OK, I think you could do the Times job, too. Better? Jeez . . .

Nothing wow about it, though – those AOL clips aren’t anywhere close to what the Times would have for a restaurant review. They’re traffic generators!

They’re also not the job I was referring to above. I wrote those while I was still getting my Bachelors.

And I’m still right – that job at the Times requires a lot of specialized skill, so it’s probably tough to fill. That is what every single thing I said above supports. It’s tough work and it needs someone really good.

But you made a good point, too – that you’re kind of a dick for no real reason.

OK, Rachel, so this wouldn’t happen to be YOU who wrote these fru fru little reviews for AOL [see link below]. They seem to be filled with discussion of ambience, service and folksiness [which you just criticized above and I thought real food reviewers didn't do?] and read like trumped up marketing pieces.

I’m sure you’ll have a great explanation that will wow us.

http://search.cityguide.aol.com/tampabay/restaurants/captain-jacks-food-and-spirits/v-288536

I noticed a couple of things – first off, the really strong ones actually discuss the food *knowledgeably* so that people who aren’t foodies can learn and be entertained.

Secondly, most reviews are really amateurish. Waaaaay too many barely even hit the food in that much detail. There are observations of ambience and service and there’s a lot of folksy star-writing in them (get to know me, get to know me!). That kind of writing doesn’t belong in magazines or newspapers.

So, the first thing I realized was that restaurant reviews are hard to write. I spent a lot of time thinking about the writing mode and learning about what flavors I needed to be looking for in the meals and what words would describe them to a wide group of people without being *too* subjective, but also showing the personal consistency you guys are all mentioning.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the Times just really hasn’t found anyone qualified. I love doing it, but part of why I like it is because it forces me to really push my limits and learn about a complex subject. I’m lucky this particular mag took a risk on a novice food writer, because it is challenging work.

That being said Creative Loafing’s critic, with whom I ate at Oystercatchers for a review he wrote, did nothing but bitch the whole time we were there, but it turns out he’s one of the best food writers I read. He’s clever and his writing is clean and balanced and informed.

And it’s really about the food, not just what he thinks about the food, which is the real trick.

I came from a city that embraces food and places it in the center of all social events; a place where food is the topic of conversation. Tampa is such a melting pot of transplants who have emigrated from other parts of the country and Bay area still hasn’t developed its own culture. In Tampa, we have professional baseball, football and hockey; wonderful beaches and fantastic weather as well as our share of national acts (grand prix racing and air shows come to mind). On the other hand, art and food simply don’t take precedence. No negativity here; I just call it like it is.

So who is first, the chicken or the egg? Is it necessary to have a flourishing restaurant community in order to create excitement and the need for a critic? Or is it vital that a critic be in place to create excitement about food in order to stimulate the restaurant scene? Only time will tell.

I really appreciate weekly reviews by Brian Ries in Creative Loafing, but more often than not, I read about yet another place that I don’t have to spend my money in dining. Week after week, the verdict is generally lackluster and shows how disappointing and tough it is to find a great meal. However, his writing is realistic, down to earth and there’s rarely a hint of pretentiousness.

I was pretty dissapointed when I found out Chris Sherman named Roy’s as the best restaurant in the Bay area for 2006. He lost all credibility with me when he published that list. I was even more dissapointed several weeks ago when I dined at Roy’s and had one of the best meals in recent memory in Tampa. I was discouraged that I had to dine at a chain restaurant in order to get a consistent and great meal. Perhaps that is the direction we are headed, but I’d like to think the contrary. I enjoy reading Matt’s findings of neighborhood joints and am happy that he has continued writing. I may one day continue, but at this time I just don’t have the energy or the desire to write negatively about any local restaurant (I’ve had too many mediocre meals that I’d rather not report on).

Do we need a food critic? Yes, but how many do we need? Between the two local papers and Creative Loafing, are three critics too many? I think we DO need one at each major publication. We NEED people writing and talking about food and promoting local restaurants before our only choices are Chili’s, Outback and Bonefish Grill. I hope the St. Pete Times realizes this.

-Kevin

I don’t imagine we’ll be reading anything from Matt about French peasant style organ meats or other ultra foodie stuff, but I agree with those who think he’s doing a great job with what he does-consistent voice, calls them like he sees them, searches out the little neighborhood spots.