Michael Landrum in the Media

[JPW]

Starring our own lunatic visionary

[Monica Bhide]

MIchael Landrum's comments on this site made it in today's Post --read it here

[JPW]

Monica Bhide said:

MIchael Landrum's comments on this site made it in today’s Post — read it here.

Looks like I beat you by about 30 seconds Monica.

[Monica Bhide]

We must be reading the paper head to head LOL

[Michael Landrum]

I never realized how much I look like Star Jones before. Why didn't any one tell me? Why?

Edited February 17, 2006 by Michael Landrum

[jdl]

I never realized how much I look like Star Jones before. 

Actually, you look more like Jenny Jones. But who's counting?

[Stretch]

I think Michael should write a letter to the editor. Those hacks make it seem like he was gratuitously insulting the good people of Arlington, when in fact his intention was clearly to gratuitously insult the entire Metro DC area.

[Jacques Gastreaux]

I think Michael should write a letter to the editor. Those hacks make it seem like he was gratuitously insulting the good people of Arlington, when in fact his intention was clearly to gratuitously insult the entire Metro DC area.

Watch out for those split infinitives.

[DonRocks]

Michael had posted the above a week ago at 3:38 AM, and I deleted it the moment I saw it - praying it was merely a drunken rant, and hoping to save him from himself. Unfortunately, it has now become a legitimate item in the media (click here), and so I'm restoring it in full.

I like both Michael and Marc, have no dog in this fight, and am posting without comment.

Cheers,

Rocks.

[DLB]

I just read the entire exchange... very intresting piece.

Here is what I loved most about Michael's response:

As to your not being welcome in my restaurants, how welcome do these unwanted intruders feel as they perform the necessary, menial tasks that are beneath the true Culpepperites and real Americans but are so necessary to their overbloated comfort? How much less welcome will your piece assist in making them as they go about making our comfortable way of life possible?

In how many neighborhoods were Jews, Blacks and certainly Hispanics not welcome where your readers, and maybe even you, now live? Or in how many restaurants where you and you family are now accustomed to dine? What's one less to you? In any case, we do not require proof of identity or of nationality, or permits of passage before seating guests, so if you want to duplicate the incredible thrill of being someplace illegally or unwelcomed, of having to hide who you are and fear being caught, of being denied the basic dignities afforded to those around you, than feel free to stretch your journalistic wings and come down to either Ray's so that you can earn the right to write about an experience that really does exist today, not in Germany, Italy, Poland and France, but right here in Virginia

[Barbara]

While I wish he would employ an editor (it sometimes strikes me that he is in the early stages of "James Michener's Disease," formally known as Literary Elephantiasis, I think Michael has struck a chord. The boy's got some guts and is a remarkable businessman. I wonder, though, if Fisher is the best outlet for this argument.

[Al Dente]

Did you read some of the replies? There are some real gems-- like this one:

What an absolute nutjob. I've raved about Ray's the Steaks often; I WAS THERE LAST NIGHT. It's a shame we so often attribute intelligence to those we like when in reality there are so many people who do good things that do not require being smart at all.

Michael Landrum apparently doesn't realize that people who slaughter animals simply to consume their flesh are worse than Nazis, because at least the Nazis didn't EAT their victims. The Nazis at least didn't enslave their victims and force them to selectively breed over the generations to make them more satisfying to murder. Not even the Confederacy did that. Animals are very intelligent and have feelings and feel pain and therefore have the same rights as people if not more because they are better than us. Anyone would be perfectly justified in vandalizing Mr. Landrum's property and/or assaulting his henchmen, because they are perpetuating the continued Holocaust of our animal brethren in an immoral fashion that no self-respecting American can support. Serving animal flesh for human consumption is indisputably repugnant, despicable, and abhorrent and should be stopped by any means necessary, just like the campaign for Civil Rights.

Doesn't Mr. Landrum (who I still think provides great food with great service at a great price) realize that there are a lot of good people out in the world who hold views contrary to his own and that those views have varying degrees of legitimacy? He has a right to ban Posties from his business, he has a right to be a provincial effete living in an NPR-fueled bubble far removed from reality, and he has a right to hold and express arrogant, insulting opinions that a majority of Americans reject, but he has no basis to proclaim a moral superiority over the rest of us.

