Washingtonian.com, with Editors Todd Kliman and Ann Limpert

[CatherineAndrews]

Hi folks! Just letting you know about a few new things we've put up on Washingtonian.com recently.

-Chew on This: Which Locals Should Try Out for 'Top Chef'?

-An Early Look at the Reserve (With Menus and Photos)

-Some extra online-only Dirt Cheap Eat content - with a drool-worthy photo slideshow

-A report and photos from the Signature Chefs Auction

Enjoy!

Catherine
washingtonian.com

[CatherineAndrews]

Hi everybody - hope all's well. Wanted to share a few posts we've had up on Washingtonian.com that I thought you'd like.

-We scored the recipe for Jaleo's bacon-wrapped dates

-An early look at Againn, with photos and menus

-We want to know what you think of the 100 Things Restaurant Staffers Should Never Do list

-Todd Kliman's mother has started writing brief restaurant reviews for us. They're a great read!

-How to make the Greek Deli's delicious avgolemono soup, starring Kosta himself.

-An interview with David Guas, who's just released a great new pastry cookbook.

Enjoy!

Catherine
washingtonian.com

[Lola007]

Hi everybody - hope all's well. Wanted to share a few posts we've had up on Washingtonian.com that I thought you'd like.

-We scored the recipe for Jaleo's bacon-wrapped dates

Thank you, Catherine! That is totally awesome.

[PigglyWiggly]

This is cool...click.

A you tube interview and restaurant review, I guess Washingtonian does these. Makes the place sound really good!

[DonRocks]

This is cool...click.

A you tube interview and restaurant review, I guess Washingtonian does these. Makes the place sound really good!

Washingtonian.com does these for a lot of new restaurants, and they can usually be found on Washingtonian's home page; this is the first time I've seen one on YouTube. I've watched them several times in the past, and they're a fun way to pass a few minutes (I actually enjoy them more if I've already been to the restaurant, sort of like watching the movie after reading the book).

[Bart]

I'm surprised that no one has posted this, but here's a really long, but very interesting article on what it means to eat local.

This article appears in the May 2013 issue of The Washingtonian.

[lion]

I'm surprised that no one has posted this, but here's a really long, but very interesting article on what it means to eat local.

This article appears in the May 2013 issue of The Washingtonian.

Very good article by Tom Kliman.

[JPW]

Very good article by Tomdd Kliman.

Toddm Sietsema

[RWBooneJr]

Clash lyric eateries are the new cronuts. First Mockingbird Hill and now La Casbah.

Derek Brown really likes song references. Of all his places, only Hogo (which is the funky taste in rum) isn't named with one. (The other places' names refer to Iggy Pop, the aforementioned Spanish Bombs, and Aerosmith, in case you were curious).

[hillvalley]

Derek Brown really likes song references. Of all his places, only Hogo (which is the funky taste in rum) isn't named with one. (The other places' names refer to Iggy Pop, the aforementioned Spanish Bombs, and Aerosmith, in case you were curious).

Hogo is Tom's place, not Derek's.

[DonRocks]

I saw this on Todd Kliman's chat today:

BLOGGERS:

Hi Todd, 

I'm so pleased to be able to join part of your chat in real-time. I'd like to know what you think about how valid bloggers are in today's world? 

For the record, I am not a blogger. I am on the fence about the subject. A few years ago, I really disliked them, as I thought they tended to be self-serving random people who probably knew very little about xyz subject but pretended to be an expert. I'm sure there are examples of this that still do exist. 

At the same time, I have to move forward with technology, social media and the times. I think there are a small handful of bloggers who either do know what they are talking about or have illustrated over time that they are good at what they do and have some knowledge or innate sense about xyz subject. Many, though, to my mind, are what I perceived in the beginning - a vast wasteland. 

I am wondering how you think bloggers have changed (added or detracted) from a critics job or an expert's job, what they have added (perhaps from a missing vantage) to an industry or where the future of blogging will go and what changes might come to bloggers and from bloggers? Thanks for your insight.

Todd Kliman:

It sounds simple to say, but it really all does depend on the blogger.

