Reading that long thread on tourist restaurants (see Manhattan) and all the issues that were raised gave me a knot in my stomach. If we have to judge a fellow posterwith courtesy, hopefullyI think more appropriate criteria might be the depth and breadth of their tastebuds and how well they can verbally express that experience, not where they were born. Whats up with all the fuss about where and when people arrived on the sceptered isle of Manhattan? What does it have to do with food?
When I read a post from a guy who asks for only mild soft cheeses at a good French joint, he doesnt get the same level of interest from me as someone who is hotly pursuing the best hotdogs in the country and carrying wasabi to fishing docks. Mild-Cheese and I are not into the same thing. Someone who can ably dissect the sweet/salt/sour/aromatic/bitter balance of a perfectly executed dish and also knows what went into it is invaluable, whether they were born in Flatbush, Omaha, or Kenya. Id like to here anyone elses opinion on this, but I think that content and context about food are the heart of the discussion here. Im amazed at the amount of venom people are willing to expend on whether someone has the right creds. To me, their creds are evident in how they write about food.
And its not enough to say, That thing was okay, Id go back. It was really good. Blah blah blah. For all the eating going on, too few posters get into Why something was good or bad or mediocre. Using words like good or bad or okay or excellent doesnt cut it. If that kind of post were a meal, itd be dry white meat chickenwhat kind, how was it cooked, I dont know. I want to know what the thing described is like and also against what ideal that judgment was made. There are a few notable exceptions on the site, of course, who set the standard.
I read for the food and because I live in the culinary wasteland of Columbia County, NY, and I seriously envy the folks who can dash out for a roti or a samosa. So how bout some gravy on that chicken?