Posted by: athea | October 13, 2006 10:03 AM

WTFF?!?!?

[TedE]

While I wish he would employ an editor (it sometimes strikes me that he is in the early stages of "James Michener's Disease," formally known as Literary Elephantiasis, I think Michael has struck a chord. The boy's got some guts and is a remarkable businessman. I wonder, though, if Fisher is the best outlet for this argument.

Michael, I read Fisher's article before seeing his blog entry late last week, and I gotta say, you missed the mark on this one. There was nothing in it that I see deviating from his goal as a journalist: just the facts, ma'am. I got a totally different reading from it. What comes clearly across in the piece is the open secret that there are bigots (What?) living in America (GASP!!) and some of them reside right here in the D.C. metro area (NOOOOO!!!!!). It was not an editorial, it was not meant to proselytize, and I think that by letting the Culpeperians speak their peace it allowed them to shoot themselves in the foot quite nicely in the face of a large and fairly well-read audience. Sure, some among the horsie set will nod their heads in agreement at what the moneyed residents have to say, but that is beyond obvious. Many of these folks live where they live precisely because they do not like their worldview challenged (to me a much more shocking example of this mindset comes across in this article from today's edition, again allowing the bigots to tie thier own nooses in a public forum). I'm fairly sure Fisher ultimately agrees with your point of view, and going off half-cocked doesn't win you any points and leads to some head-shakin' among those who are not used to your diatribes. I don't want the media telling me what to think through day-to-day reporting, and I would hope that you don't either.

Did you read some of the replies? There are some real gems-- like this one:

[/size]

WTFF?!?!?

I had to read that one twice. I think the middle paragraph was a poorly crafted attempt at satire.

[Heather]

Michael, did you intend for your letter to be made public, or was it private correspondence?

[Sthitch]

I had to read that one twice. I think the middle paragraph was a poorly crafted attempt at satire.

You have not been paying much attention to PETA's billboard and print ad campaigns (meat = Holocaust, or meat=slave trade). Unfortunately, I do not believe that this was satire, but the writer's true beliefs.

[goldenticket]

Did you read some of the replies? There are some real gems-- like this one:

[/size]

WTFF?!?!?

I think this was a poorly executed attempt at irony - the writer was comparing some of Michael Landrum's arguments to those of some animal rights activists...which some people might think extreme and irrational (as you just demonstrated ). Ok, (s)he did call him a nutjob, but I think the middle part of that post was more about the level of rhetoric... the writer says they were just at RTS so I don't think they're a PETA spokesperson (and I see that TSE) has just posted a similar thought.

Good for Michael - too few people speak out when they think something is wrong. His approach may offend (many?) people, but I respect both his right to speak his mind and his willingness to do so when he thinks it is necessary.

[Biscuit Girl]

Did you read some of the replies? There are some real gems-- like this one:

QUOTE

What an absolute nutjob. I've raved about Ray's the Steaks often; I WAS THERE LAST NIGHT. It's a shame we so often attribute intelligence to those we like when in reality there are so many people who do good things that do not require being smart at all.

Michael Landrum apparently doesn't realize that people who slaughter animals simply to consume their flesh are worse than Nazis, because at least the Nazis didn't EAT their victims. The Nazis at least didn't enslave their victims and force them to selectively breed over the generations to make them more satisfying to murder. Not even the Confederacy did that. Animals are very intelligent and have feelings and feel pain and therefore have the same rights as people if not more because they are better than us. Anyone would be perfectly justified in vandalizing Mr. Landrum's property and/or assaulting his henchmen, because they are perpetuating the continued Holocaust of our animal brethren in an immoral fashion that no self-respecting American can support. Serving animal flesh for human consumption is indisputably repugnant, despicable, and abhorrent and should be stopped by any means necessary, just like the campaign for Civil Rights.