Good writing is good writing, and I really don't care where it appears.

There are very good bloggers. There are many, many, many, many crappy bloggers.

A lot of blog writing about food is really dull, a predictable recitation of meals from start to finish with flat, distorted pictures of the dishes and little descriptions beneath them "” "this dish worked really well, I like how balanced the flavors were, etc." I guess there are people who want to read that; I don't.

There are food bloggers who are not dull, but then they tend to write in a very NOW voice that is full of false energy. Reading more than a few paragraphs of that kind of writing makes my head hurt. And then there's the fact that so many of these meals that are being written about are being funded by the restaurants themselves.

The future of the food critic may not be real bright. Papers are failing, and although magazines are, generally, in better shape, they are not as robust as they were. But being a blogger critic is not something I suspect you're going to be seeing. It takes too much money. Which means corners have to be cut, which means the would-be blogger critic ends up attending media dinners and making the rounds of various functions around town. Or accepting ads on a website, compromising claims of independence. Or both.

This is both a good question, and a good (if, perhaps, pre-formulated, scheduled) answer.

The bold, enlarged text is mine, and should remind everyone that Washingtonian is notorious for not just "accepting" ads, but for funding their entire venture with advertisements, or variants thereof - if it weren't for advertisements, Washingtonian Magazine would not exist. Period.

In fact, they have enough advertisements from restaurants where they're seemingly able to "drive a wedge" between the "restaurant section" and the rest of the magazine - the perceived dichotomy being completely false, and the independence of their restaurant critics (and they have several) is dependent on one thing and one thing alone: the personal integrity of the critic, or lack thereof.

Maybe I shouldn't go so far - after all, newspapers and magazines were traditionally funded by subscriptions, for the most part; but now, in the age of the internet, any reader should assume that it's nearly 100% advertising that "funds" the salaries of restaurant critics - if they can generate enough revenue (i.e., "subscriptions" or "advertisements" or 'other fundraising items') from the masses to justify their salaries, then they will stay employed; if not, they will be terminated.

On a related matter, I ask that ANY restaurant in town (including their ex-employees) step forth and expose Don Rockwell for being anything less than 100% honest, truthful, ethical, and faithful to his readers. Likewise, you should feel free to do the same with every other restaurant critic in town.

Please come forth. Your posts here will remain unedited. There is no other place that I know of that promises untouched postings about people who review your restaurants, and I'm promising that in this thread (unless you just come on here and curse, or do something mischievous like that).

Please come forth.  Even if you're a new member - sign up, and spill your guts.

There's one thing in particular in that Q&A that I agree with. Todd wrote this:

There are very good bloggers. There are many, many, many, many crappy bloggers.

There *are* many, many, many, many crappy bloggers, and the "very good bloggers" Todd refers to can be counted on one hand, and often last for months. Todd Kliman himself is the single most skilled writer of any restaurant critic I know of.

Read that last sentence again. It does not mean that Todd is qualified to judge restaurants any more than Vladimir Nabokov was (interestingly, Nabokov was also a renowned lepidopterist); it merely means that he is a great writer.

In particular, Todd Kliman is a great long-form, novel-or-exploratory writer.

Yet, he's a terrible short-form internet writer, just like Patrick Makau or Gezahegne Abera are terrible "sprinters," and being a great long-form, expositional writer has nothing to do with ones ability to judge a restaurant.

Does that sound snippy? Because if it does, I can tell you that I wish I had half of Todd Kliman's writing skills. and also that, on the other side of this coin, being a great long-form writer certainly does not *preclude you*, in any way, from being a great restaurant critic. 

[jayandstacey]

I had a discussion years ago with a musician relative.  He argued that a musician has "sold out" once they sign with a major label and play big venues.  I argued that from a money perspective, an artist "sells out" the minute they accept their first penny.  BUT...from an integrity perspective, artists can hold on to integrity regardless of the money flow.

I did concede that it is easier for an artist to lose their integrity as the money increases and in fact we see that so often that it is easy to merge the two concepts.  Yet they remain different.  So while it is possible to make money and uphold ideals, the money makes it harder to do so and even harder to appear so.

