Restaurant reviewers Terry Durack (Sydney Morning Herald) and Jonathan Gold (Los Angeles Times) discussed their modus operandi at a Talks & Thoughts session at Crave Sydney’s International Food Festival.
Both review anonymously – or as anonymously as possible when your photograph is in circulation – and make bookings under pseudonyms. Gold used to go by ‘Ron Davis’ or ‘George Greed’, the name of his algebra teacher in high school; Durack used to assume the names of the streets nearby where he lived: “trouble was by the time you got to the restaurant three weeks later you forgot what street you were,” he said.
But that’s where most of the similarities end. Gold, who in 2007 became the first food critic to win the Pulitzer Prize, tends to visit a restaurant four or five times before writing a review. Newspaper restraints in Australia mean Durack visits a restaurant twice, if he returns a third time it’s at his own expense. Here are edited excerpts of their thoughts on other restaurant reviewing tricks of the trade.
On taking notes
Gold: “I take notes when I get home. I have a very good food memory … it might be pathological. I don’t remember people. If I talk to someone today I will not remember who they are tomorrow. But I remember food.”
Durack: “I do take notes. I don’t hide the fact that I’m writing. Most people think I’m actually working, I’m doing some homework of some kind. They don’t know that I’m reviewing the restaurant. It’s quite amazing, but true. We used to take a little tape recorder and I used to put it into my wife’s handbag and we’d talk into it … ‘oh, I see the lasagne is $12.65’. Trouble is once you’ve done two and a half hours in a restaurant, then you’ve got to do two and a half hours transcription and it takes forever … so it’s notes now.
“Also I used to draw every dish. I’m not the world’s greatest artist and I’d go home and look at the drawing and say ‘what was that?’. I love little cameras, no flash, nobody knows you’re doing it, you’ve got the shot and you can just remind yourself of all those little nuances on the plate and that makes my life easier.”
On striking a balance between positive and negative commentary
Gold: “I decided earlier on … that [negative reviewing] was part of the experience that I didn’t enjoy that much.When you become a critic of a certain level in town a bad review will shut a place down so I used to save it for things.
“The idea is to write a review, especially if it’s going to be negative, that is going to be insightful, that is going to be something that could almost be used as something that someone would hire a consultant to do.”
Durack: “Insightful, not spiteful, is what you should be aiming for. Working in London for almost nine years, they are experts in absolutely crushing chefs with their words … While A.A Gill is a magnificent writer, as is Giles Coren and all the others, I just think sometimes our job is not to tell people what not to eat, our job is to tell people what to eat and I just think the English critics sometimes aren’t doing that enough.
“The restaurants that get hurt are in the in between layer. Usually the ones right at the top end have got a reputation, they’ve got a chef who’s been around, but the strugglers in between who’ve just spent all their savings, they’ve hocked the house, and they get a bad review and they’re only dragging in about 18-20 people a night anyway, you kill them, they’re gone.”
Gold: “I can’t bring myself to do that … there was a place that was a really bad restaurant where I found out the chef and his family were living in a closet upstairs. It had to die a natural death. It wasn’t going to be murdered.”
Durack: “If you write a bad review you have to have a good reason for it. It’s too easy. I won’t eat at a place that I know is going to be bad. If I know it’s going to be bad why the hell am I going there? So when I write a bad review it’s because I’ve been unhappily surprised. I know there are reviewers in England who choose their mark … ‘that restaurant’s not going to be very good, I can have fun with that, everyone will quote me in all their trade mags, and it will be fantastic’.”
On who they write for
Durack: “I write for myself. So I’m assuming i’m writing for someone who knows something about food, who likes eating out, and I just think if you can please yourself, you have a much greater chance of actually pleasing everyone else.”
On how the changing media landscape has affected their work
Gold: “I’ve always reviewed restaurants that other critics didn’t touch. Now, in the first week of an obscure place with an un-transmitted menu opening, there are six blog posts and it’s much harder to discover [a new restaurant] – not that discovery is the be all and end all of restaurant reviews, but it’s a part of it.”
Durack: “I think online has had a huge influence in the way I work. When I was in Australia before I went to London in 2000 we had a pretty strict rule that we wouldn’t review a restaurant that wasn’t three months old and sometimes eight weeks old. My whole view of that changed when I went to London and the reviewers seemed to have a race to see who could get the review out first on a new restaurant.
“Now there are so many online things, so many reviews going out in the first week of a restaurant’s life: how long can we leave it, especially as the newspaper itself is called a newspaper and everyone is looking at your review to have some kind of news quality to it? So now I review much quicker than I ever used to.
Durack: What I see for the most, and there are a couple of exceptions, they are enthusiastic amateurs whose real value is in their images and I think it’s the images that actually stand them up. Very few use words as well as they use their cameras.”
On scoring restaurants & awarding ‘hats’
Durack: Hats are okay but I think scores are essential. They are very essential in Australia where you are not really allowed to say what you really think. You’re really not. You have to hide it between the lines or you will end up in court and you lose the case, which has happened three times now in Sydney. They can’t take you to court for getting a [score of] 12, or an 11. Therefore you have a chance of being honest through your scores. Hats are the fun part, unless you’re talking to a chef who has lost one.”
On how to become a critic
Gold: “Through the back way. I was at university, I was studying to be a composer … I started writing music reviews for the local newspaper and one day the guy who ran the paper asked me if I wanted to edit the restaurant guide. I was behind on my rent that month so I did and it turned out to be something I enjoyed terrifically. I was very enthusiastic but not particularly knowledgeable in the beginning, but five years later I’d probably worked it out.”
Durack: “All the hot critics in London started off as journalists, they did their training as journalists, they went into newspapers, they swapped newspapers. Those jobs simply don’t exist any more … I get email after email saying ‘can you please advise me, I want to be a critic, what do I do?’ and I just don’t know what to say.”
Gold: “In some ways, though, it’s easier than it’s ever been because you’ve got blogs and there is no barrier to admission and if someone has a good blog somebody will notice it, and if you’re a blogger and you write better restaurant reviews than the people who are writing restaurant reviews you will get a job with someone, people will hire you to do it, you will get a look in.”
Durack: “In an ideal world.”
Gold: “Look it happens, I mean it’s very hard to pick new food writers in the States who have not come out of the ranks of the food bloggers.”
On how soon they write reviews after visiting a restaurant
Gold: “Usually I’ll try to let it marinate for a couple of weeks because first impressions are sometimes good, and sometimes they’re great, but they’re often also pretty wrong.
I do tend to go back to restaurant a lot and it’s amazing sometimes when you think you have an idea of a restaurant on the first go and it turns out to be something else.”
Durack: “On the other side of that argument is of course if I leave it too long I forget too much. So I will normally do a first draft within a week and often within 24 hours if I’m organised. Then I will do a second draft after a second visit, then there will at least three drafts, sometimes five – then it’s not for the content, for remembering what the meal was, it’s for making it as readable as you possibly can.”
The Food Sage attended the International Chef Showcase as a guest of Crave Sydney.
- Is the internet jeopardising food journalism?
- Tapping out a future in food writing
- Delicious discount gnaws at the future of food magazines
- From the mouths of food writers