Doesn't Mr. Landrum (who I still think provides great food with great service at a great price) realize that there are a lot of good people out in the world who hold views contrary to his own and that those views have varying degrees of legitimacy? He has a right to ban Posties from his business, he has a right to be a provincial effete living in an NPR-fueled bubble far removed from reality, and he has a right to hold and express arrogant, insulting opinions that a majority of Americans reject, but he has no basis to proclaim a moral superiority over the rest of us.

Posted by: athea | October 13, 2006 10:03 AM WTFF?!?!?

That was my thought too! What then did this pious person person have to eat at Rays that didn't have feelings before it met it's untimely demise? Perhaps mothing more than some lettuce or a spcy cashew?

The whole exchange is a bit tedious at this point. I think folks should lay off both guys and let them sort things about themselves (and not in the media).

Maybe a duel with steak knives would be in order?

[Al Dente]

You have not been paying much attention to PETA's billboard and print ad campaigns (meat = Holocaust, or meat=slave trade). Unfortunately, I do not believe that this was satire, but the writer's true beliefs.

I agree. The astonishing thing though, other than the complete obscenity of their comparison, is the hypocrisy of the position. The person claimed to have dined at Ray's the previous night!

[Poivrot Farci]

drunken rant

Mr. Fisher appears to be reporting hillbilly intolerants deperately clutching the vestiges of Rockwellian (Norm) yesteryear homogeny, rather than spearheading immigration reform on Salvadorian gypsies & Mexican Jews. Mr. Landrum’s retort is enough to make Castro blush.

Generally, on the argyle pipe flavored collegiate professor symposium circuit, when one is unable to intelligently make sense of anything or recognize defeat of a low-watt argument, they resort to the all-time favorite stock rebuttals:

(insert drum roll)

1. The Nazi’s!

...

4. Profanity!...

9. Jews!...

16. Nixon!...

43. Hippies!

Somewhere, a fortune cookie reads:

The higher a monkey climbs, the better view we have of his ass.

[TedE]

You have not been paying much attention to PETA's billboard and print ad campaigns (meat = Holocaust, or meat=slave trade). Unfortunately, I do not believe that this was satire, but the writer's true beliefs.

Coupled with the dining-at-Ray's comments leads me to believe that this person was trying to make a point about Michael's reaction to the article through compare and contrast.

[JimRice]

Link to Marc Fisher's original column

I read Marc Fisher's column, and it struck a bad chord with me too. As immigration policy has risen to the top of the political debates in this election year, much of it has come through sources that are not known for their enlighted views on race. Mr. Fisher's column is flawed because it ignores race in America and includes some quotes that remind us of the bad old days. That's something that Mr. Fisher should have noted, and followed up on.

I think Mr. Landrum's rhetoric was over the top, but he has a point.

[The Hersch]

I think Mr. Landrum's rhetoric was over the top, but he has a point.

Mr. Landrum's rhetoric is almost always over the top, which is among the reasons I love him from afar.

[Heather]

Michael's rhetoric was over the top, but if Fisher wanted to do straight on the one hand/on the other hand reporting he might have included some quotes from the "illegals" in additions to the sad sad laments of the crackers old-time Culpeper residents. There was no insight in his column, merely, as Michael said, an old vileness granted new legitimacy.

Somewhere, a fortune cookie reads:

The higher a monkey climbs, the better view we have of his ass.

I'd get down from there before you hurt yourself.

[TedE]

Mr. Fisher's column is flawed because it ignores race in America and includes some quotes that remind us of the bad old days.

I disagree. It's absolutely does not ignore race in America (it's the subtext for the whole damn article!), and the quotes do not remind us of the bad old days; they remind us that they are the bad current days. That was the whole point, no? That the days of socially accepted, institutionalized racism are not behind us.

That's something that Mr. Fisher should have noted, and followed up on.

I think Michael's outcry is based on the fact that Fisher did not cry "Bigots!!!" from the mountaintop. I still think the article was effective in bringing his point across, just with more subtlety. Dunno, maybe I'm reading intent into the article where actual cowardly reporting exists. Knowing that Fisher likely wanted to cry "Bigots!!!" gave me a different reading, but I'd accept that I'm wrong and he dropped the ball where a stronger opinion could be implied (I still stand on the point that I don't want my daily to force opinions down my throat; I have plenty to choke on already ).

