New York Times

[tommy]

Ok,

Now i agree and disegree with some of the stuff said. What nagatti said was very true about a profetional cook being a critic. We are far to critical about to many small things. The one point he made about her being a cia grad im not sure about but i heard she was an english major of some sort.

To answer jhlurie a very good is an average rating i dont think anyone would be popping the bubbly for a very good an excellent maybe.

To TCD how close are you with tye chef of SHI? I got that information from one of his close friends.

If anyone gets to read the review i think the first part of the review is what bothers me the most. Its all a fabrication. This women didn't even know that the seabass was an endangered fish and was being boycotted. But in her review she talked about how she and her friends were so concerened if they should order it or not because it would be wrong to order it but it would be wrong to deprive them selves of the most interesting dish on the menu. All a big fat bunch of BULL.

By the way when do reviewers go out to eat with more the 4 people. She said she was with like 7 or something. That didnt make sence either to me. And if the menu is so cluttered with entrees and your there to review a place what the hell is all the fighting about how many people will order the bass?

Thats right there is what really gets under my skin and the fact that i think the restaurant is better then very good.

yikes. i don't know where to start. if i hear about someone's undergrad degree in this thread again i'm going to burn my engineering degree to ashes and admit to the world that i know nothing about dining. clearly i'm clueless...like that movie with that pretty girl.

[John Whiting]

For me, the most interesting question hasn't been answered: Why did the restaurateur name his restaurant after a Peter Cook and Dudley Moore routine, in which they deliberately chose the most ridiculous name they could think of?

Those unfamiliar with the sketch will find the complete text at: http://www.davehitt.com/july99/frogskit.html

[Steve Klc]

I might as well be the person to ask Chop: you seem to have "heard" alot of things, you're searching for friends you have working all over the place at restaurants you can't seem to spell properly, you betray the confidences of these anonymous friends like you're Deep Throat, and you speculate amongst these friends that you have many stories to tell.

But do you actually "know" anything? Are you capable of communicating something as mature and thoughtful as ngatti did in this thread? Or contribute as rozrapp or jhlurie did with specific credible information about the issues at hand here?

I'd like to ask you if as a professional cook--as you supposedly are--how would you critique yourself? Do you enjoy your work, do you enjoy what you do and your lot in life? Do you wish you went to college and got an undergraduate degree in English? Have you ever connected with your customers and in that moment--from the glint in their eye as they've tasted the first bite of your food--known that you are doing what you are meant to do? Have you ever been proud to call yourself a chef?

If so, and taking into consideration your problems with the written word, what makes you think you're in any position to critique a food writer? You haven't given me any indication you understand food--and if you don't understand food how could we take your comments seriously about others?

Bourdain has shown all of you battered bitter line cooks the way--if you're going to talk tough you have to walk the walk. Don't talk around issues, don't speculate--lay it on the line and be honest and direct. Don't cast aspersions and don't hide behind the veil of anonymity.

In other words--know what you are talking about and come strong to the plate. As far as I'm concerned, you're missing the pitch by a mile.

There are some interesting issues here that have arisen out of your post, like the differences between the Times coverage of NJ and NY restaurants. The lack of online access to these reviews so any of us could read what you're so upset about for ourselves. (If you have copies of these reviews--did you ever think to quote a few of the passages which upset you so much?) The vagueness of review criteria in NJ as it relates to review criteria by Grimes in NYC. The possible role of the Times in maintaining the perceived second-class status of New Jersey fine dining restaurants in comparison to NYC restaurants of comparable aims. That Cook isn't as talented a writer or as knowledgeable a critic as the NJ dining scene deserves. (I have no idea because I can't read the damn reviews online.)

What I see instead are feeble, speculative, hearsay attempts to tar and feather a reviewer, while remaining anonymous yourself. I also see that you're positioning yourself and the restaurant where you supposedly work now by demeaning and casting aspersions on other restaurants like the Ryland Inn. And that's too bad.

You don't gain by diminishing the achievement of others. You gain by doing the best work possible each and every day and reflecting thoughtfully on that work.

[Rachel Perlow]

Klc, you really hit the mark with that post. Bravo!

[tommy]

Klc, you really hit the mark with that post.    Bravo!

i've noticed that rachel is just looking for reasons to use her new smiley faces this morning.

[lizziee]

klc,

Double Bravo. You have succinctly put what we all have been thinking.

[Rachel Perlow]

i've noticed that rachel is just looking for reasons to use her new smiley faces this morning.  

Aw, shaddup you "sick...hayseed"!

[chopjwu12]

Listen here steve,

The only thing i am prouder in my life then being a cook was being a college baseball player. i dedicate my life to my profetion and im good at what i do. When haven't i been honest and direct. I voiced my opinion on lies that were told by the food writer. If you read all the post you would see that i did quote a couple lines from the review in the last post. Oh and if you went to the member bio section you would find out where i work because its right there. Then you would also see how i praise the food at the ryland inn and all the other restaurants i talked about. I dont think restaurant nicholas is better then any other restaurant in NJ. All the restaurants ive been talking about are preety much on the same level. So dont sit there and ASS-U-ME im trying to put another restaurant down.

By the way how do i betray the confidence of my friends. Im standing up for my friends at the frog and the peach.

[tommy]

college?

[Courtzzz]

Hooked on Phonics?

[Fat Guy]

Chopjwu12, have you asked your friends whether this is the kind of sticking-up-for that they want? No doubt you're familiar with the phrase: "With friends like you . . ."

[chopjwu12]

maybe your right fat guy. Maybe im to young and have to much piss and vinegar running through me. So this will be my last post about the subject. The rest of the egulleters can share their opinions on the matter.

