Restaurant reviews are dead. Long live restaurant reviews.
Restaurant reviews are dead. Long live restaurant reviews.
And - try this doughnut!
Restaurants are struggling. Newsflash, I know.
Where does that leave restaurant reviews, guides and awards?
In the UK, The Observer’s Jay Rayner announced that his wouldn’t be publishing negative reviews for the time being, and in Hong Kong, Susan Jung’s reviews have been replaced with an opinion column on the goings on in the F&B industry. Even before the pandemic, Soleil Ho of the San Francisco Chronicle had begun to move the needle with her socially-conscious writing, and ruffled some feathers with her less than glowing review of SF institution Chez Panisse. Have we arrived at a tipping point in restaurant reviewing? (Along with every other institution in the world. If you want to skip this whole reviewing thang, jump to “What I’m reading” for a little about another, much more important institution that needs an overhaul).
Like most contemporary reporting, the “classic” restaurant review, be it in a periodical or a guide (say, the Michelin), largely aspires to be objective. “Serious” reviewers or media outlets will have certain guidelines that they believe help with that, such as paying for their meal, making bookings anonymously, eating at the same restaurant multiple times, not visiting a newly opened restaurant, donning elaborate disguises, and so on. But as Dean Baquet, the executive editor of The New York Times said on Longform [1], “objectivity is a goal”, and probably the hardest to achieve in the type of restaurant criticism described above, where it is literally the account of the experience of one person, with no other sources by design.
Yet, there’s that old trope that reviews can “make or break a restaurant”. People assume that means the ability for them to attract or deter potential customers, but it goes beyond that. The cultural importance ascribed to reviews (much to my disdain – I wish people wouldn’t take reviews so seriously) means that they become a part of the CV of everyone who’s worked there, they affect investment in restaurant projects, whether a landlord wants you renting their property, whether you can hire good talent… In short, a review becomes part of your reputation and identity as an individual as well as a business. All this, on one person who comes to eat at your restaurant a few times.
Being on the other side of the fence, I’ve often defended myself and “my” industry – media – by having the foremost goal of serving the reader. “Service journalism” has a bad name for being dull, but I think about it as a way of helping people discern where they should go to part with their hard-earned cash. It’s a noble enough goal, and while I still believe it’s a necessary one, I no longer believe it’s worth anyone’s time nor column inches to do that in that traditional review format that omits: a) context of what else in happening in the world (aside from the smart-alec quips that are typical of this genre) – from food supply chains to social movements, and b) any commentary from decision-makers directly involved in the restaurant, such as the restaurateur or chef.
No good reporting happens without an acknowledgement of context and information from quality sources – given that restaurant reporting has such lasting consequences (a clipping lasts forever), why should they be any different?
My mind has now wondered into opinion columns, and whether reviews have a place there [2], or if people don’t actually give sh*t (if my life were a word cloud, “food” and “media” would be so big, I’d be able to see them even without my glasses on (I have myopia, I’m -5.) I also love bad analogies). Send me your thoughts. [3]
What I’m reading
Doughnut Economics by Kate Raworth, which argues that the neoliberal school of economics (what most governments, banks, schools, financial reporters, and anyone who touched Econ 101 assume as the only school of economics) and its obsession with concepts such as GDP growth, market equilibriums, and the “rational man” are hugely flawed, and proposes another model – the Doughnut, which is defined by our basic needs in the inner circle, and the planet’s environmental boundaries as the outer circle. When we dip into the doughnut hole, or shoot beyond the outer edge of the deep-fried ring, we encounter problems such as malnutrition and hunger, destruction of natural forests and climate change. Although published in 2017, it could not be more relevant in a time of money printer go brrrr – if there was a time to rethink how our economy works and who it actually serves (spoiler alert: not us), it’s now. Beyond her own model, Raworth (an economist doing research at both the University of Oxford and University of Cambridge) shows that there are myriad ways of thinking about the economy, and has, at least the very least, introduced me to myriad uncelebrated thinkers.
A statement [PDF] signed by over 100 scientists globally regarding the use of reusables in light of Covid-19, which states:
“Single-use plastic is not inherently safer than reusables, and causes additional public health concerns once discarded”.
The pandemic is not an excuse – whether you’re a F&B operator or an individual heading out for your morning coffee – to not use reusables. Implement normal hygiene measures and carry on. Most disposables are not recycled and just add to already mounting landfills (I could go on, but I assume you know). I cannot emphasise this enough: reduce at the source.
In Apple Daily Hong Kong (link, in Chinese) there was an article about a farming course now available in Hong Kong where you’d end up with an accredited qualification. That’s pretty cool, but the strange thing was the angle – the headline said it was a good skill to have for migrating to Western countries. It was pretty sad to think that people who were never interested in farming at home would consider it for a HKD 20K/month salary in say, Canada.
This brief tweet (below) from chef Mark Best (one of Australia’s most well-respected chefs, who Netflix viewers might recognise from The Final Table, paired up with Hong Kong’s own (well, via London and Australia etc.) Shane Osborn.) It was a very short exclusive in The Australian, the country’s national broadsheet regarding chef Jock Zonfrillo (of Restaurant Orana in Adelaide, and one of the current hosts of MasterChef Australia) and his foundation (also called Orana…), allegedly having embezzled funds in the name of promoting Indigenous Australian ingredients. It made a sliver of the front page, but I haven’t seen much reporting since, which is shocking, as it concerns not only government funding and prize money from the Basque Culinary World Prize, but also calls into questions the funding of culturally sensitive projects to people who are actually of that culture (like, duh?), in this case, Indigenous Australians, instead of a white saviour. In his Instagram Stories, Best has been sharing some of the contents of Instagram DMs sent to him (censoring the senders’ details to protect their identities) in response to the story (mostly to say how dodgy Zonfrillo they think he is) but at this point it’s all gossip. Why aren’t the Aussie food media all over this? If you’re working on this story, feel free to ping me and I’ll definitely keep an eye out.
Things I ate
A government-issued white bread sandwich with processed chicken slices and cheese, at the Asia World Expo temporary quarantine centre (which everyone arriving by plane in to Hong Kong is taken to). It tasted great for Proustian reasons – I hadn’t had this combination of flavours and textures since primary school. (See above: context matters!) But just one measly sandwich for a 10-hour wait? Just another example of Hong Kong Government being blind to what its people want. (I’m trying to be funny, okay?)
A completely dairy-free, gluten-free seafood chowder at Tuppence Cafe in Dunedin, that was rich, creamy and perfect for the 4C weather (that I miss terribly as I sweat in my room while under quarantine, despite the air-con). I regret not asking them how they made it.
If you were forwarded this newsletter and found it worthy of your inbox, consider subscribing.
[1] an hour+ podcast where he, exec ed since 2014 and the only Black person ever in his position, discusses his leadership of the NYT in the context of current events. Highly recommended listening if you are interested in the inner workings of this powerful institution.
[2] I’ve always wondered why Chinese-language newspapers in Hong Kong don’t have restaurant reviews in the same way that English ones do. They’ve always had restaurant coverage, but they function as features or “reviews” by columnists who, these days, have mostly been invited for complimentary meals at restaurants.
[3] If you have thoughts about restaurants giving out free meals for coverage, or “bloggers” asking for free meals etc. Let it be known that I’m past that debate and not only do I not care what individual restaurants/people choose to do, I don’t care about your opinion on that either. (Although I do love a chuckle at the occasional screenshot with some shameless begging). The reality is, restaurants are as in control here as any other business – if you want to give out free meals as a marketing cost? Do it. If you don’t believe in doing that? Don’t do it, and work out a marketing strategy that is in line with your values.