[Poivrot Farci]

I'd get down from there before you hurt yourself.

Perhaps. But I have better sense than to risk compromising my business by publicly and recklessly condemning an otherwise benign article, and recognize the difference between an objective and subjective piece. There appears to be a prejudice mob mentality in which the bearer of unsavory news is being tried as a heretic, much like lynching a reporter who documents the evil of Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptists without the unnecessary conventional decent “other hand” humanity which is assumed by readers of the WashPost.

[ScotteeM]

Mr. Landrum's rhetoric is almost always over the top, which is among the reasons I love him from afar.

Make that a me, too! I hadn't read Fisher's original column, but in reading it now (before I read Michael's response, to be fair) I found it offensive in his apparent complicity with the underlying theme of prejudice expressed both in code and outright by the old-time resident he interviewed for the column.

In addition to his restaurants and his writing, I admire the way I have observed Michael Landrum treating his staff--with respect.

[edited to remove triple-spacing that I swear I didn't put in to begin with! ]

[Heather]

Perhaps. But I have better sense than to risk compromising my business by publicly and recklessly condemning an otherwise benign article,

Was he doing it publicly? That's why I asked if Michael's original letter was meant to be private correspondence. If not, then Fisher is the one ratcheting it up. I read the original column when posted, and wondered what the point was, as it can't be a surprise to anyone that the attitudes expressed are still hanging around in the parts of VA succumbing to suburban sprawl.

Fisher says his "main job is to present the beliefs and arguments of people whom readers might otherwise not meet." I suggest that we all know these beliefs, and I for one don't care to meet them again, especially not presented as a homey little slice of (bigoted) life.

And one of the things I like about Michael, and will lead to my patronizing his places of business, is his respect for and care of his staff and his colorblind hiring practices.

[Camille-Beau]

...Knowing that Fisher likely wanted to cry "Bigots!!!" gave me a different reading...

you sure about that?

[Michael Landrum]

Michael, did you intend for your letter to be made public, or was it private correspondence?

I did not write to a Letter to the Editors, with the intent of publication, I wrote a letter to Marc Fisher.

Mr. Fisher did not ask permission to publish my original letter to him or give notice of his intention to do so in his reply to me, which was clearly personal, and which engendered my follow-up response, which was published with neither permission nor notice.

Granted, my posting of the original letter here gave de facto permission, even cause, to publish (although I doubt he even know about that--it was 3:30 Sunday morning and unless he was as drunk as I was he would have no reason to be up and reading DonRockwell.com), but the ensuing correspondance was clearly personal and, had permission been asked, it obviously would not have been given.

His motives under these circumstances are clear and do not speak favorably to his integrity. One could easily say that this is a clear case of abuse of the power of his position at the Post to cause deliberate harm and to settle a personal score.

His need to do so indicates that my letters to him did strike a nerve and must have caused some degree of personal shame for his having given sympathetic voice and validation to bigotry and racism, thereby granting these all too current things a new legitimacy.

As I said in my second letter to Mr. Fisher, some journalists bravely undertook the cause of civil rights during that struggle, and others used journalistic neutrality as justification to preserve and even strengthen inhuman traditions. Of that second class of journalists, if the best is to be believed of them, many may have simply done so ignorantly, or may have simply been duped into serving as tools of those far more clever in their brutish and hate-and spite-driven exploitations.

Finally, before my rhetoric is judged as over the top, or sympathies, subjectivities or objectivities declared, did anyone note that it was not mentioned by Mr. Fisher just exactly which Army his subject's great-grandfather rushed off to join and the pride-of-place his being the first from Culpepper to do so Mr. Fisher uses to establish the legitamacy and sense of honor of today's council member? Did no one notice the parallel drawn by Mr. Fisher between the honor of the struggle of the forebearer and it's continuation today in the struggle of the council member?

I can only hope that Mr. Fisher himself is ignorant of the parallel he himself has drawn and presented sympathetically. (Actually, I can only hope that Colbert King returns to the Post).

[DonRocks]

I want to have sex with Paris Hilton.

