Michael Bauer has started a blog. I like it: I think that Mr. Bauer is a good writer and I enjoy reading what he has to say. I chortle in glee when he scathes a chef I don't like. I gasp in outrage when he writes something I deem to be untrue. I feel that I've already been to a restaurant that he's reviewed, he's so thorough, and I can't wait to try it 'again' and see what I think.
However, I see him becoming the Robert Parker of the San Francisco food world, someone who's got too much influence in a certain sphere. I think that one person's tastes are just that: one person's tastes, and although critics like Mr. Bauer and Mr. Parker are well-educated in their fields and for the most part on top of their game, it doesn't make sense to have one Kaiser dictating what tastes good. I fear that through these daily musings on his blog, Mr. Bauer will be slamming and dunking chefs at whim and ruining peoples' careers. Oh wait, he already does that. How does one person gain so much influence that a few negative words will affect the ebb and flow of what's hot and what's not in this city?
Restaurateurs quiver in fear before the rumor of him, and scarce recognize him when he does dine in. Freelance journalists sting from his pointed rejections and waitresses drop trays as his piercing eyes cut through a dining room full of chatter to see that they are in the weeds all the way across the floor.
I guess people are prone to believing everything they read, which is why blogs are so popular--any jackass can see their opinions in print and feel validated when they garner a readership. But what happens when an already established food writer takes to the open screen? Restaurant Girl waits with bated breath to see.
3 comments:
I thought his blog had a fairly pedestrian beginning, until today's post when he slid a knife into Daniel Peterson and turned the blade a few knotches clockwise. I am a little bit nervous about watching the carnage unfold from here on in.
I think he needs to pace himself. Bauer's been blogging up a frenzy as if he was trying to play catch-up to NYT's Frank Bruni. As far as the writing goes, I think Bruni's doing a better job overall - quality over quantity.
I do agree that having a primary food critic promotes a monoculture taste of sorts but the alternative would be having a troop of food critics stomping around town. And there's just too many restaurants and reviewing to be done for a coalition of critics.
hey RG - came over from MB's blog - love your stuff - hilarious. I had no idea that MB was so feared - although now that I think about it, my foodish friends say rather unkind things about him...hmm...
Anyway, love it.
:)
Post a Comment