So this is what it's like to be the one under scrutiny. Whether it's a plate of food or a book, the critical process is much the same. Somebody does the work, somebody else pronounces on it. It was about time I got to experience the rougher end of that bargain.
The people who know best how to deal with criticism are the marketing folk. They have a simple tactic: pull out all the best comments, sometimes out of context, and ignore the less flattering ones. As it happens, there have indeed been quite a few nice things said about my new book, Tough Cookies: "a delicious tale" - the Observer; "revelatory, principled and entertaining" - the Independent; "full of colour and insight" - Scottish Herald. I could go on - a little. And when Tough Cookies comes out in paperback, no doubt these are the quotes that will, in time-honoured publishing fashion, be plastered all over the cover.
But hey, I'm nothing if not even-handed, so I'd like to take this opportunity to balance things up with a quick summary of the much less flattering comments, just in case you missed them.
The first major review of Tough Cookies was by Jonathan Meades in the Sunday Times. It was a long piece spread over two pages with some very nice pictures of the chefs mentioned. Most of the review is actually spent discussing the state of eating out in Britain, together with the deficiencies of many of our chefs and the current crop of restaurant critics.
It wasn't a horrible piece, but about halfway through he said: "Wright seems to consider that sequinned macramŽ is gastronomic nirvana." Now that hurt. It was like being accused of being a Genesis fan.
According to William Sitwell in a (thankfully tiny) review in the London Evening Standard's ES magazine, Tough Cookies is: "the most obsequious book about chefs ever written". Actually, to be perfectly accurate, Sitwell says that a "publishing friend" tells him that it's the most obsequious book about chefs ever written. Inspired by this second-hand reporting, I decided to ask my very own publishing friend what he thought of Waitrose Food Illustrated (the magazine that Sitwell edits). Disappointingly, he told me he quite liked it.
That kind of anonymous review does leave you kind of intrigued as to the identity of the critic. You'd like to think, of course, that it's just somebody you might have upset in a previous life. That way it's much easier to dismiss the likes of the "Count of Monte Cristo", a correspondent on the (excellent) eGullet website, who reckons that I have my "head stuck so far up Gordon Ramsay's arse" that I may have lost a bit of perspective. Well, were it true, I imagine it might have that effect. Actually, the Count - if I may be so familiar - wasn't actually commenting on Tough Cookies directly but on criticisms of Egon Ronay's new guide that I made in this very column. Like I said, I had it coming.
Source: Caterer & Hotelkeeper magazine, 07 April 2005