LOL! Point taken!

Perhaps it's my youth that leads me to feel more at home at Local than at Street & Co. Then again, perhaps it's the contents of my wallet.

I love the idea of great food in an unexpected, unpompous place.

Gastronomic irony. Kind of like Vientiane.

BTB, I had the hangar last time we went. I could not agree more -- spectacular. I thought I couldn't get it any better than 555, but Local's is the best I've ever had.

And you didn't mention the wine list. That's one of my favorite parts!

I'll notify you if Local starts doing take-out.

Cheers,

~Jes

BTB is the best webronym I've seen yet!

I'm with Jes, I like the atmosphere. And the ripped bread is mighty tasty, whatver its appearance. I think they're going for a casual "family-style" feel when it comes to that, but I could be completely wrong. Maybe they just need more knives.

Their wine is good, but I don't like that it's served in juice glasses.

I have to get back there again soon. I've I see you there I'll buy you a juice glass of wine, John.

Hey, Jes--

And maybe it's my remembrance of times past that leads me to more forward-looking places. If it were a little less dreary I'd go again and again. I know my neighbors do.

WOW! My two favorite bloggers.

Quite an honor to share a cyberpage with you both.

Colleen perhaps I'll see you at Local this weekend. I believe I'll be there Friday night and possibly Sunday for brunch!

I love the juice glasses.

I also love the Red Sox updates on the brunch menus during baseball season (and sometimes with off-season trades).

Cheers,

~Jes

john, first i love the reviews, your the only person in portland to be critical of any restaurant. thank you! i find the taste and tell on sundays useless as it's comments are always positive and tell little about whether i would want to go there or not. i do have a question though. when reviewing restuarants are we comparing to portland or restaurants in general such as in boston in nyc? Although i enjoy street and comp. it's not highly inventive. it reminds me of legal seafoods in boston. Very fresh stuff and good but notthing that special. There are no masterpieces and presentation is just ok. Is it just me or are we after the whole experience in dining when we pay the prices we do when we eat out. when i go out in a true city i think nothing about a $150 bill for two but you better give me everything. ambience, service,food and last but not least presentation

NIck--

Thanks for your nice comments. I'm glad the restaurant pieces work for you. I see no point in painting false pictures just to be nice. My aim is to be honest about what I feel the exeperience is all about. Of course my opinions are subjective, as they should be. I may think something is terrific and someone else may not. Yet, true taste and quality always win out.

I write about these restaurants for what they are and don't skew my comments to fit some Portland value system. In restaurants like Bandol, Hugo's, Fore St., Back Bay, etc--these are places that I think can stand proudly alongside others in bigger cities.

Basically I look at them with a universal eye. They are what they are, good or bad, no matter the location.

Bandol is having a special dinner on the 24th of this month, and I'm sure it will cost a bundle, but at least the food will be worth the price.

I agree %100. The key for me is that no matter the cost is it worth your time and the price. i didn't agree with you on duckfat. i thought high quality ingredients great taste but not for the price. However, Bandol, hugos expensive but very much worth it. I think what some people don't get is that the search for a great restuarant inovlves everything and the restuarant needs to deliver. Fore instanc local 188 is ok but i agree it doesn't deliver everything. When i dine I want to say I couldn't do that at home!

Nick--I agree. But I still disagree with you about Duckfat. I go there quite often now when I want a quick lunch. I usually order one of the soups, along with either the duck salad or cheese wedge plate. Really good, filling, and reasonably priced. The flavors are great. I do think they'll have to add new items constantly so regulars won't get bored.

Nick brings up an interesting point about the Taste and Tell review on Sunday. It's been quite some time since I've read anything remotely critical in that column. I don't think C.Z. Cramer ever said anything critical about any place, so it must have been the reviewer before that. So it must have been 3 or 4 years ago, but I do recall that when a local restaurant got a bad review the paper would be inundated with angry responses from people who would say that the reviewer was "too critical" and even "putting the livelyhood of the restauranter in jeopardy." Conversely, when the review was positive, there would be no reaction, which could explain why Taste and Tell hasn't had a reader's comment in three years.

It does raise some interesting questions though, and John perhaps you can share your thoughts about this. Does a food critic, or a theater or music critic for that matter, serve a different purpose in a smaller community like Portland than they do in large cities like NY or LA? A news reporter in Portland should work by the same tough journalistic standards as a reporter in Chicago, but should the food critic as well?