[Waitman]

Gah...almost lost my breakfast seeing that face staring out at me in living color, first thing in the morning. Then I began to get Pavlovian cravings -- steak for breakfast, yeah, and maybe a Zin. It's a fucking snow day, after all. And there might be a bar or two for after...best not to tell the wife. It's not the face of a restaurateur, but a satyr, a Dioneysian devotee of wine women and beef sent to lead us with his panpipes across the river, and then throw our asses out when we become tiresome.

Not so much new for those of us who congregate here, but perhaps a warning to stay away for a day or two as "the number of evictions tends to reach a high after one of his restaurants receives a review," and who wants to be collateral damage in tableside bomb like that? On the other hand, maybe I'll wander in tonight, and see if I can get a ringside seat.

Oh, and the piece mentions the East of the River and other new spots, as well as providing a Brief History of Ray's. Worth a gander.

[MC Horoscope]

The history of Ray's in the print edition I received didn't even mention Ray's the Classics in Silver Spring! Something against Montgomery County?

[Kibbee Nayee]

I think the Post did a good job of capturing the unique contribution he makes to our local food scene, but may have played up the Steak Nazi persona a bit much....

[ad.mich]

It will have a variety of new dishes, including cold-smoked fried chicken and smoked and roasted prime rib, both of which Landrum hopes will be smash hits.

This is where I nearly spilled my coffee. Cold-smoked fried chicken? NOT Prince's style hot chicken??? I mean, it still sounds awesome, but...

[FunnyJohn]

Too bad the article failed to mention Michael's charity-related activities since they illustrate his social agenda and add to the profile of him being not your average investor cum restauranteur.

[mdt]

"Actually, I might be ready to add some decor to some of the others."

This was the most shocking to me. Say it ain't so.

[youngfood]

Also worth noting about the story is that it is another awesome piece of writing by Jane Black who I now probably enjoy reading more than anyone else who appears regularly in my morning newspaper. Does she have a blog or is there another spot to keep track of her work?

[DanielK]

Also worth noting about the story is that it is another awesome piece of writing by Jane Black who I now probably enjoy reading more than anyone else who appears regularly in my morning newspaper. Does she have a blog or is there another spot to keep track of her work?

I can't look up her handle from the office, but I know that she Tweets.

[Joe H]

Duck fat fries. Finally.

[Heather]

A comment from a Washington Post reader called "Sheepherder" made me wonder who he is, and whether he would say this publicly if he was identified:

sheepherder wrote:

Landrum's rep with quality suppliers out here in VA for beef, poultry, lamb etc is awful. Most of us won't deal with him.

I won't sell at a loss

and if the punk doesn't like it he can go find a lower quality supplier. If he treated me the way he treated some of his quests in the column we would step outside. And this ex SEAL would teach him the finer points of how to manage the FOTH.

[mdt]

A comment from a Washington Post reader called "Sheepherder" made me wonder who he is, and whether he would say this publicly if he was identified:

I doubt it. I am sure it would be easy for certain folks to figure it out.

[StephenB]

Roast prime rib at the East River place -- Mattemashita!

[Pat]

Also worth noting about the story is that it is another awesome piece of writing by Jane Black who I now probably enjoy reading more than anyone else who appears regularly in my morning newspaper. Does she have a blog or is there another spot to keep track of her work?

http://www.janeblack.net/

Link to twitter is there too.

[Waitman]

Who's up for seconds?

[Heather]

I doubt it. I am sure it would be easy for certain folks to figure it out.

Washingtonpost.com commenters are among the lowest of the low amongst internet trolls. It would be nice to see this one called out to verify the mud he is flinging.

[Pat]

Washingtonpost.com commenters are among the lowest of the low amongst internet trolls. It would be nice to see this one called out to verify the mud he is flinging.

A person with the same username posted on one of the weather threads there today that he had more than 300 ewes about to lamb. For whatever reason, the commenters' names on the weather blog aren't hyperlinked into a user profile the way others are, so I'm not 100% sure it's the same person. If so, he really does seem to be a sheep farmer.

That aside, I liked the article.

[durwoodx]

A new entree from the article at the forthcoming Ray's East River location: "A heart-attack-on-a-plate dish he dubs the Biggie, in honor of the late Biggie Smalls: a T-bone steak, cheese omelet, waffle, hash browns and a biscuit with bacon gravy."