[bettyjoan]

Speaking of long-form writing, I really enjoyed this piece about our very own hmmboy - http://www.washingtonian.com/articles/food-dining/for-restaurateur-mark-kuller-a-third-course/index.php

[Mark Dedrick]

Thank you for confirming this for me, I've long felt that Todd Kliman is not just a good writer for a restaurant critic or food writer, but just a fantastic writer period. 

[Rieux]

I have to say, I am finding it almost impossible to read Kliman anymore.  The self-righteous histrionics he has gone into over the perceived slight of a guest (who was not invited over for food) not eating just makes me crazy, and is indicative of his holier-than-thou attitude in much of his writing. http://www.washingtonian.com/chats/kliman/tuesday-september-24-at-11-am.php and last weeks chat.

[DonRocks]

I have to say, I am finding it almost impossible to read Kliman anymore.  The self-righteous histrionics he has gone into over the perceived slight of a guest (who was not invited over for food) not eating just makes me crazy, and is indicative of his holier-than-thou attitude in much of his writing. http://www.washingtonian.com/chats/kliman/tuesday-september-24-at-11-am.php and last weeks chat.

[Prepare yourself for a Kliman-gram ]

[RWBooneJr]

I have to say, I am finding it almost impossible to read Kliman anymore.  The self-righteous histrionics he has gone into over the perceived slight of a guest (who was not invited over for food) not eating just makes me crazy, and is indicative of his holier-than-thou attitude in much of his writing. http://www.washingtonian.com/chats/kliman/tuesday-september-24-at-11-am.php and last weeks chat.

Todd did say that, at least in part, he was trying to provoke discussion, noting:

Well, listen "” part of the fun of dredging this up again was to don the cloak of righteousness and get huffy all over again.  I'm not saying I didn't feel those things at the time, but I didn't express them like that. That's one of the fun things in writing, the adopting of a mask "” to say things with more intensity or extremity than you might otherwise as you play and explore.  I say things that I mean in the moment. An hour later, I might feel differently. A day later, I might have forgotten all about my state of mind at the time. I also, in discussions "” and this is a discussion, is it not? "” say things that I'm trying out. To see where I go. To see where a conversation goes. Maybe I mean them. Maybe I don't. Maybe I think I mean them. Maybe I mean them more later. Maybe I don't mean them as much later. Maybe I mean them less later.

As one who enjoys the "devil's advocate" role, I can appreciate this, though I recognize that it can be annoying.

That said, it seems clear that Todd actually was put out by this male guest of his wife.  One could imply a certain sexual dynamic and resultant territoriality, but the circumstances suggest that the guy was probably just a bore.  Had he otherwise been an engaging person, the perceived slight of refusing food would have seemed, if not trivial, much less.  In other words, refusing hospitality was not why the guy sucked, but a symptom of it.

Personally, I would have eaten unless I had a compelling reason not to, if only to be hospitable.  Conversely, I'm not sure I would have cared that someone didn't eat, had I been the host.  But I have known a number of people with eating issues, so I'm kind of used to it.  After religion and politics, food seems to be the thing that makes Americans the most crazy.

[dcandohio]

But, but, but...presumably the "friend" has an inkling about Todd's profession and can read Todd's chat and can recognize himself...in that case, the discussion of the guest's behavior is kind of rude, don't you think? Todd's not having an intimate discussion with like-minded friends. He's criticizing a person he barely knows in a very public forum for a perceived personal slight.

[Rieux]

I just feel, if I was invited to someone's house, and it was not clear that dinner was being offered during the visit and it was at a remotely dinner-ish time, I would definitely eat first, so as not to be starving.  And, not to put my hosts out.  And, then, I would feel no obligation to "just have a bit" if I had just eaten and randomly their dinner was offered to me.

