Reminder: Submit Your Restaurant Review

The restaurant in The Palace Hotel (37.7880° -122.4019°) in San Francisco, California, United States. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Chris:

Tara:

Sarah:

Greta:

Nick:

Jeremy:

Quin:

Lonny: 

Links to Some Pete Wells Restaurant Reviews

He has fun.

Structure in Restaurant Reviews

Chronological method is effective in that it’s easy for the reader to follow, but it always seems a little amateurish, at least to me. One of the disadvantages in the method is that it encourages clutter – “and then the hostesss showed us to our table.” That is, you fall into storytelling mode and include bits that really don’t tell you useful information about the restaurant. Better reviewers usually focus on the points they want to make and don’t present them chronologically because that can waste valuable space and fog the emphasis of the review.

Of course, once chronological order is abandoned, it can result in an “elusive” structure. That is, we aren’t quite sure why the information is presented in the order it’s presented. Some reviews do seem to be exercises in “nut graf” structure. There’s the lead that grabs us by the nose, and then there’s the nut graf making several key points, which are developed in that order. And some reviews do have the feel of the old inverted pyramid structure, as if the points of criticism were presented in order of descending importance. And in other instances, the structure seems purely associational, which does give such reviews a kind of casual, conversational quality.

Bottom line: Understand what sort of structure you are using or – having “jumped into” writing and having come up with a structure that works – be able to explain why you think it works.

Reviewing Ethics Tweaked in 2013

This is from an LA Times Magazine article.

The AFJ’s previous set of guidelines insisted that food criticism be done anonymously or not at all. Today’s revision to the rules includes an understanding of the fast pace of internet news and blogging, and tips on how food writers can compete while still following a journalist’s code of ethics. The new rules also acknowledge the difficulty of staying anonymous in this, the age of the smart phone camera.

Besides basics like not using their own name, paying in full for their meal, and visiting a restaurant multiple times in order to taste as many dishes as possible, here are a few other highlights from the new guidelines for restaurant critics:

 “Reviews should be conducted as anonymously as possible… However, true anonymity is often no longer possible. In that case, critics should engage in the practice of anonymity. Ideally, that means keeping all photos and social-media profiles photo-free and restricting public appearances.”
“Installing caller ID blocking on one’s phone, maintaining a separate email account for communication with the restaurant, and maintaining one or more identities on restaurant-reservation sites is recommended.“

“If a restaurant critic is recognized, or accompanied by a person known to the kitchen, and the restaurant sends over free food, request that the cost of the items be added to the check. If such an incident occurs, it should be acknowledged in the review.”

Naturally, we reached out to our own restaurant critic, Patric Kuh, for his take on the rules. Though he acknowledges that we live in “complicated times,” Kuh says he agrees with the suggestions and abides by them (and others, as set forth by Los Angeles magazine, which are meant to protect his anonymity, allow him to avoid bias, and effectively complete his task). On anonymity, Kuh says, “Of course, I have been recognized, but that’s why it’s really important to pay for everything that you eat.”

On the other hand, this can get pricey for a blogger: “…when I see a picture of a blogger with their arm draped around the shoulder of the chef whose restaurant they are reviewing, I wonder how they can call it a review. Some bloggers hit it right… but that, I imagine requires a lot of money. Many others seem compromised in some way or other.”

Here's a link to the new guidelines.

---

Playing with Language for a Restaurant Review

* It is the kind of restaurant you might expect to find in ____________________.

* Red wine spilled on the table cloth like___________________________.





     * The waiter stared at me as if I ___________.

* The lone tomato sat on top of the salad like ___________.

 


* The choices on the menu reminded me of the day my mother ___________________________.


* After I mispronounced the name of the wine, I imagined my face going the color of___________________________.


* A USF student in a fancy restaurant _________________ is like a _______________ in _____________________.

* A USF student in a fancy restaurant is like a Jesuit in a_______-_____.





* My date drank the lemonade as if ___________________________.




* Music flooded the restaurant  like___________________________.

* The steak tasted as if _____________.