I'm not referring so much to John's blog here, which I imagine is read by people with a particular interest in food and dining, but more to the Taste and Tell in the Sunday paper which is read by a much wider and more general audience. Let's face it, if the food critic from the Times came up here and took over the Taste and Tell column, applying the same standards, most restaurants would be lucky to get one star. The reviews would be much more critical, and I think many readers would be taken aback.

Personally, while I wish the Taste and Tell columns were a little more critical and insightful, I don't think we neccessarily need a Times-esque reviewer. I think a critic in a smaller city like Portland has much more impact on his/her community than the Times reviewer does. I know for a fact that a restaurant or theatre review in this town can affect the business of that eatery or theatre significantly. Accordingly, I think a good reviewer in this city should balance a critical eye with a sense of social responsibility.

Just a quick thought. A critic from NYC or any other major city should apply the same standards to a smaller community as a larger city. However, these standards should and usually do include multiple visits to a particular establishment before a review is written. Any and every restaurant has an off night and readers should be made aware as to whether or not the review is made from these multiple visits or not.
Also, in a major city restaurants are easily catagorized and rated comparatively since there will be multiple versions of similar cuisines. We have one Salvadoran** establishment wheras NYC or LA may have 5, 10 or 20. To compare our Salvadoran establishment to any one in particular would be a disservice to both but it will certainly help the reviewer in establishing a base point of comparison. However, since we only have the one, the reviewer neesd to consider the local flavor, who we are as citzens (although there certainly are more NYers here now then before), what our style as a community happens to be and the economic impact of a smaller population with a limited number of patrons able and willing to eat Salvadoran.
**Please note that the Salvadoran reference was made solely to illustrate a point. I have no financial or other interests in this particular business.

What I'm hearing from many of you is that you prefer reading an honest, unexpurgated piece of criticism that aims at all angles. Critical reviews of theatre, film, books, restaurants, et al should all be under similar scrutinies.

Some reviewers, though, like to be mean. John Simon in New York Magazine took great pleasure in being nasty. But, beyond the hyperbole, he was often right on.

William Grimes in the NYTimes was a great restaurant reviewer. HIs critiques were beautifully written, and his finely tuned perceptions about culinary matters were downright brilliant. They were a treat to read. He was honest, cutting when necessary, kind when needed. Overall he did his best as a journalist to show all sides of what he was writing about.

I agree that the pandering, sappy, watered down review is a useless vehicle. It certainly isn't good journalism.

Would it suffice to say that the film was pleasant, the painting was nice, the ballet was energetic and the book readable?

Hardly.

Yet, Portland is a small town. One misplaced sneeze could cause unnecessary harm. If something is really bad, then leave it alone. It will find its own demise soon enough.

If a reader is hit with writing that has no point of view, then what's the use of doing it in the first place? It's one thing to say that the cows crossed the road to get to the other side. And another to say that the cows crossed the road, looking like a bunch of fat, aimless bovines. Who cares if they crossed the road? Maybe they stopped in the middle. But in the last scenario I at least found out they weren't happy.

When I had decided to go to Local 188 the other night I knew that I'd be critical of the decor. I just don't like places like that. And I"ve said that before, often saying, why am I here?

I went because a reader asked my opinion, and I thought it was high time that I re-visit the place.

The food was nice, good, in fact, and I made sure that I said so. But it would h ave been terribly wrong of me not to bring up every impression that I had. I do this blog to make my opinions known, not to censure them.

And that's great to do as long as I do it honestly and responsibly.

Basically I try not to hold anything back. What I find I report on. And that's that.

The comments that have
been made h ere are really terrific. They're honest, forthright, funny and real. Please, keep them coming.

I just want to say that I was not drunk when I posted my first comment. (The typos! The grammar!) A 7-year-old stole my identity, I swear!

Anyway, whether you're reviewing a restaurant in a big city or a small one, you should never bend over backwards to try to be nice.

And let's face it; while a reviewer shouldn't go out of their way to slam a place, slams are far more interesting to read than love letters. So long as the slam is honest.

And good point about visiting restaurants multiple times before reviewing, Nick. But also consider this: If your or I go ten times and they're having an off night one or two times, no big deal. But what about the person who only goes once and it happens to be an off night? It's probably little consolation to them that the place is USUALLY good, especially if dining out is a special event.