Oh, my aching arteries.

[Michael Landrum]

...but may have played up the Steak Nazi persona a bit much....

I know poor Jane is shaking in her shoes waiting to hear what I post about this article, but I will only say this:

This article is in no way the piece that I was asked to give an interview for.

This article in no way reflects the interview I gave.

I have no idea who the fuck Shallah Jewel is or what his relationship is to the Post for him to be quoted in this article.

In addition to the family I lost in death camps, my adoptive mother (while serving in the army in Israel) was orphaned at the age of four in 1944.and after surviving death camps and DP camps herself lost her eldest son, an officer in the Golani Brigade's commando unit, at the age of 19, just as my sister lost her eldest son at the same age on December 31st of 2009 (a fact only relevant because it was while after his funeral that Jane reached me to arrange her interview). While living in Tel Aviv, I lived next door to a synagogue where I was daily ambushed to pray, having not been raised Jewish, in order to fill the minyan--which never reached beyond 7 or 8 (allowed under these circumstances)--because the members of the congregation, tattoo'ed all, had died off or were in the process of doing so and had no children to replace them. I lost several of my friends, members of the Second Generation (Dor Ha-sheni) to suicide, a common phenomenon. The only mention of the term "steak Nazi" I made was in the context of how abhorrent I found it that the term would be applied to me and how sickened I was that that word and my name would appear in the same sentence--a point i made very clear to Jane. Shame on her for including it in her article.

Other than that, all I can say is what a waste of time. I can only hope that this missed opportunity to tell a real story only slightly diminishes the work I hope to achieve when I open up in Ward 7.

Oh, and my wine splits suck.

[DonRocks]

This article is in no way the piece that I was asked to give an interview for.

Jane interviewed me by email for this piece. She was very close to deadline, working with space constraints, and was only able to use part of what I wrote.

Last night, I wrote her and expressed concern that this sentence:

Rockwell has deleted other Landrum rants.

might make it sound like I willy-nilly go around deleting peoples' posts.

With Jane's permission, I'm going to include the full text of the final email I wrote her, unedited:

Rants, but with a small "s"...

Really, that one against Tom [talking about Michael dropping the F-bomb in response to a comment Tom Sietsema made on his chat] stands out as unique in my mind, and I deleted it before Michael had a chance to change his mind (within an hour), so to judge him solely on that would be unfair. He had his moments in the battle against Marc Fisher, of course - I still think Marc was out-of-bounds in publishing a private email on the Post's website for all to see, but I also think Michael was out-of-bounds for bombing Marc the way he did. So I consider that one a fist-fight in the schoolyard.

In general, I think everyone is entitled to get PO'd, or drunk, and type something they regret - I know I have. :-)

Twenty years ago, it was the drunken phone call in the middle of the night; now, it's something much more permanent. But I'm digressing ...

If I've deleted 50 posts from Michael in the past five years, probably 47 of them were because they were goofy, 4 AM one-liners that were completely off-topic. My overall impression of Michael is that he's deeply haunted, dangerously smart, and has a heart of gold beating behind eyes that view the world differently than yours or mine.

Jane completely agreed with that last sentence, and wanted to quote it, but couldn't because she was up against deadline. She thinks highly of you, Michael, and I think you're being quite harsh in your response. The truth is, with all the rest of your lovable quirks, you DO have a reputation as something of a - I'll choose my words carefully here - "my way or the highway" restaurateur - and had she not presented that aspect, she would have painted an incomplete picture. As for the "N" word: When we have restaurant chains ridiculously named "Soup Nutsy" (yes, there was actually a Soup Nutsy in the Reagan building at one time), you can blame the writers of Seinfeld for putting that association into our mass collective consciousness.

I'm literally about to run out the door, so if my thoughts aren't well-formed, I'll correct and edit them later.

Cheers,

Rocks

[zoramargolis]

A comment from a Washington Post reader called "Sheepherder" made me wonder who he is, and whether he would say this publicly if he was identified:

The comment is no longer there--apparently removed by a moderator.