* The eye of the fish stared back like ______________.



Alternative: Settle on the most memorable moment in your restaurant experience, which could be the taste of something or the cost of something or the sound of something or the smell of something.   Finish this sentence with a metaphor:

The (memorable experience) was __________________.

Example. If the chopped salad was Beethoven's Eighth Symphony, the vindaloo was Marvin Gaye's "Let's Get it On."

The new book is here!

Thinking about the Structure of the Restaurant Review

Chronological method is effective in that it’s easy for the reader to follow, but it always seems a little amateurish, at least to me. One of the disadvantages in the method is that it encourages clutter – “and then the hostesss showed us to our table.” That is, you fall into storytelling mode and include bits that really don’t tell useful information about the restaurant. Better reviewers usually focus on the points they want to make and don’t present them chronologically because that can waste valuable space and fog the emphasis of the review.

Of course, once chronological order is abandoned, it can result in an “elusive” structure. That is, we aren’t quite sure why the information is presented in the order it’s presented. Some reviews do seem to be exercises in “nut graf” structure. There’s the lead that grabs us by the nose, and then comes the nut graf making one key point or several key points, which are developed in the order presented in the nut graf. And some reviews do have the feel of the old inverted pyramid structure, as if the points of criticism were presented in order of descending importance. And in other instances, the structure seems purely associational, which does give such reviews a kind of casual, conversational quality.

Bottom line: Understand what sort of structure you are using or – having “jumped into” the writing and having, without planning, come up with a structure that works – be able to explain why you think it works.

Checklist for your Restaurant Review

1)    Do NOT write your review in chronological order. That is, don’t begin with a bland description of the outside of the restaurant or of the hostess taking you to your table. Begin with your most striking idea from the whole review somewhere in the first three sentences. Almost certainly that won’t be the first thing that happens during your visit. That doesn’t mean you can’t begin with a vivid description of the interior – which you will have taken the time to study - if those details support your main point, if it goes somewhere.  Consider this student lead from a couple years ago:

At first impression, you might think you’d walked into a glorified soup kitchen, which isn’t half wrong. Tommy’s Joynt doesn’t have any menus or servers, and there’s a sign above a barrel of pickles that reads, “Enjoy the pickles. But please only take what you can eat – when you buy something.” The walls are covered with old beer signs, paintings of horses, and any other kind of memorabilia that has been stuck up since 1947. Yet all these distractions fade when hungry customers lay their eyes on Tommy’s meat.

Tommy’s is a meat market. People line up, look at the wall of meat options, and watch as a guy with a giant knife cuts healthy portions of all types of meat onto a plate. There’s bratwurst, knackwurst, lasagna, spaghetti with meatballs, buffalo stew, and of course the bbq turkey sloppy joe. You feel like you’re  in a 1950’s school cafeteria. All meals are served on a tray with options of rice, mashed potatoes, beans, and any other side that can be scooped out of a metal tub.

2) At the end, list the basic consumer info: address, telephone number, hours of operation, reservation policy, price range, credit card policy, dress code (if any), noise level and so on.

3) Give me some sort of grading scale and use it to evaluate the restaurant. Here’s an example.

Three margaritas out of four

El Toreador:

50 West Portal Avenue

San Francisco, CA 94127

415.566.8104

Credit Cards: All major

Entrees: $8.75-14.95

Drinks: (Beers and margaritas are about $4.00- a little pricey)

Atmosphere: If you go early (around 4:30 pm for dinner), you can hear your conversation.  After 5:30 pm, forget about it.

Service: Friendly, but a little prompt.  Dishes came faster than I could eat them.

4) Tell me how much your meal costs item by item.

Thursday's Class Assignment

Arts Reviewing Assignment for Thursday:

 Prepping for the Restaurant Review

1)   Bring a restaurant review to class to present accompanied by brief remarks on why you like or dislike the review. In particular, I want to know what you learned from it, positive or negative, about how you should approach your own upcoming restaurant review.

2)   Which restaurant or restaurants are you interested in reviewing? Why?