Knives Out
September 5, 2016 3:14 PM   Subscribe

Ian Parker writes about The New York Times' restaurant reviewer: Pete Wells Has His Knives Out
Previously, previously, previously.
posted by Joe in Australia (20 comments total) 7 users marked this as a favorite
 
I enjoy his snipey reviews but Pete Wells admits directly in the primary link that his entire life is a lie: he is recognised, and gets higher quality dishes and more attentive service than most other patrons. Therefore his good reviews cannot be trusted, though his negative reviews will remain accurate. But shitty restaurants don't need to be reviewed by the New York Times because that's what Zomato, Google and Yelp are for. With everything becoming automated and millions across the world losing their jobs to robots and Word macros, Pete Wells' only function is to say: because of who I am, I got a pretty good steak at this place that nobody else can get into.

On the other hand, viewed as entertainments, his pieces are pretty exemplary. The summary, then: breezes.
posted by turbid dahlia at 3:22 PM on September 5, 2016


There is no such thing as a restaurant reviewer for a major publication that isn't recognized 90% of the time.
posted by slkinsey at 4:00 PM on September 5, 2016 [4 favorites]


That's why I always wear wigs to restaurants. The staff assumes I'm Ruth Reichl.
posted by roger ackroyd at 4:14 PM on September 5, 2016 [14 favorites]


MetaFilter: always wear wigs to restaurants.
posted by hippybear at 4:18 PM on September 5, 2016 [6 favorites]


I would love to be mistaken for a reviewer and get the five star treatment for once in my life.
posted by Dip Flash at 4:25 PM on September 5, 2016


Actually, the article suggests that this "five-star treatment involves nervous, overly solicitous servers and delays in getting your food because it's being fussed with in the kitchen. Doesn't sound all that appealing.
posted by neroli at 4:31 PM on September 5, 2016 [4 favorites]


Wells has also learned to avoid taste-related adjectives: his quintessential description of a plate of food is a list of ingredients coupled to an emotion. Writing about Mr. Donahue’s, in Nolita: “The chard was cooked with a little garlic and lemon and bread crumbs. The crab tasted of mayonnaise and Tabasco and had been browned and warmed inside a heavy foil dish in the shape of a crab shell. I spread it on saltines from a crinkly cellophane wrapper and ate it with the sensation of having found something I’d lost such a long time ago that I’d forgotten about it.”

That style of restaurant review seems problematic for a number of reasons. I have no idea whether good food or bad food would be more likely to evoke that particular emotion from Wells, much less whether a particular dish would get the same response from me. Certainly restaurant reviews are by nature subjective, but this approach would make the subjectivity even more prominent than it would be otherwise.

I guess good food is probably more likely to produce good feelings that bad food in general, but at the level of specificity described here, I suspect the connection is too attenuated to support a genuine review of the food as food. Given that it's often quite difficult to pin down the source of an emotional state, this doesn't seem like a reliable strategy for accurately accessing the quality of a restaurant.

I also wonder at the versimilitude. Does Wells really recall, hours later, such detailed emotional responses? Especially given that his practice is to each in company of others. Can he accurately screen out all the social interaction going on during meals and definitively link what he was feeling at any given time earlier that night to the food he was eating when he felt it?
posted by layceepee at 4:58 PM on September 5, 2016


Does Wells really recall, hours later, such detailed emotional responses?

Did Proust really remember all those things just by smelling a madeline?

I jest.

Really, someone who has been writing restaurant reviews for a long time I sort of trust them to know what they are doing. Just like I trusted Roger Ebert to be able to write about movies. It's what they do, and professionals who have practiced what they do for a long time should be able to do what they do. If he were brand new to the restaurant reviewing game, I'd have such questions. But someone this seasoned? Yeah, he is able to recall those things even with the distractions.

Remember, he won't review a restaurant without eating there at least 3 times. It's not like it's a one-and-done thing.
posted by hippybear at 5:24 PM on September 5, 2016 [4 favorites]


Remember, he won't review a restaurant without eating there at least 3 times. It's not like it's a one-and-done thing.

Do you think the crab made him feel like he was finding a long-lost forgotten something every time he ate it? Or just 2 out of 3.

And I get that you're kidding, but Proust was writing fiction.
posted by layceepee at 5:49 PM on September 5, 2016 [1 favorite]


I would love to be mistaken for a reviewer and get the five star treatment for once in my life.

This happened to us during an entire London trip, in certain Mayfairy parts of town we got sealed in separate rooms, our drinks comped, special courses from the chef, really comically obsequious service, which was all very strange and unusual and we had no idea why (but accepted the free drinks, obviously)

We later found out my husband is a DEAD RINGER for a son of the member of the house of Lords. I wish I knew that going in, we could've Talented Mr. Ripley him.
posted by The Whelk at 5:53 PM on September 5, 2016 [10 favorites]


This was a really good read.
“I’m very reluctant to break the fourth wall,” Wells had said to me earlier, speaking of restaurant staff. “But I wish there were some subtle way to say, ‘Don’t worry!’ ” He sighed—he often sighs—and added, “I can’t honestly say that. Because sometimes they should worry.”
I found this all deeply fascinating and I strongly identified with Wells for some reason. This provided a lot of insight to his reviews.
posted by Ivan Fyodorovich at 6:26 PM on September 5, 2016 [3 favorites]


This read almost like an ethnography to me. This is the kind of thing where the New Yorker really shines, that ability to bring you into a recognizable but slightly alien world, and show you around. This is less about Pete Wells and how he writes reviews, and more about this rarified, insular, somewhat bizarre world of fine dining in NYC.