Actually, I would think it was pretty weird that food was being offered if it wasn't made clear when we made the plans.  If someone is inviting me over at a meal-ish time  and they didn't say "come for dinner" I would assume no food would be served.  It's not like Kliman said he put some olives out, or cheese for nibbles.  He was eating dinner.  If I recall, it was pasta and crostini -- as a guest I'd find it strange to have been invited over at a time my hosts were apparently having dinner, and not to have been told in advance whether to eat or not.

I am not sure if any of this is making sense....

[RWBooneJr]

If I recall correctly, the "friend" was an out of town guest, making the likelihood that he'd ever see the discussion rather remote.  Mrs. Todd, on the other hand . . .

As for whether the guest was wrong in refusing the meal, my point is that it's immaterial.  If he had done anything else that would have inspired Todd to like him, whether or not the friend ate anything wouldn't have mattered, or wouldn't have mattered much.  I'm guessing Todd would have disliked this guy regardless.  It's not so much a question of etiquette as it is one of charm (or lack thereof).

[Tujague]

I have to say, I am finding it almost impossible to read Kliman anymore.  The self-righteous histrionics he has gone into over the perceived slight of a guest (who was not invited over for food) not eating just makes me crazy, and is indicative of his holier-than-thou attitude in much of his writing. http://www.washingtonian.com/chats/kliman/tuesday-september-24-at-11-am.php and last weeks chat.

I dare say, you ain't seen nothin' yet.

[Pat]

I just feel, if I was invited to someone's house, and it was not clear that dinner was being offered during the visit and it was at a remotely dinner-ish time, I would definitely eat first, so as not to be starving.  And, not to put my hosts out.  And, then, I would feel no obligation to "just have a bit" if I had just eaten and randomly their dinner was offered to me.

Actually, I would think it was pretty weird that food was being offered if it wasn't made clear when we made the plans.  If someone is inviting me over at a meal-ish time  and they didn't say "come for dinner" I would assume no food would be served.  It's not like Kliman said he put some olives out, or cheese for nibbles.  He was eating dinner.  If I recall, it was pasta and crostini -- as a guest I'd find it strange to have been invited over at a time my hosts were apparently having dinner, and not to have been told in advance whether to eat or not.

I am not sure if any of this is making sense....

What the guest was told in advance was that it would be drinks and something light.  Pasta is not light, and that is what this person already had eaten before arriving.  Crostini may fit into the light category, and if I'd been in this situation I'd probably have tried to eat a couple of those to be polite, but I really hate eating when I am full/don't want food.  By the time he arrived at the house it was 8:30, which to some people is fine as a dinner time and to others is way too late.   Communication about this event was obviously not clear enough in advance, so there's not much to be done in the aftermath of that.  Todd's wife was the only one who was hungry, as he'd already eaten too.  Presumably he's used to eating multiple dinners, though.

[DonRocks]

Todd Kliman has a new column beginning today: "OtherWise."

"The Beard Awards Have Noticed Washington's Food Scene Still Lacks An Identity"

I'm not saying this isn't true, mind you; merely that it's a classic example of Post Hoc Ergo Prompter Hoc.

And if this is true, then why has DC been so strongly represented in the past? The Mid-Atlantic Category has gone to either DC or Philadelphia 20 out of 25 times, with only five chefs outside of these two cities *ever* winning the Mid-Atlantic award: Desaulniers (VA), O'Connell (VA), Foo (PA), Shelton (NJ), and Presilla (NJ). Neither Maryland nor Delaware has ever won the Mid-Atlantic category. Since 2003, DC has had Andrés, Cashion, Trabocchi, Cooper and Ruta (tied), Ziebold, Monis, and Sunderam - that's 8 chefs in 13 years - plus Richard and Andrés as Outstanding Chefs in the Nation. If you want to go back to the awards' inception in 1991, you can also include Palladin, O'Connell (if you consider O'Connell to be DC), Donna, Kinkead, Clark, and Buben (making it 13-14 chefs in 25 years) and Palladin and O'Connell as Outstanding Chefs in the Nation (making it 3-4 chefs in 25 years).

You can make a very strong case for Goyenvalle, Pastan, and Armstrong getting hosed, but other than that, what more could you really ask for?

