December 22, 2007
Ziggedy Zaggedy Zagat
The new Zagat is out, at least the one "devoted to Seattle" restaurants. And with "all due respect" to "local editor" Alicia Comstock Arter (who also contributes to Northwest Palate), it's "a freakin mess." The trouble, "brewing for years," is that the "capsule reviews" take isolated "nouns and adjectives" from "reader comments" and string them together to make "nonsensical" and "often inaccurate" profiles. It's a Fox News approach to dining, all pseudo-oracular, disjointed headlines with "little substance."
For the record: 759 eateries, contributions from 3,165 self-described frequent diners. Herbfarm leads the list for food and service, as expected, but second place for food goes to a bakery in West Seattle, for God's sake. The Georgian leads for decor. Canlis, Rover's and Mistral also score at the top level. But Uptown Espresso as the city's "best buy"? Seattle's a cheapskate town, as if we didn't already know: average check here is $27.68 while the national average is $33.15. (Why should this be described as a good thing?)
Another problem: the misleading ranking of what Zagat calls the "most popular" restaurants. Zagat's top five: Wild Ginger, Dahlia Lounge, Metropolitan Grill, Canlis and Zoe. Actual retail "most popular" (most customers, highest revenues) are Space Needle, Salty's, Ray's, Daniel's Broiler. Either most Zagat diners don't eat where the rest of us do, or they lie about it.
Not to mention that a book like this is outdated even before it hits the bookstores, never mind the editor's note suspiciously dated Dec. 5, 2007. Supposedly "new" places that aren't new at all (DiVino, Wild Rover, Lark, Umi). Oh, and don't think you can go to Tavolata for a "quiet conversation."
More wildly inaccurate stuff online, where ZigZag Café is said to be "cigar friendly" (WTF?); a reader complains that Salumi 's menu isn't vegetarian-friendly (this could happen only in Seattle!); other readers ding Rover's and Canlis for being stuffy and overpriced (duh). It's the Yelp-ification of dining: acclamation and judgment by noisy, ignorant boors.
If you like this sort of thing, the online version is free with registration. Bottom line for the print version: "a waste of $12.95."
| 
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
[ report this ]
I received a copy for free for submitting a few reviews. It gives us a quick guide to checking out new places that we haven't heard of. I think if you can get it for free, it's worth having around.
[ report this ]
I received a copy for free for submitting a few reviews. It gives us a quick guide to checking out new places that we haven't heard of. I think if you can get it for free, it's worth having around.
[ report this ]
For what it's worth, Zagat's isn't a real review book. It really is a printed sort of Yelp guide. I think you're being a little too hard on them.
FWIW, I find the electronic version useful for when I visit unfamiliar places and lack local recommendations.
[ report this ]
Yeah, you wouldn't want to read anything with comments by the slovenly masses. Rather than the "ignorant boors" you can get your dining news from a "pretentious bore" like Ronald.
[ report this ]
Reply to Larry B: that's my point, Zagat's not a review book at all but transcribed shouts & murmurs...just like Yelp. Although there are many "contributors," each individual restaurant has relatively few reader mentions, resulting in "bizarre" quotes and "absurd" attributes.
Replying to BigYaz: does da Seattle Timez Ceiling Cat (whence comes your email) know what you're up to? Surfing the internetz can be hazardous to parochial outlooks. But, yeah, if it comes down to it, I'd rather be called pretentious than be ignorant.
[ report this ]
Hmm, so anyone who posts a criticism of Seattlest gets their IP address tracked and subtly threatened with exposure if they might be posting from a work account (which, incidentally, I'm not)?
Talk about small-minded. You seem very happy to criticize just about everyone else who writes about food and wine, yet get mighty defensive when it's aimed at you. You may want to try some therapy for that.
[ report this ]
One step at a time, BigYaz.
Anyone who posts online these days is certainly savvy enough to know that IP addresses are a matter of public record. You park your car, they take your license number. You don't like it, don't drive.
As for myself, how can I possibly be less defensive about my own very modest competence? The only local food writer I have a problem with, as you surely know by now, is Leslie Kelly, who needs to get a real job somewhere, preferably not where her husband works.
[ report this ]
I really don't want to continue this back and forth, but trust me, as a network consultant I know all about IP addresses. What I don't understand is why the source of a comment is important to you as a blogger. Do you have some need to ascribe motive to anyone who might criticize your overblown prose? Or to issue vague threats about "outing" them ("Does the Seattle Times know...)? It just seems small-minded and petty, not good traits in someone who likes to put their own opinions out there.
[ report this ]
What do you want me to say? That I agree, my unedited prose is occasionally overblown? That my curiosity about those who comment on my posts could be considered inappropriate? That like most mortals I can small-minded and petty? Guilty, guilty, guilty. Welcome to the imperfect world of blogs.