Also, I really want those Szechuan-flavored french fries.
posted by lunasol at 9:12 PM on September 5, 2016 [7 favorites]


My husband was mistaken for this reviewer a while back. We got extraordinarily good service, and the server finally asked us if that was who he was. We were sorry to disappoint.
posted by Peach at 5:10 AM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


I would love to be mistaken for a reviewer and get the five star treatment for once in my life.

You don't need to be mistaken for a reviewer to get special treatment. You just need to me known to the house. One of the best ways of doing that is to be a regular, or frankly to simply be on their radar by being interesting and interested. Good restaurants make and keep notes on customers and those notes are shared among other restaurants in the same ownership group. This is why if you like your after-dinner tea extra-strong, for example, you will get it that way automatically in any restaurant in the Union Square Hospitality Group. OpenTable didn't start out as a way of making online restaurant reservations. It was (and is) a way for restaurants to manage their reservations and also to keep notes on customers. Even if it is a restaurant you haven't visited before, there is a fair amount of turnover in the industry and if you frequently eat in fine dining restaurants there is a good chance you will be known to someone in the front of house staff. I ended up getting the super soigné treatment at Per Se in its earlier incarnation as a result of being recognized by the front of house staff, despite never having been inside a Thomas Keller restaurant before.

But no, if you never go out to fine dining restaurants you are unlikely to get special treatment that one time you do. The service and food should still be excellent, of course, because you're paying top dollar for them to be excellent. But it's not really like that guy at the other table who is getting three extra courses in the tasting menu is getting them "for free." A better way of thinking about it is that he pre-paid for that special treatment by spending a lot of money and establishing relationships in fine-dining restaurants.
posted by slkinsey at 5:27 AM on September 6, 2016 [6 favorites]


You don't need to be mistaken for a reviewer to get special treatment. You just need to me known to the house.

I've had the "you're a regular" special treatment plenty of times, from surprise extras from the kitchen to drinking shots with the staff. All you need for that is to show up a few times, tip ok, and not be an asshole, it's not a hard bar to hit. But I've also seen the type of special treatment that gets bestowed on a visiting food celebrity, and that is entirely another level. It probably is draining and boring to get that kind of service every time, and if you are even a tiny bit empathetic you would pick up on everyone's stress, too, which could bring down an evening. It would be fun to experience once, but not as a routine thing.

As others have said, it's a really interesting article and Wells came across as thoughtful and aware of the weight of the reviews. He talks about tending to not give many poor reviews, choosing to stop eating at those places rather than write the reviews, which gives additional power to the occasions when he does write such a strongly negative review.
posted by Dip Flash at 5:44 AM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


The chard was cooked with a little garlic and lemon and bread crumbs. The crab tasted of mayonnaise and Tabasco and had been browned and warmed inside a heavy foil dish in the shape of a crab shell. I spread it on saltines from a crinkly cellophane wrapper and ate it with the sensation of having found something I’d lost such a long time ago that I’d forgotten about it.

I don't know how useful this is as a restaurant review, but I like his style of writing. Enough that I think he should stop being a restaurant reviewer, and start writing about hard-boiled private eye fiction who conducts most of his interviews in restaurants, instead.
posted by Jon Mitchell at 6:01 AM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]


There is no such thing as a restaurant reviewer for a major publication that isn't recognized 90% of the time.

I found it interesting that Wells appears to lean into it so much, with his friend saying that they should recognize Wells and comparing it to Van Halen's famous brown M&M rider clause as an example of attention to detail.
posted by Etrigan at 6:19 AM on September 6, 2016


Enough that I think he should stop being a restaurant reviewer, and start writing about hard-boiled private eye fiction who conducts most of his interviews in restaurants, instead.

As she settled into the booth, the waiter greeted us with a trio of small plates: an amusing salmon croquette, two shining slivers of smoked trout, a dollop of crab leg meat and mayo. "That's on the house, Sam. You shouldn't be such a stranger all the time."

"Thanks, Mac. Ask Pierre to go easy on the paprika just this once."

Mac grunted like a butcher working a primal as he backed away, always a pro. I turned my attention to the tall glass of water seated across from me.

"So, how can I help you, Miss?"

"It's Missus, and it's about a man."

Isn't it always. "Husband?"

"No. Candy. Candy Corn."

Of course it was. Candy Corn. Sweet, insipid, palate destroying. It seems like a good idea at the time and you tell yourself the last time it was probably a flukey batch, maybe, just a stale bag that was left on the shelf overlong. Something that looks so right can't possibly be so wrong, and you grab a handful and stuff them into your mouth and your teeth settle into the waxy sweet, and it's like a memory of a bad mouthful of stale corn syrup you have forgotten and were glad to be rid of and why have you done this to yourself yet again. "I want you to tell me all about it, but let's enjoy this trio first."
posted by notyou at 7:50 AM on September 6, 2016 [12 favorites]


The big thing of his negative reviews is that he HATES it when guys start to cruise on their reputations, whether that's Keller for over-the-top gourmet-experience, Chang for delicious whimsy, or Fieri for honest tasty American fare.
posted by MattD at 8:08 AM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]


^lol^
posted by Stonestock Relentless at 8:19 AM on September 6, 2016


« Older Lean wit it, rock wit it   |   She achieved "a new era of harmony between women... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments