Ruth Reichl is “grateful” she doesn’t have to be a food critic in today’s media climate.
Ruth Reichl is pretty wonderful. Even if you weren’t familiar with her long and impressive career as one of the nation’s preeminent food writers (as critic, chef, memoirist, and even novelist), you’d probably be charmed by her strangely soothing, oddly gnomic twitter feed, and its haiku-like evocations of the changing seasons.
Misty morning. Turkey struts across the lawn. Raspberries and ripe peaches; splash cream. Holding onto summer.
— ruthreichl (@ruthreichl) September 2, 2021
Wind whispers through the pines. Tide rises on the shore. Wild blueberries. Black coffee. Morning in Maine.
Article continues after advertisement— ruthreichl (@ruthreichl) July 31, 2021
But Reichl also has thoughts on the state of contemporary food criticism, and is “grateful” she doesn’t have to do it anymore:
I think that today’s critics, the ones who are working, are probably the most interesting group of critics who have ever worked in this field, but what they are being asked to do is such a combination of criticism and reporting, that I don’t know how it is sustainable. I think it is wonderful that critics are thinking that they need to know about social justice issues and what’s going on in the back of the kitchen, but that’s reporting; that’s not critiquing. I have to say I’m kind of grateful that I don’t have that brief at the moment.
Not only that, but Reichl also doesn’t think we need food magazines anymore “…because everybody is writing about food. It’s everywhere. The world for food writers is huge.” She’s not wrong!
Personally, as long as Reichl continues to tweet now and then, I’ll be happy.
[h/t Albany Times-Union]