Good point JohnnyB, I mean.

Guilty of PWT. Posting while tired.

As the editor who encouraged John Golden to begin writing his blog, I can tell you that John is delivering everything we hoped for when we offered him the opportunity to write for us.

Here at MaineToday.com, we have the opportunity, through our blogs, to allow local people to share unfiltered opinions with the rest of our viewers. At the same time, we're not interested in allowing someone to use the blog to simply take shots or settle scores.

It's largely a matter of trust. John reports and posts completely on his own, without editing. We let him write based on his experience, maturity and understanding that whatever critical opinions he makes must be backed up by actual reporting. Other than that, he's largely on his own.

John has taken it from there and the results have been great so far -- entertaining, useful and fair.

I just hope he doesn't ever decide to go on a diet.

Scott--Thanks for your kind words. I have lots of fun doing this blog, even if it has altered my previously acceptable waistline.

What a great run of comments, I can't resist joining in.
One of the advantages of the blog is that we receive John's opinions on his dining experience without editions, or other distortions. I love this.
We have all eaten at places where we were part of a terrible night, on the other hand the opposite is true too.

My partner, SO, whatever - took me to dinner last night, in Cornish and we had a very pleasant meal. We have been there before and the owners are working very hard to maintain a good standard of food and service. It is not Fore St, or Arrows, but it is honest. Very honest when the owner says you may not like that wine, I'll bring you a taste. She was right, we ordered something different. She came over to see how we had done at the end of the meal and I told her honestly what was good and what was a little overdone. We were both pleasant, and we will return there again and again.
I live far enough away from Portland (an hours travel in all) so that dining in, is not a spur of the moment decision. John's comments are helping me navigate my way through the restaurant maze. We are so lucky having this many good restaurants in Maine.
Sorry about your waistline but please keep writing with honestly and detachment. I appreciate it.

Celia--Thanks for your comments. The waistline is in fact going down. I'll have a 33 inch waist in no time.

Where did you eat in Cornish? There was a charming place on Main Street that I went to once but it closed. Has it re-opened? Or did you eat at the hotel. I've been there. NOt bad.

Hi John et al,
After reading through your essay on your experience at Local 188 (and the ensuing comments), I feel that I have a few things to contribute to the discussion.

I agree entirely that reviews should be honest, critical, insightful, and well-written. I also believe that they should be respectful, especially in a community where reviews can have a huge effect on a restaurant’s business. That all-in-all the writing should be entertaining goes without saying as well.

John, you say in one of your comments that you were basically predisposed to not liking the place. To be fair to the folks at Local 188 and those who are at least interested in your opinion, I’m wondering why you didn’t disclose this fact at the very beginning of your review. It would have kept your subjective response to the décor/environment in context.

Considering that the title of your column is “Food for Thought,” I would have expected that the restaurant’s fine cuisine (you describe a meal that is, with little exception, “very tasty” or “so tender I thought it was filet” or, regarding the cheesecake, “the best I’ve had in Portland”) would be the central theme of your review. Perhaps the title would have even been something like “Pleasantly Surprised at Local 188.” Or even, more plainly, “Loved the Food. Hated the Room (but knew I would).” Instead, you chose to berate the restaurant with your choice of title and an insulting comment about feeling like you’d have to wash your hands between courses for starters. Having eaten at Local 188 on many occasions, I can tell you that I’ve never had any concern about the cleanliness of the place. Hell, I once received a piece of dirty silverware at Hugo’s, but I probably wouldn’t start a review of the restaurant by recommending that prospective Hugo’s diners bring their own Brillo pad! I found your derision to be a bit thoughtless.

Since you opened with such a negative comment, it colored the rest of your review. I read your words about the “well-seasoned” cookware, at first wondering why it even mattered, and then wondering if you’d be inclined to take Eric Clapton’s pre-war Martin Guitar away from him because it looked “shabby,” handing him some shiny, new more-pleasing-to-the-eye model for his concert appearances. Most artists (culinary artists included) like the feel of well-worn instruments, and coax the most beautiful melodies from them even if they don’t look like fresh-from-the-gourmet-shop Calphalon. On third thought, in re-reading your description of the cooks and their cookware, I see that it might have, in a different context, actually have been meant as romanticism, or perhaps even flattery. But who can say for sure, given the unrelenting initial negative spin.

