Sticks and Stones
A lot of people have been calling out Amanda Hesser lately. Last week's review of Spice Market has foodies and bloggers up in arms. Eurotrash wrote the most scathing rant to date, verging on the personal in her typical holier-than-thou style. Gawker couldn't help but keep the ball rolling. Lockhart Steele weighed in with a somewhat more subtle parody. E-Gullet head honcho Fat Guy tersely trashed the Spice Market review, and other e-Gulleters chimed in accusing Hesser of everything from logrolling for her buddy Jean-Georges Vongerichten to insulting the Spice Market kitchen staff to compromising the credibility of both herself and the Times. Felix of felixsalmon.com tried to defend Hesser, but somehow couldn't help descending into backhanded criticism.
It's entirely likely that another review will come out tonight and that the Hesser-bashing will resume in earnest. And before that happens I figured I'm entitled to add my two cents for anybody who'd bother to take notice. I say: Leave Amanda Hesser alone.
Some have suggested that Hesser is a novelist trying to walk the walk of a critic, and stumbling at just about every step. Obviously there is little agreement on what food writing in general -- and the Times restaurant reviews in particular -- should look like. Ultimately, though, there's enough information out there that Hesser's reviews are not going to be the final word on a new restaurant. So if she wants to set a mood with flowery prose at the expense of providing the nitty-gritty information that many foodies are looking for, I think that's a choice she and her editors are entitled to make. Hesser's reviews smack of travel journalism, which is ideal for people who will probably never set foot in Spice Market or any of the other restaurants the she reviews (presumably the vast majority of the Times' readership falls into this category). The genre has a value in its own right, whether or not it's the most suitable format for a restaurant review.
Most (but, to be fair, not all) of what I've read about Amanda Hesser this past week is transparently rooted in either jealousy of her position at the Times or resentment of the power that comes with that position. I think it's rather petty. Many of Hesser's critics may believe themselves to be superior writers, or to have deeper knowledge of food and the restaurant scene, and they may very well be right. But savaging her reviews on that basis, parsing them in a search for the slightest misstep, comes off as sour grapes. Writing, like dining, is a matter of taste. Disagree if you will, but let's be civil about it.
Comments
I couldn't agree more. Sure, I get annoyed at flowerly/fluffy reviews that don't really tell me anything about the food. BUT, writing (yes, even food writing) is one person's expression. If she wants to wax poetic and just gloss over the food...that's her option.
Why does she do it? Who cares? That's between her and her editor.
Writing, like eating, is a matter of taste when it comes right down to it. You could take me to the single best sushi spot in the world...and I'd not enjoy it that much because I'm allergic to shellfish and dislike most other fish. Does that mean it's a bad restaurant? No...and I'd never dare say so.
Posted by: LT | March 30, 2004 04:29 PM
right on. the only complaint i ever had about mrs. hesser is that she went through a period where all we heard was tad this and tad that. but i suppose that could be jealousy too.... in its own slightly frightening way. haha, but she's not so bad after all.
Posted by: timo | March 30, 2004 10:47 PM
Chris and I both really liked the review. Ms. Hesser's writing had sort of gotten on my nerves a bit after the cohesive arc of the Tad Friend story ended. But the last two reviews renewed my membership in the very-happy-to-read-her-stuff club.
On another note, I have been surprised lately by both the praise and the critism on eGullet. Increasingly, I am disagreeing silently with which ever way the forum is leaning... This is just one of those times, I guess.
Posted by: emily b. hunt | March 31, 2004 12:09 AM
Apparently, much of what Amanda Hesser writes is rooted in ass-kissing important restaurateurs: http://www.nytimes.com/corrections.html
Posted by: Josh | March 31, 2004 04:42 PM
Yes, many on e-Gullet also pointed out the Jean-Georges/Mr. Latte connection. Hence my reference to logrolling. I don't think it establishes that Hesser is an ass-kisser; my understanding is that she and Vongerichten are friends. Does it disqualify her from giving an honest review of a J-G restaurant? I don't think so. It would have been nice if this information were disclosed up front, but it seems that most people who follow NYC restaurants and current food writing already knew about it. The thing is, these are exactly the people who are denouncing Hesser, and I think it's just more evidence that they're affirmatively looking for reasons to pick on her. Again, it seems pretty petty to me.
Posted by: Jeremy | March 31, 2004 08:03 PM
I agree with you on this one. I really don't have a problem with Hesser.
I do admit to a love-hate relationship with e-gullet. Whlel some of the dialogue is terrific, too often it sinks into clique-y, snipe-y, snobiness. And this is a perfect example of that.
Posted by: Amy | April 2, 2004 10:18 AM
Thanks for your even keel views on Amanda Hesser's writing. Love her or hate her, she's living her dream and some people are jealous of her. If she was fat, ugly, and repulsive, people would make fun of her for just that. But she's not!
Posted by: Dave | April 9, 2004 09:11 PM