Note also that, up until the final round of voting, only a relatively small group of James Beard Administrators has the final say on who gets nominated. I'm not saying this is bad (in fact, I think it's good); I'm merely saying this is the way it is.

Also, the Beard Awards are almost purely political; they don't represent reality, or at least not my view of reality. Not to mention that Philadelphia is closer to New York City than DC is, and a disproportionate number of judges are from New York City (this problem is only becoming more prominent as the years go by, as the number of New York City judges is growing like a cancer every single year) - there's a rule that says, "You can only vote on restaurants where you've eaten," so if a judge has only eaten at one of the nominees in a category, for example, there are two - and only two - choices for that judge: vote for that restaurant; or don't vote at all (*). The flaws in this process need no commentary. I also personally know of judges who've told me they're voting for restaurants only because their friends own them (and no, I can't rat them out because they told me this in confidence) - you can also rest assured that chefs tend to vote for their friends' restaurants, hence making the awards a giant popularity contest.

(*) Example: For this year's Outstanding Wine Program (a national award), the nominees are: A16, Bern's Steak House, FIG, McCrady's, and Spago. If I were a judge, for example, I could either vote for Bern's Steak House, or no-vote in that category, as I've not been to the other restaurants. Is that fair to them? I'm not saying there's a good solution (you cannot expect judges to go to every restaurant in the United States unless you pay them to do so, or hire a group of full-time, professional judges with no conflicts of interest); merely that there's a problem, and at the end of the day, it all becomes a New York City-based PR game. I cannot emphasize enough how big of a problem it is that there's a guaranteed winner from New York City each-and-every year (since there's a Best Chef: New York City category) hence at least one additional New York City judge the following year. And, in practice, there's more than one, since there are awards for Best Service, Rising Star Chef, Best Wine Program, etc., that are inevitably skewed towards New York City.

The sad truth is: If someone opened the best restaurant in the world in Alaska, it couldn't ever win (at least not legitimately) because not enough judges would be able to try it.

I don't think this is any "daring exposé"; in fact, I suspect most Beard administrators would agree with me. And, the heart of the matter is: I'm not offering up any solutions because I don't have any. But, at some point - perhaps many years in the future - the Beard Foundation is going to be forced to address the issue of a disproportionate number of New York City judges.

[darkstar965]

I find this pretty interesting.  Personally, as a big fan and avid consumer of what talented producers and chefs create, I care less about what an out-of-town "authority" decides DC's food seen is or isn't it's "identity" or how high it ranks. But, of course, my interest is broader that that as I care about the businesses and people behind them who see greater success from recognition.

It is a puzzle though.  Don's theory about the limitations of the JBA's judges' time and scope makes as much sense as any to explain the snub.  Less thoughtfully than Don's view, I wonder about the average age of the judges and whether they just aren't interested in doing the hard work to really know this town. After all, to say it's "improving" as TK relays from his talks with others, implicates speakers as maybe being a bit behind?  I felt like the gerunds were more applicable five or more years ago, than now.

I heard another theory from someone close to the JBA with real knowledge of this.  That thinking is about a flawed assumption surrounding a generational shift here.  In other words, some of our more established food journalists and critics may (knowingly or unknowingly) be creating an impression that we're in the throes of transitioning from the older, entrenched chefs like Furstenberg and Wiedmaier while handing the baton over to young guns (Silverman?  Isabella? Red Hen?) still making their name.  While interesting, this also feels misplaced to me; though it may be true.  After all, some of our best talents are in the middle of those extremes.  Ruta, Trabiocchi, etc.

Another thought I've been noodling is about our regional food shed. Joe H has taught us all a ton about why we should appreciate the VA wine industry as one of the very best in the nation. Our ratio of farmers' markets to population has to be top 10 in the nation.  And, the abundance of producers of regional things like Chesapeake oyster reclamation and honey to craft brewing and all manner of produce is clearly visible on the plates of so many of our wonderful restaurants. Did they consider that at all as a differentiator? Part of this somewhat nonsensical "identity?"

