Think twice if you think it is easy to review food, What is HOT and what is NOT right now in Montreal

Posted: August 8, 2017 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , ,

What is HOT and what is NOT right now in Montreal : Right now, ONLY the few eateries with artisan Chefs (Chefs REALLY working in their kitchen) worth a detour, in town, namely  Le Serpent, La Chronique,  Nozy, Marconi. Pay big respect to Toque! as well as Le Club Chasse et Peche!  I went to Toque! twice. The 1st time was superb, the second just Ok but Toque! is certainly a destination restaurant by Montreal restaurant standards. LCCP was amazing under Chef  Claude Pelletier, not as stellar as in those days, anymore,  but it remains a top tier  table for Montreal.

BIG UP to the best poutine (but NOT the one at la Banquise…Nah!!))  and smoked smeat (Reuben’s Deli is still one of the very best in town) in the world, their  happening is right here in YUL! Ou bagels, our cheesecakes are also the best in the world.

According to the latest local buzz, Manitoba/L’Express/Impasto/Le Vin Papillon/Cadet/Lawrence/Le Mousso/Hopkins/Bar George and Tuck Shop  are doing a fine job lately. I have not been to Kitchen Galerie in a long time, but most foodies I know seem to continue to find it good.

At the end of the day, whatever the local hype is  trying to sell to you, the wisest thing to do is to remember that the restaurant  scene in Montreal  continues, in general,  to be a pale copy of what was done, at least 2 to 5 years ago, in the true foodie destinations found abroad. That is the TRUTH!  You know…when you manage to convince an International list of restaurants like the “San Pellegrino’s top 100 best restaurants in the world”  that your best restaurant is that one that’s selling spaghetti found at the supermarket, served with some lobster (I just came from Greece and most  casual eateries do serve  lobster spaghetti because it is easy to sell, but somehow, in Montreal that was enough to be a revelation ), you truely are a joke! And it is not even funny…

Anyways,  the Montreal foodie scene is hardly going to be a serious foodie scene for at least another 10 years, easily, as our best Chefs have long abandoned their stoves (Martin Picard) or  have simply deserted  Montreal (Jean-François Bélair, Hughes Dufour, Jean-Paul Giroux). Of that generation of gifted Chefs, there is Martin Juneau who is still around, especially on TV, but Martin is not the brilliant Chef that he used to be in his heyday at La Montée (in those days, Martin was easily a world class Chef…BUT that was 10 years ago!!!).

When you look at the restaurant reviews on this blog, my reviews have  covered restaurants that are mainly abroad . There are actually 10  times more restaurants reviewed on this log that are not located in Montreal than there are from Montreal. On a blog which focuses on what’s supposed to stand out in Montreal, that speaks for itself.

 

Being a critic is NOT as easy as some may think. Far from that. I am not talking about the common restaurant-friendly food write-ups wildly found online.  I am talking about serious ppl who are willing to say things the way they are, and most importantly, who bother about knowing what they are talking about.

Not to sound pretentious (btw, as explained elsewhere on this blog, I do not have the pretention of being a food writer or food blogger. I am not. I am sharing my dining experiences of an anonymous/normal diner with foodies who help me find eateries abroad when I travel and this is just sharing back with them. As it is easier to simply put that on a website, it was all natural to post my experiences on a blog. That is it. Nothing more, nothing less), but my 20 years of analyzing the restaurant industry helped me composing the following list of the characteristics of  a great food critic (again, as I just mentioned, I am not a critic):

1.Are you capable to separate your analysis of the food from your feelings of the dining experience?  On MY blog, an amateurish blog, written by someone who is not a food critic, I gave a 9/10 for the food of a restaurant of which I hated the dining experience. In my post, both feelings were clearly expressed while avoiding being unfair to the kitchen (not their fault if the front house is amateurish). If an amateurish food blog like mine can do this, needless to stress that more is expected from a food critic.

2.Do you know what you are talking about? It took me 25 years of familiarizing myself with Brazilian food before deciding to review a Brazilian restaurant. And by familiarizing, I meant eating serious mom and pop traditional brazilian food for 25 yrs. And that is food that is very close to the food I grew up with, btw! 20 yrs of eating serious / genuine Russian and Romanian food  are still not enough, for me to decide reviewing both cuisines. And we are talking here about someone who is cooking seriously since his tender childhood. Again, not to brag, but to make the point that if an amateurish critic like me goes to such extent, you can imagine what needs to be expected as the minimun  to be a REAL critic/ food journalist/food writer.  Most food journalists / food writers review Japanese food when the closest they got to Japan was to drink Sake. They are as clueless about most cuisines. I recall a food journalist putting down a dessert perfumed with rose, at an afghan restaurant in Montreal, because for her the fragrance of rose is just good for soap. A true ignorant disguised as a critic. Worst, most of them are known to the food industry, therefore you can easily imagine how the way they are treated has nothing to do with what the normal/anonymous diner will experience, making their opinions utterly useless to someone who wants to get a serious idea of the reality that he will face at the restaurant he chose to dine at

3.Do you feel the need to please an audience? Most do. But that is right there the very first sign that you are not a serious critic.

4.Do you really know what needs to be assessed? It is an important question to ask yourself as a critic. As an example, many so-called professional critics  do assess   classic food  as “tired” only because they do not know how to differentiate an average classic dish from its better versions. They basically just associate excitement with novelty, and do not have the proper knowledge to dig deep in anything that is not ..novel. There is also a lot of ignorance about textures/doneness/temperatures: your meat is tender? then it is good. Your meat has a firmer consistency, then it is not, etc. And they do that regardless of the type of cuisine they are assessing, which is the perfect recipe to spread inaccuracies.  A good critic SHOULD BE INFORMED about  the notion of doneness/textures/temperatures that is proper to the cuisine that he is assessing. Or else. what is he assessing??

Advertisements

Comments are closed.