This was our book for book club last night. I liked it the least of anybody in my group. It's Ruth Reichl's account of her escapades as the restaurant critic for the New York Times, a coveted position she made sure to point out more than once. It was fairly interesting and moderately witty because often she dressed in disguise to avoid recognition so that she would get the "average man's" service. This, naturally, lead to some crazy situations.Why didn't I like it? I can't stand the snobbishness of that whole elitist industry. It seems that she is less pretentious than the previous critic, who wouldn't even go to a restaurant unless it was French. Reichl, at least, sought out a variety of exotic and ethnic restaurants run by "real" people, not just people with pretend French accents. Nevertheless I couldn't get past the gluttony and waste that is the basis for her job.
How can you write about meals where just the wine is over $100? the appetizers alone caused the death of 10 animals? the crab cakes were "subpar" because they didn't melt in your mouth? the total bill for that one meal would feed these children nutritious meals for two months?How can you write about the less than perfect treatment you received by the wait staff when there are children living on the street with no means of survival? who don't know when their next meal will be or from where it will come?
How can you go to sleep at night knowing that your stomach is full of exaggeration when others have stomachs touching their spines?
It's not Reichl's fault; there's a demand for this type thing and she's just talented enough or lucky enough to do this and get paid for it. At one point she briefly mentions, with what I would call thinly disguised guilt, the absurdity of it all. I'm glad I didn't buy this book; I borrowed it from the library. I think I'll donate the cost of the book to Oxfam or something.
5 comments:
You're right...it's so wasteful and unfair. The picture of the little boy sleeping on his parent's lap really upset me...maybe because he reminded me a little bit of Cyrus. :(
-Shirin
I wasn't even sure that was a parent, maybe it is. I thought it looked like an older sister, but you're probably right. It's a crime nevertheless.
So much tenderness of feelings, compassion, and kindness are captured in your post. The ugly injustice separating the haves and the have-nots! Curious, though, how the very existence of these tender feelings that brighten the hearts of people like you owe their existence to there being dirty rich and overindulgent people who have and don't share? How could you be compassionate if injustice did not exist? We all, then owe gratitude the haves. It is a sorry state of affaires that kind people like my wife and daughter never say nice things about the dirty rich for having been bestowed their capacity for kindness and compassion.
That's true. If dark does not exist there cannot be light. I would prefer, though, not to have this opportunity. I would prefer that compassion, equality, and justice were so far reaching that the opposites were unknown.
Let me also say, that it's the behavior I'm finding fault with, not the people. People are so complex. It may be those very veal-eating, caviar-eating people that donate their time and (perhaps) hard-earned money to the betterment of the underpriviledged.
It's interesting reading this blog posting. I agree with you mommy that it's so wasteful the way some people live. It's interesting that I've been a server at these types of restaurants and seen many of the people who order the $100 bottles of wine. They're usually the most unhappy and critical of life...but then again, not always.
Post a Comment