Restaurant Critic's Expertise & Veracity

I used to argue with the restaurant critics in Milwaukee (I knew them because I used to be a "contenda.") that if they don't "get out of town," their reviews have no foundation or validity. Are they simply comparing our local dining establishments to other joints in town? If they're analyzing Italian cooking, don't these critics have to try restaurants in Chicago, New York, San Francisco, Milan, Bologna etc? How can they say that a local French restaurant is on point, if they haven't been to France? The restaurant critic for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel was Dennis Getto before his untimely death. Dennis was an expert in Italian cuisine as he used to be a chef and traveled to Italy frequently. Yet, he had never been to France and lauded a local restaurant for its French cooking. I argued with him that this restaurant (Lake Park Bistro if you have ever been in Milwaukee) did not even approximate a French restaurant. I know I get in trouble asking for people's opinions, but this isn't a personal query. What do you think? Does a restaurant critic for a particular city need to taste the cooking in restaurants all over the world in order to have veracity? Thanks.

[Robin Garr]

Does a restaurant critic for a particular city need to taste the cooking in restaurants all over the world in order to have veracity? Thanks.

Phil, I don't think it's NECESSARY, but I think it's NICE. Speaking only for myself, I've traveled fairly extensively, and I think my dining adventures all over Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and, to a more limited extent, in Latin America inform my efforts as a food critic. I know I'm a much tougher critic of Italian and French fare in the US because I've traveled extensively throughout both countries, for example, and can speak functional food-and-wine Italian and French. On the other hand, I don't really expect an Italian-American family place like Come Back Inn or the late, lamented Melillo's to cook like a trattoria in Rome or Verona. They need to be measured against their own immigrant genre; so even with travel, common sense remains the lodestar.

On the other side of the ledger, I've never been to China, yet I've read extensively about China and its regional cuisines, and I don't feel handicapped by my lack of direct exposure. Same for Iran and the countries of the Middle East.

Robin,
I am positive your extensive travel has made you not only a better critic, but a more objective evaluator of good cooking. As I'm almost positive you will agree, the best cooking in Europe and Latin America usually is at some tiny trattoria, bistro, or cantina filled with locals enjoying an afternoon respite. Thus, when you taste food here in Louisville, your palette is accustomed to excellent flavors. The Olive Garden is not going to enthrall you with their Lasagne.

[Robin Garr]

I'm almost positive you will agree, the best cooking in Europe and Latin America usually is at some tiny trattoria, bistro, or cantina filled with locals enjoying an afternoon respite.

In fairness, Phil, I think it's different. When I'm traveling on my own dime, which is most of the time, I eat in the bistrots and trattorie and love them, and I agree that the food is earthy and honest and prepared with love. Of course, the same can be said for many of the similar "down-home" eateries in the US.

I have to be honest, though, and say that in France and Italy in particular, standards for starred restaurants are so insanely high, and the glory attached thereto tends to lure the greatest chefs, that it's hard to declare objectively that a three-star Michelin restaurant (or even a one-star) is overrated. I don't get to eat that way a lot, but between hosting a few wine tours in partnership with a very high-end French travel company, and having been feted as a wine judge at Vinitaly, among other things, I've had the good luck to eat at a modest number of high-end, starred temples of cuisine. I would not turn down the opportunity to do that on someone else's dime - or even, occasionally, on my own.