Robin Garr wrote: It's not even snark, really. It's just cold, gimlet-eyed meanness without any humor. That's why it struck me as so out of tune.
This thread seems to have taken on the same tone.
Robin Garr wrote: It's not even snark, really. It's just cold, gimlet-eyed meanness without any humor. That's why it struck me as so out of tune.
Richard S. wrote:This thread seems to have taken on the same tone.
Richard S. wrote:This thread seems to have taken on the same tone.
SilvioM wrote:Yup, seems to have brought out a lot of pent-up frustration about the place. Say what you will about her writing style, but also credit her with an accurate assessment of the place.
Robin Garr wrote:SilvioM wrote:Yup, seems to have brought out a lot of pent-up frustration about the place. Say what you will about her writing style, but also credit her with an accurate assessment of the place.
Seems legit.
I tried to nudge us to discuss the odd tone of the review, irrespective of its accuracy, but it's really hard to keep those things separate.
Will Crawford wrote:The tone of this piece was a bit harsh and read more like an anonymous Yelp drive by.
John NA wrote:Most good food critics seem to really enjoy food and their experiences and evidence of this abounds in their reviews.
Adam Robinson wrote:the food there is just flat out bad, even as bar food. And for the price, it isn't really fair to call it "bar fare." I'm going to be much harsher towards your $16/dinner than I am the $6 burger and fries at some hole in the wall.
Mark R. wrote:Will Crawford wrote:The tone of this piece was a bit harsh and read more like an anonymous Yelp drive by.
Bingo, that's the term I've been trying to think of to describe the review!
+1TP Lowe wrote:Mark R. wrote:Will Crawford wrote:The tone of this piece was a bit harsh and read more like an anonymous Yelp drive by.
Bingo, that's the term I've been trying to think of to describe the review!
Yup - well said, Will.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 66 guests