[SobaAddict70]

*sigh*

The Ghost of Christmas Past has struck again, methinks.

Btw, I like quiche.

SA

[TCD]

To TCD how close are you with tye chef of SHI? I got that information from one of his close friends.

I can almost assure you that the facts of this story have been significantly alerted in the re-telling.

[Jinmyo]

I noticed Rachel's smileys too, tommy.

[Lady S]

I too was surprised by Karla Cook's review. Not because she only gave a very good, it is after all an opinion and she is entitled to hers, but because she stated that she was with a party of 7. How can anyone possibly taste each dish and still find the dish in question in perfect condition. Simply to examine each plate to see the arrangement takes time, let alone taste every element on every dish. The last three would surely be cold and possibly congealed. Perhaps she made a mistake in the number of people with her, or possibly she asked their opinion instead of tasting everything herself. What do you all think?

The New York Times Jersey section used to give stars. It changed about 15 years ago because the powers that be in Manhattan thought that people might confuse the stars given to restaurants in New Jersey with their so much better Manhattan counterparts. (Their words not mine, and implied rather than stated) Incidentally, all of the regionals, Westchester, Long Island and Conecticut are not allowed to give stars anymore.

[John Whiting]

Btw, I like quiche.

I found joy

I'm as happy as a baby boy

With a brand new kind of choo-choo toy

Since I ate my quiche lorraine...

[PaulaJ]

Wilfred,

If you'd enjoy a smile at the expense of the NYT, look at

today's paper. There is a picture of Sharpe James with

the caption, holding his hand over his heart. The only problem

is that he has his left hand on his right chest!

[Jason Perlow]

From David Corcoran:

Hi, Jason ... feel free to post this on the site if you wish ...

Greetings. Jason asked me to respond to this thread. I'm not going to get into a discussion of a specific restaurant, but I'm happy to try to shed light on a couple of factual questions.

The Times has two New Jersey restaurant reviewers, Karla Cook and me. We alternate Sundays, so neither of us is the "lead" reviewer. The division of labor is geographic. She concentrates on Central Jersey and I concentrate on the north, and we divvy up the Shore.

As for stars: they appear only on reviews of New York City restaurants in the Dining section on Wednesdays. We don't use them in any of the regional weeklies -- New Jersey, Connecticut, Long Island, Westchester. Haven't used them since the late 1980's, when we switched to one-word ratings (good, very good, excellent, extraordinary). I wasn't here at the time, but I can guess that the top editors felt that the star system should be reserved for the Lutèces and Four Seasons of the world.

Best, David Corcoran

[jhlurie]

I noticed Rachel's smileys too, tommy.

ew. Gross.

[goodngood4u]

chopjwu:

I wouldn't condemn a food writer for not having any formal food background.

???????!!!!!!!! Are you serious? I've read Mr.Corcorans reviews and I'm always scratching my head as to why he is a food writer for the New York Times. A bad review from the NYT is not damaging because its ego deflating, its bad because it could ruin your busines, and that's the reality of it and that's the power of it. Peoples livelihoods are at stake when a review is posted and i think more respect should be given to that.

[Jason Perlow]

chopjwu:

I wouldn't condemn a food writer for not having any formal food background.

???????!!!!!!!! Are you serious? I've read Mr.Corcorans reviews and I'm always scratching my head as to why he is a food writer for the New York Times. A bad review from the NYT is not damaging because its ego deflating, its bad because it could ruin your busines, and that's the reality of it and that's the power of it. Peoples livelihoods are at stake when a review is posted and i think more respect should be given to that.

Quite serious.

[Fat Guy]

goodngood4u: If you have something specific to say about what you think is wrong with one of David Corcoran's reviews, by all means say it. If your complaint is legitimate, I'll be the first one to join you in having it be heard loud and clear. But thus far you've said exactly nothing substantive, and I can't imagine why you think a restaurant reviewer should be trained as a chef. Restaurant reviewers are not chefs and chefs are not restaurant reviewers. There is no formal training program -- no Ph.D. -- in restaurant reviewing. Not to mention, not every chef goes to culinary school. It's not about degrees or formal study; it's about the quality of your work.

[tommy]

Peoples livelihoods are at stake when a review is posted and i think more respect should be given to that.

i'm missing the part where there is no respect being given. can you expound on that a bit?

[jhlurie]

I'll post this as an outsider of any inner circle--someone who has met and spoken with Mr. Corcoran, but only casually.

He doesn't pretend to be something he's not. He seems grateful to be doing what he's doing and it's my impression that he approaches it that way. Seriously, but not claiming to be more than he is--a person who is an educated man, with a good palate, and a capacity to ask questions when needed.

Whether that is true for all food reviewers is a greater issue. The power to make or break a restaurant is certainly a heady one.

But in a way the Times, particularly the Jersey section, is a bad target for this type of criticism. The Times just doesn't have the ROOM to print that many bad reviews. Usually if a restaurant isn't somewhat worthy they don't even get near it. There have to be exceptions, I suppose, but someone getting a bug up their ass about a GOOD or VERY GOOD is STILL really weird, unless the place in question is trying to imply that they supply four star service.

Also, I've been thinking about the potential problems of having people with formal food backgrounds as reviewers. One in particular--ego.

The knock you always hear about book and movie reviewers are that they are just failed novelists and directors who are jealous of their betters. Would we want those type of assertions to be leveled against every restaurant review printed in The Times? (I'm sure a few people already make that criticism, but how much worse would it be if the reviewer actually WAS a failed chef?)

Discuss amongst yourselves.