Favorite in class text: My favorite in class text was Tacopedia by Deborah Holtz and Juan C. Mena. I liked this text because it was accompanied by a class discussion that forced me to consider how food connects to history, culture, race, and identity. Instead of simply thinking, “This corn tortilla was made somewhere and now I have a taco”, I  was exposed to not only the history, but also the importance of corn as a staple food in the Mexican culture.

Favorite out of class text: My favorite out of class text was Perfect Neapolitan Pizza, a clip from TV show, No Reservations, with host Anthony Bourdain. I really appreciated this ‘text’ because it was a multimedia text and I had never before considered that the written word and the multimedia version could be one in the same. This text might have also been my favorite because it is linked to my favorite class project, the annotated bibliography.

What does the Rhetoric of Food mean? I now know that the rhetoric of food is incredibly broad. It is meant to bring joy to people the same way that food itself does. Whether it’s a multimedia platform, poetic piece, food review, or recipe, texts are published to insight a feeling within the reader or viewer. The rhetoric of food is meant to tell a story. We can use the rhetoric of food to look at everything we already know through a different lens; whether that be history, socio-economic status, culture, and so on, food provides a new perspective into these dense aspects of the human world.

This link will take you to my blog the Common Eater where you will find a review of Second Bar + Kitchen! Check it out!

The Common Eater

I am exploring the genre of restaurant reviews. After conducting research, I have gathered that reviews come in all shapes and forms. Some reviews are extremely biased while others try to remain more open-minded; certain reviews critique a particular food at various locations while other authors take the route of reviewing all aspects of a single restaurant. When assessing this genre, I tried to take all of these variations into account, so my sources have a wide assortment of style preference. However, while all of these reviews are somewhat different, they still fall under the same genre of a ‘restaurant review’, therefore they all have formal and functional similarities.

What should it contain?

Always: 

• A critique of the food
• The atmosphere in which the food is consumed
• Brief description of the restaurants location
• Directly or implicitly provide the author’s credibility

Sometimes:

• Include the restaurant’s chef
• Provide comparisons of similar restaurants
• Include photos
• Address how pricey the restaurant is
• Inject a biased opinion

The functional elements include giving the reader the ability to make an informed decision about whether or not they would enjoy a dining experience at the particular restaurant. The author provides a detailed summary about what a typical meal at this restaurant would be like and through the use of strong imagery, the reader is able to envision the event being described.

Sources:

• Restaurant Review: Guy’s American Kitchen & Bar in Times Square
• Jonathon Gold goes on a holiday crawl across L.A
• Austin Chronicle Restaurant Review
• Restaurant Review: Uchiko
• Fed Man Walking: A Month of Sunday’s Brunch

Questions:

• What makes me qualified as an author to write a food review?
• Which type of review do you think is more interesting: a singular restaurant or a”best of” list with a particular food
• As a reader, are you more interested in food reviews or beverage reviews?
• Any suggestions for which restaurant you’d be interested in reading about?

Austin Chronicle Restaurant Reviews

For my mentor text I chose a local restaurant review website that is relevant to my audience because as of right now we all live in Austin. I am a strong believer in researching a restaurant and checking out their menu before committing to a meal, so this particular type of text is incredibly close to my own passions regarding the rhetoric of food.

Restaurant reviews vary from author to author, but I appreciate the reviews on this specific website because they present a biased point of view. After reading a review from this site, the reader is able to understand if the author appreciated their overall dining experience, but is also capable of removing themselves from the particular opinion and is left to consider the facts that have been laid out before them. This type of opinionated review is beneficial to me because the imagery created within the article is so vivid that the reader is able to place themselves in the restaurant and assess whether or not they would enjoy the certain environment themselves.

The review I provided of Forthright, written by Brandon Watson, has notable factors that deem this text a superb mentor review to analyze. He begins by establishing his credibility as a long time Austin-ite, reminiscing on the city’s changing food scene over the years. Following his opening statements he declares what ‘restaurant category’ Forthright is most closely linked to and provides restaurant comparisons in hopes that the reader will find this relatable. Watson knows all too well that when assessing a dining experience, you have to address all of the factors involved, so he also successfully lays out a description of the restaurant’s ambiance and environment.  At this point in the text, the visual reader has an image of the atmosphere and is then presented with a detailed review of the menu’s hits and customer favorites. I thought Watson’s inclusion of dish prices was unique and beneficial to the reader if they were considering budget. Another simple aspect that makes all the difference in this review is his final text at the bottom where he includes the restaurant’s location and hours of operation. While yes, any diner could easily Google this information, it is helpful to provide these details with the review itself.

Watson, Brandon. “Restaurant Review: Forthright.” The Austin Chronicle. The Austin Chronicle, 28 Oct. 2016. Web. 22 Mar. 2017.