Finally, my analytical bent wonders if the notion of thinking about a city's food "greatness" as a proportional exercise, relative to the population, transience, and degree of sprawl, even crossed the minds of the fine Beard judges?

To put Baltimore as better than DC due to blue crab seems a bit wacky.  Portland (an admiitedly great food town) is characterized as having strong identity around "artisans, food trucks and bakers."  Huh?  We have some artisans 'round these parts and surely a bunch of food trucks. While bakers are in shorter supply, how about the international breadth given the uniquely diverse international population here.

It's all very silly. But, of course, it all really matters to too many livelihoods to dismiss. Kudos to TK for focusing on this, btw. I think he does the local an important service with that.

[squidsdc]

I hate to say it because I can't pin down exactly why, but TK gets on my nerves. I don't like to admit it out loud as I keep hoping maybe I'm reading him in a bad mood or I need to give him a second chance. Or Third. Or Fourth, or.... I keep reading his chat weekly hoping my feelings might change, but finally have given up. I read this article for reference to the conversation and to hope that maybe I'd like his viewpoint in a different setting, but no such luck. His writing comes off to me as pompous, and bears attributes of what he disses others about. And he cuts down on other critics--why is it necessary for any food writer to undercut another in the same field? Maybe it's the manner in which he does it. Really bugs me that there is no "agree to disagree" viewpoint as his is always right, instead of being his view.

I think he could have stood up for what DC represents well, and why is it that the multicultural aspect is not "seen" by others? Why try to justify that DC doesn't have a culinary viewpoint? Because he thinks it so as well? I just think there may be a better way to get the conversation started.

[Rieux]

I just want to say I agree 100% with squidsdc above and feel the same way. But she expressed it in a way I never could quite get right.

[mtureck]

I've gotta say, I'm not entirely sure where the criticisms of this article are coming from. It's a straightforward piece about how DC is perceived by people outside of the area. I'd even say it's probably one of the most objective pieces I've ever seen from him.

[DonRocks]

I've gotta say, I'm not entirely sure where the criticisms of this article are coming from. It's a straightforward piece about how DC is perceived by people outside of the area. I'd even say it's probably one of the most objective pieces I've ever seen from him.

I can't speak for the others, but just to make my comment more clear: I wasn't really even talking about the article; I just went off on a random tangent.

That said, I don't think the article is particularly well-woven - I have trouble finishing it, and am still not quite sure what it's main point is.

[Bart]

That said, I don't think the article is particularly well-woven - I have trouble finishing it, and am still not quite sure what it's main point is.

I sort of feel he had a conclusion in mind (DC lacks an identity) and then went looking for "facts" to support it. The whole "food identity" thing is a little weird too. Sure New Orleans has a definite identity, but does New York City have one? ONE? Or does it have a thousand identities from the run down mom and pop joint serving great food for a couple of bucks to the highest of highs at Per Se where dinner and drinks for two will be around a thousand bucks.

I hate to say it because I can't pin down exactly why, but TK gets on my nerves. I don't like to admit it out loud as I keep hoping maybe I'm reading him in a bad mood or I need to give him a second chance. Or Third. Or Fourth, or.... I keep reading his chat weekly hoping my feelings might change, but finally have given up. I read this article for reference to the conversation and to hope that maybe I'd like his viewpoint in a different setting, but no such luck. His writing comes off to me as pompous, and bears attributes of what he disses others about.

I totally get that. I think he has a second city mentality as a critic. Not sure if that's the right word but a lot of time he comes off as "of course I knew about that place and I'm insulted that you thought I didn't" in certain questions. For instance, I remember recently someone asked if he'd of some little place in a strip mall in the burbs and his answer was along the lines of "I wrote about it back in September" (with a snooty shot of arrogance and elitism thrown in for good measure). Another time someone raved about another little place and his answer was "You must not have been following this chat for long, because I've been going there and writing about it since 2012". To me he always seems to need to prove to the masses that he's been there first and is annoyed by the mere suggestion that he may not know of some place. With Tom at the Post, it's much more of "Yeah, I love that place, I'm a fan too" attitude where we're all equals just getting a meal. With Todd it's like he's a lot more equal than the rest of us commoners.

