Critical Lingo
Randy Richardson in Carroll County posted a comment yesterday thanking me for not using "impeccably fresh" and "tender crisp" in every review. I immediately went to the Sun's computer archives, of course, to see just how often I had used them since 1992, which is as far back as the archives go...
I'm embarrassed to admit "tender crisp" came up 41 times. (Fewer times early in the '90s, maybe because restaurants were overcooking their vegetables more often then.) "Impeccably fresh" appeared 11 times, but only two times in this millennium and not at all in the past couple of years.
Still, it got me to thinking about how hard it is (and how important it is) to come up with new language to describe food qualities, especially when the restaurant isn't either thrilling or really awful. One of my favorite food writers, Calvin Trillin, once commented on high-falutin' restaurant criticism by saying something like BUT DID IT TASTE GOOD?
On the other hand, the editor of a former Live restaurant critic got so bored she had to order the freelancer not to use the word "good" to describe food. I hope I fall somewhere in between. I'm pretty good at avoiding Elegant Variation -- using mollusks to refer to oysters, for instance -- but I do have trouble sometimes figuring out a new way to say the fish is fresh or the vegetables aren't overcooked. And that's what people need to know.
Anybody have any other phrases they hate to see in restaurant criticism? Please post below.
Comments
I find the 2 most useless words in reviews to be "exquisite" and "exotic." Both words are really only meaningful to the beholder.
I enjoy your reviews (not to pander here) because you say what the food is, how it presented, how it tastes and, also very importantly, what the whole experience was.
My wife and I went to a certain highly regarded place in Hunt Valley and spent a LOT of money on good food that was "exquisite," but were treated like idiots or ignored altogether by the wait staff. We were told this was typical but it really ruined our experience.
Recently, based on a review from you, we went to another highly regarded restaurant in the city where we also spent a LOT of money but were also very impressed by the attentive but not intrusive wait staff.
So I sort of agree with your writer - I would much rather get details that avoid "trendy-isims," but, at the same time, the more descriptive - even if not exciting - the review the better.
Posted by: TWD | April 19, 2007 12:01 PM
I despise the overused term "to perfection" as in "grilled to perfection."
Posted by: Catherine | April 19, 2007 3:52 PM
I'm not a fan of the term "succulent" in reviews, but my beef is not with critical lingo, but with menu lingo. I'm sick of reductions, and dishes "infused with" such-and-such. And what's with expensive restaurants using "pea tendrils" all the time? I do, however, love the words fingerling, ratatouille, bouillabaisse, couscous, and kumquat.
Posted by: Kate | April 20, 2007 8:51 PM