This week, I read through several of Jonathan Gold’s Pulitzer Prize winning restaurant reviews.
The devil’s own steak house instantly hooked me in with the way Gold began with describing The Lodge. I could instantly picture the food he was describing and loved the way he used comparisons that ranged from the mundane to the outlandish. The descriptions set up the rest of the review beautifully.
I enjoyed that this review also took into account the atmosphere and design of the restaurant. It gave perspective into how the food compared with the general atmosphere of the restaurant, something that greatly enhances or destroys a dining experience. He truly did not hold back in his criticism of the style of the restaurant. It was both enlightening and entertaining.
He balanced his considerable criticism of the overall style of The Lodge well with his depiction of the food. The way he details the food makes it sounds enticing. One of, and often the sole repeated thought I had while reading this review (and most of his other reviews) was, “yeah, I’d eat that.” Not that I’m an overly big fan of wedge-of-iceberg salads, but the way it was illustrated just made me want to eat.
Another review of Jonathan Gold’s that caught my eye was The great white duck. Though it is clearly not a favorite of Gold’s, he pays homage to dish by detailing the difficult and time-consuming process that Nanjing duck requires. This review seemed balanced, it was not a favorite, but he went into detail describing the difficult and lengthy process that is required to make the Nanjing Duck, and he also relays his conversations with the owner, John Zhang, and what he does to make this dish extraordinary. He highlights the uniqueness of this particular dish in this particular restaurant.
Gold goes a step further than just reviewing the food or the interior of the Nanjing Kitchen – he sets up the physical location of the restaurant. He places the audience in the setting, giving a fictitious, but very reasonable scenario describing how one might come to find themselves eating there. This is not only interesting to read, but also further goes to illustrate the type of restaurant the Nanjing Kitchen is and what to expect from it.
Both reviews clearly demonstrate that Gold is extremely well-educated and knowledgeable about the food he is reviewing. His elaborations were easy to understand and appreciate. While reading his reviews, it was clear to me that Jonathan Gold had a high respect for the food, the dining experience, and the audience.
Overall, I found Gold’s restaurant critiques to be vastly entertaining. Even if I didn’t know what a dish was, I found that by the end of a review I was decently familiar with it. Gold has an extraordinary ability to capture a reader from the first sentence or two, then bring them into the restaurant and acquaint them with the menu in a very personable manner. I would only recommend that you don’t read any reviews from Jonathan Gold hungry.
The Great White Duck review highlights a really important point – it’s the food and its quality that matters, not whether Gold likes it.
And you highlight another important point here – We read food writers because we love the writing.
Kristen, “comparisons that range from mundane to outlandish” is the perfect way to summarize Gold’s writing style. I agree with your statement on how Gold’s description of the restaurant atmosphere and setting is important to the experience of eating food. Most people will only think that a restaurant with minimal cleanliness is the only kind of atmosphere that can affect the dining experience, but there are so many other factors that come into play. I didn’t read the article about the duck dish, but I do appreciate that Gold writes about the lengthy and complex dish anyways. Although he may not like some of the dishes he reviews, he always gives them a fair shot. Lastly, I liked how you mentioned Gold’s ability to draw readers in and get them acquainted with the food. Food can be hard to describe because of the mountain of details you could include like taste, appearance, and ingredients, but Gold finds the perfect balance. You definitely picked up the most important things about Gold’s reviews and explained them well.
Kristen, “comparisons that range from mundane to outlandish” is the perfect way to summarize Gold’s writing style. I agree with your statement on how Gold’s description of the restaurant atmosphere and setting is important to the experience of eating food. Most people will only think that a restaurant with minimal cleanliness is the only kind of atmosphere that can affect the dining experience, but there are so many other factors that come into play. I didn’t read the article about the duck dish, but I do appreciate that Gold writes about the lengthy and complex dish anyways. Although he may not like some of the dishes he reviews, he always gives them a fair shot. Lastly, I liked how you mentioned Gold’s ability to draw readers in and get them acquainted with the food. Food can be hard to describe because of the mountain of details you could include like taste, appearance, and ingredients, but Gold finds the perfect balance. You definitely picked up the most important things about Gold’s
reviews and explained them well. Great job!