Recycling: Critical lingo
OK, I haven't picked "Recycling"; I just needed something to give you an idea of what I want to do for the second post of the day during my road trip. If you don't know what we're talking about, see the post just below this.
The following is a post from the second day of the blog, April 19, 2007, with comments. It was before my daughter commanded that I have photos. The problem with posting it now is that you guys aren't going to leave me with any words to write a review. I'll just have to use stars and a photo:
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.
Posted by Elizabeth Large on April 19, 2007 6:27 AM | Permalink
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
Comments
A month or two ago, I read a chat with Anthony Bourdain - I think it was on the WaPo website. One of the emailers asked him why he didn't describe more of the food he eats on No Reservations.
His answer, basically, was that it's just too hard to describe food, since taste is subjective and there's really limited language to say, for example, that something's salty.
I can't say that there are any particular phrases I dislike. But having to come up with constant variations on a theme is tough. It might be the only part of your job I wouldn't love!
I always say I want to be the companion. EL
Posted by: kitpollard | March 7, 2008 4:10 PM
When I was doing the takeout food column, my biggest complaint was -- there should be two different adjectives for "spicy hot" and "well-spiced." There are two words in Hindi. Just not in English.
Posted by: Sam Sessa | March 7, 2008 5:22 PM
There is a certain local critic who sets my teeth on edge every time she writes that they "appetized on xxx" There are other frequent infelicities, but my mind has mercifully blocked them at this time. And there's something about the word "beverage" in a food review that puts me into a bad mood. Be specific, dagnabbit!
Posted by: Dahlink | March 8, 2008 8:27 AM
One of my grammar pet peeves is the propensity for people to make verbs out of nouns.
I think the first time I heard it was was in conjuntion with "flyering" a neighborhood for the community association.
Posted by: Rosebud | March 8, 2008 2:46 PM
One of my grammar pet peeves is the propensity for people to make verbs out of nouns.
I hate verbing of nouns!
[ducking and running...]
Posted by: Hal Laurent, VoR | March 8, 2008 6:33 PM
Some of these "verbed" words sound awkward because this use is new to us. Some will last, others will wither on the proverbial vine. In general, though, we have a 'nominalizing' language -- we tend to name things first, actions second. As a result, nouns morph into verbs. Consider "text message" and "keyboard" as 2 relatively recent examples.
I had a linguistic professor who used to say that a dictionary isn't a rule book, it's a history book. Pretty soon "menuing" will sound just fine to us. EL
Posted by: bra1nchild | March 9, 2008 9:20 AM
Pretty soon "menuing" will sound just fine to us
Well, maybe to some of us. :-)
That's a particularly bad one. What does "to menu" mean? To create a menu? To read a menu? To order from a menu?
Posted by: Hal Laurent, VoR | March 9, 2008 11:07 AM
I've always hated when a verbed noun already has a verb verb: gift - give, not gifted. "She was gifted that by her grandmother.' What's wrong with 'She was given that ..."?
Posted by: Robert (the Single One) | March 9, 2008 12:20 PM
I can get my mind around some "verbed" words, but the one that really grates on me is impact as a verb. I first started hearing this back in the early 90's coming from Government agencies such as NASA.
It has always been my conviction that people who use impact as a verb just can't remember whether it is affect or effect that is the verb.
I know this happens frequently with proper nouns. My mother used to speak of Hoovering the floor and, to get bavk to food, Cuisinarting ingredients. It's just to much for this English major.
Posted by: Rosebud | March 9, 2008 12:31 PM
Impact as a verb makes me cringe also. I'm glad to know that someone else cares.
And back to the original subject of review language: I think "napped" is icky. Ditto for "tucking in." Both used to be okay I guess but are so overused now that they really grate.
Posted by: chez G | March 9, 2008 3:32 PM
"It's just to much for this English major."
Really?
To the blackboard, Jonathan. Fifty times. I will not comment on other posters' spelling. EL
Posted by: Jonathan Gilbert | March 9, 2008 6:00 PM
Oh, c'mon, teasing someone about their spelling when they were criticizing others' grammar seems fair! I suspect even Rosebud (nee Janet) would agree.
As long as nobody's feelings are getting hurt. EL
Posted by: Hal Laurent, VoR | March 9, 2008 7:44 PM
Okay, we may have been separated at birth, but one of us may be a better proofreader (most of the time, anyway).
We agree on grammatical heresies, however.
Posted by: Dahlink | March 9, 2008 8:30 PM
Not exactly a misspelling; more a typo. But tease away since I didn't proofread it first, so I deserve it.
That's what happens when I get too emotional... :)
Posted by: Rosebud | March 9, 2008 9:35 PM
Voice of Reason indeed. For you Prince Hall a sticky bicky and an ice lolly.
Posted by: Jonathan Gilbert | March 10, 2008 7:02 AM
Prince Hal, that is. Oops, back-thwapped by me own gob-smack.
Posted by: Jonathan Gilbert | March 10, 2008 9:35 AM
While the verbing of nouns - and even the nounization of verbs - is rampant in the American English lexicon, I think we should all be grateful that we don't have to deal with German on a regular basis. When they need a new word to name or describe something, they won't necessarily use the English word; rather, they will combine existing words in their language to create a new word that can be well over 20 letters long!
Posted by: Piano Rob | March 12, 2008 9:53 AM