in the 6 million range and who has sold hundreds of thousands of books and has a multi-million dollar contract on the table, all in a few years with no real "training."  go figure.  i wish i were as "talentless".   

←

Yeah, well, Paris Hilton is richer than Rachael Ray, but I don't think any of us would call her talented except at self-promotion. Clearly, Rachael Ray is doing something right, but I'm not sure it's related to any talent other than marketing.

[rich]

Clearly, Rachael Ray is doing something right, but I'm not sure it's related to any talent other than marketing.

←

And marketing is what it's all about. She has found something that works, has fun at it and is hugely successful- all of us should be so lucky and talented to achieve that goal.

Edited October 20, 2005 by rich (log)

[Rinsewind]

I knew when I brought this up that I was risking another Rachael Ray discussion-- I think there's a thread about her not too far below this one. The article seemed fairly straightforward to me, basically descriptive with some attempt to contact people, such as publishers, who have not worked well with Ms. Ray. As a folklorist/anthropologist, I guess I'm not so concerned about whether or not she's an energetic young woman guiding people who wouldn't otherwise cook into cooking, and therefore fine, or some huge blight on the food world. I guess I'm more interested in *why* she is so popular, and also why she is so bashed. As for amassing a fortune, Lord knows I will never amass one as a professor, so I say mazel tov to her while wishing I were good at something more lucrative than teaching 18 year olds and writing academic articles (both of which I enjoy greatly, but it would be nice to make some money for a change...).

[dmede]

And marketing is what it's all about. She has found something that works, has fun at it and is hugely successful- all of us should be so lucky and talented to achieve that goal.

←

Fine. Perhaps I was not precise enough in what I was saying in my first post above. She has talent, but it's not cooking talent. I am an amateur cook, aspiring to improve. I don't learn anything from watching her cooking shows (let alone her travel shows).

I don't begrudge her her success. She's found something that works and is happy with it. I do begrudge that I can't turn on the Food Network without seeing her. I don't enjoy anything she does, but to each their own.

[rich]

I am an amateur cook, aspiring to improve.  I don't learn anything from watching her cooking shows (let alone her travel shows).

←

Depending on an amateur cook's level, she can help, but that's not the true purpose of her shows. She's there as an entertainer who knows her way around a kitchen in an "everday" sought of way. The travel show is pure entertainment and people enjoy watching her.

If she's too simple at your level, there are a few shows on the Food Network that might help (Brown, Mario and some of the Moulton re-runs) and many more on the PBS stations. If TVFN programmed just for teaching, it would have been off the air in six months or less. A wide audience and varied demographic base guarantees sponsors that guarantee income etc, etc.

Edited October 20, 2005 by rich (log)

[jgm]

I'm always a little disturbed at the criticism of Ms. Ray. All things to all people, she's not. But the niche she occupies is an important one.

I've written about this before, but it's an excellent illustration of why her show should not be dismissed away. Not long ago, I sat at a meeting and heard another woman describe chicken breasts cooked with instant rice and canned mushroom soup as "real food" (as opposed to frozen Pizza Rolls, Hamburger Helper, and other concoctions that are all too often a mainstay of the American diet). Believe it or not, much of America cooks that way. Or worse. eGulleters would probably collectively roll over and die if we all really knew how many people eat the likes of squirt-cheese-on-a-cracker and call it dinner.

Rachael's ingredients are, for the most part, fresh. She is a transition out of Box Dinner Hell and into a world of much better food. Perhaps her recipes aren't the kind of thing that makes a foodie's heart flutter, but she's a dramatic and helpful step up for a home cook. I have many, many friends who have a guilty look on their faces when I tell them I cook only 'from scratch'. They'd love to, but they don't know how. They also don't think they have time, in between hauling the kids around to extracurricular events, keeping the house clean, and working a full-time job. Rachael Ray is the very person who can help non-foodie America cook and eat better. Somebody who is used to stocking up on Rice-a-Roni isn't likely to start watching Mario Batalli's shows, and using his recipes, without some sort of transitional experience.

Her show was never intended for people like us. But the people in niche she occupies, need what she has to offer. How else would anyone make the transition from Hamburger Helper to beef bourguignon?

Edited October 20, 2005 by jgm (log)

[R Washburn]

I thought she came off very well in the article. Definitely humble and aware of her lack of training or education.

It was interesting to read that her infamous magazine layout in FHM was done at the behest of her employers at the Food Network. It certainly seems to have widened her fan base considerably.

[JohnL]

Well said Rich.

Media is all about communication.

Back in the seventies Carl Sagan was not anywhere near the pre eminent astronomer of his day, Many "serious" astronomers joked about him and mocked him-- but he was the one who was on the Tonight Show and other media and he is the one who sold millions of astronomy books. Why?

He was able to communicate obtuse theories and principles in an entertaining and easy to understand manner.

In the end he was good for astronomy.

The fact is most people are happy with Ms Ray--they like her and respond to her--they will not go on to appreciate food at a higher level and find those shows on PBS.

some people will be introduced to cooking by her and will move on.

In the end she is good for cooking and food appreciation.

As to exactly why she is so succesful?

Hard to say.

No one has quite been able to figure out why Ed Sullivan was as succesful as he was or many others.

I can say that Ms Ray has a girl next door quality and is attractive but in a non threatening way.

She has those ellusive qualities that make for a TV star.

Is she everyone's cup of tea? No--but she obviously has a very broad appeal.

If we are looking at the advancement of culinary awareness and the arts then she is as important in her own way as Thomas Keller is in his.

[russ parsons]

i look at rachael ray as a kind of foodie gateway drug. some of the people who start out watching her may move on to shows/books, etc., that i find more "serious." for that, i say good for her. too often in food we tend to look at things in ways that are so absolutist that they allow room for the one or two perfect instances and everything else is garbage.

personally, i think it's kind of cool that someone cute and young and lively is even interested in cooking. that's quite a change from when i started 25 years ago and most people seemed to regard the kitchen as a prison of soul-destroying drudgery.

[Jinmyo]

Rachael Ray is the Ed Sullivan of food? The gateway drug of food? The Ed Sullivan on drugs of food?

That is sooooo kewl.

[robb]

There is tension in just about every field between the views and interests of the cognoscenti and the views and interest of the general public. Someday maybe a new food channel will be created especially for foodies. For now, we have Food Network and they are interested in making money. Whether I or anyone else likes it, Rachael Ray makes them money. Lots of money.

[docsconz]

Rachael Ray is a person who can inspire people who are interested in food, but have limited time to go cook a meal rather than order out. She is the "everywoman" on tv. She also happens to live in the same part of NY that I do. I am happy that a local has made good I have never met her, although I have seen her at one of my favorite food places in Saratoga - Mrs. London's.