[The Hersch]

Judging by how often it comes up in the mainstream media and the blogosphere, the subject of How Washington Ranks as a Food City seems to exert an irresistible fascination over many people, which for the life of me I can't understand. Can somebody explain why anybody gives a shit about this subject?

[DonRocks]

Judging by how often it comes up in the mainstream media and the blogosphere, the subject of How Washington Ranks as a Food City seems to exert an irresistible fascination over many people, which for the life of me I can't understand. Can somebody explain why anybody gives a shit about this subject?

You know what? This is a really good point.

[Bart]

Maybe it happens in every city?

[Josh]

Judging by how often it comes up in the mainstream media and the blogosphere, the subject of How Washington Ranks as a Food City seems to exert an irresistible fascination over many people, which for the life of me I can't understand. Can somebody explain why anybody gives a shit about this subject?

It can certainly be tiresome to read about, but I'd say people care about this for the same reason they root for the Nationals/Caps/Wizards/United/that other team.

[DonRocks]

It can certainly be tiresome to read about, but I'd say people care about this for the same reason they root for the Nationals/Caps/Wizards/United/that other team.

You know what? This is a really good point.

[Bart]

It can certainly be tiresome to read about, but I'd say people care about this for the same reason they root for the Nationals/Caps/Wizards/United/that other team.

I was just reading the Post online about the Nats game last night and in the middle of the article they had a little video clip with the title, "Fans Weigh In: Is DC a good sports city?"

[Al Dente]

Kliman still owes me lunch for holding off on Thai X-ing:

My fellow Rockwellians,

I've decided I can't share this information-- I want this place all to myself.

Sorry,
Al

P.S. On second thought, I may feel more charitable on Friday.

[DonRocks]

Kliman still owes me lunch for holding off on Thai X-ing:

I am your witness.

(Don't count on collecting.)

[lion]

Judging by how often it comes up in the mainstream media and the blogosphere, the subject of How Washington Ranks as a Food City seems to exert an irresistible fascination over many people, which for the life of me I can't understand. Can somebody explain why anybody gives a shit about this subject?

When people talk about other cities food history, regional specialities, or movements there is a sense of gravity to it which is lacking in DC. For a city like DC there is a feeling of that absence.

[Simul Parikh]

"The Best Cheap Eats in Washington, DC" on washingtonian.com

Apparently ethnic food is cheap and good, and no western cuisine really can be cheap and good, save for pizza. Oh, and bbq.... Sheesh

[Josh]

1 hour ago, Simul Parikh said:

Apparently ethnic food is cheap and good, and no western cuisine really can be cheap and good, save for pizza. Oh, and bbq.... Sheesh

I don't know that that's a fair reading of this list. After a quick once over, I counted ~20 "Western" (as in European or American) restaurants on the list.  

Is that too few?  (Not a rhetorical question. I'm curious as to what folks think would be appropriate.)

[Simul Parikh]

20 of a 100? 

I don't know .. It's just that there is a consistent issue - people won't pay money for ethnic food, and this list pushes that idea. Maybe you're right, and I'm being sensitive, but it just annoys me a bit. We live in America and 80% of the cheap eats are non-Western. It's the idea that French, Spanish, etc food is the only food worth paying a lot for... 

Apr 22, 2016 - "How Americans Pretend to Love 'Ethnic Food'" by Roberto A. Ferdman on washingtonpost.com

 

[DonRocks]

6 hours ago, Simul Parikh said:

We live in America and 80% of the cheap eats are non-Western.

We live in America and 90% of the cheap eats are American fast-food and quick-serve garbage.

[Simul Parikh]

In that list 

[DanielK]

6 hours ago, DonRocks said:

We live in America and 90% of the cheap eats are American fast-food and quick-serve 

5 hours ago, Simul Parikh said:

In that list 

Then the other way of looking at it is that cheap American food is bad, and cheap international food is good.

[Simul Parikh]

Hmm.. That's a good point.