Regarding your details about the food, I thought that I’d correct one inaccuracy. The food is Spanish-influenced (not South American). After all, “paella” is on the menu twice (two different versions). I CAN tell you that having been to Spain and sampled many a paella, Local 188’s paella is, in most cases, way better than anything you’d get in your most authentic Catalonian restaurant. Also, in Spain, the ‘tapas’ are small dishes that usually accompany late night drinks – and the ripped-up, olive-oil dressed bread that Local 188 serves is a fairly typical Spanish offering – unpretentious and very tasty, as one of your readers mentioned.

Finally, it’s worth mentioning that Local 188 stands out from most of Portland’s restaurants in that it doubles as an art gallery/performance venue, as well as a space where local artists, gourmet diners, and (well, just about anyone would feel welcome there) other folks can come together in community, take in good art (maybe even buy a piece), and have some delicious food or a drink or two. In fact (though the folks who own the joint might correct me on this one), I’d imagine that a certain amount of the accommodations are designed so that they can be easily moved (during art openings and concerts) – thus a little less plush than establishments that are exclusively food-oriented. I’ve never tried to run a gallery, but I think that most of the time they would probably try to create the ideal surroundings for the art, which might make for sparse choices in decoration.

I appreciate that your reviews are done blog-style, as I think that all of your readership can only benefit by a dialogue approach to culinary appreciation. From my point of view, a truly “negative” review is only merited when people’s health (or sensibility) is threatened. In the case of Local 188, especially considering how much it sounds like you enjoyed your meal, everyone might have been better served had you made THAT experience the memorable point – all the while coloring your review with your own aspersions about the environs for comic relief. If I said “John Golden, yeah he’s a really friendly guy, really knows his food well…needs to lose a pound or two, but all-in-all a good one to have around” it would leave a much different impression than “John Golden…he needs to lose some weight. All that food reviewing is really adding some ‘depth’ to his character, if you know what I mean. He is a really nice guy, though.” I’m sure you get my point.

In any case, keep the reviews coming. And welcome to Portland.

What great comments, Neil. I chose to disclose my feelings upfront so that the reader knew right away that generally speaking these sorts of places are not my thing. Then whatever comments came after might make more sense. I suppose it's a stylistic choice. If I were writing a mystery novel I could chose to say who the culprit was up front and then go into how it all came about.

IN any case I've been taken to task a bit about my off-handed comments and that's OK. I certainly have no wish to do anyone in. IN fact I've refrained from writing up other places just to leave well enough alone.

However, I write it as I see it, from a very personal point of view...nothing left unsaid, as it were.

In retrospect I might have made it clearer that one of my schticks about 188 was that it should be tidied it up a bit; it seemed a bit weather worn since my last visit. But I was quick to point out how much I enjoyed the food.

I think dining out is a total experience. IT has to include ambiance, food, service, comforts, price, etc.

I've gone to many places where the food is not fabulous but the surroundings are, and vice verse. I think these are important issues, which one wants to know about.

The best restaurant reviews are generally found in the NYT. It is the model for restaurant criticism. Though I'm not crazy about their current reviewer.

My style is more diary oriented here and one would hope that honest subjective/objective criticism would prevail.

All I'm doing is putting down my thoughts on food. There's a few other places in town that I feel are not living up to par lately, and I wonder whether I should bring it up or not or make sure I just didn't hit bad nights. This is risky business and I take it serioiusly.

Hi John,

I enjoyed your last comment and do appreciate that you have written ANYTHING critical about any restaurant. I hope you take on the sacred cows next--Street & Co. (fairly dull and unoriginal, to me), Fore Street, and especially, Hugo's (HOW much food do you get for the money? Not enough, for my money, not to mention the supercilious attitude of the waitstaff).

I wish you'd apologize, however, for your mischaracterization of L188 as a South American joint. It is a Spanish-style tapas bar.

Incidentally, you do know that tapas bars in Spain ONLY serve raciones, right? It is not a "trend" that they are following at L188; rather, it is the nature of the cuisine itself.

I may not agree with your opinion of Local 188 but I look forward to reading your next review.

Cheers,
Devin

this 50-something middle-income wanderer can't wait to visit the Local on our weekend trip next month - - we look for "local" flavor (in food, music, "scene"ery) wherever we go - thanks to the reviewer and his "critics" for the lead