Gold's new 101 restaurant list in LA?

Epicurean Exploits - Food and Recipes
1

Surprised there hasn’t been any more chatter on the new list and Vespertine’s ascension to #1:

http://ballots.latimes.com/lists/101-best-restaurants-jonathan-gold/

Bruce

2

cause it’s a boring list. Vespertine shouldn’t be #1, you won’t find a single well traveled “foodie” that actually thinks it’s peak cuisine. His list in the top 20 is tired and the same over and over.

3

Jonathan Gold deserves credit for writing about great, overlooked/unknown to white folk ethnic restaurants while at the LA Weekly. Since moving to the LA Times five years ago, not so much.

4

Totally agree with Mark. I find Gold to be relatively useless when he reviews “fine dining.” His so so review of Kali last year convinced me to ignore him. [help.gif]


Cheers!
Marshall [berserker.gif]

5

The Vespertine reviews from all LA reviewers and even the NYC times are the most confounding reviews I have ever read. They barely talk about the Food.

6

I’m going to be the stodgy one and say that the list is fine. It’s not perfect. It contains some restaurants that hold their place by being standbys and Gold favorites. I also agree that Gold is best for off the wall ethnic. But even though I love that, they are usually at lower price levels, without some amenities. So while they are great QPR, it’s understandable that they reasonably aren’t well represented by that definition of “best restaurants”. I mean really, where do you fit something like Langer’s or Guerilla Tacos on a “best” list? I think it’s weird that Vespertine is number one. But it surely has a complex experience and attention to detail that warrant attention.

But if you picked a random dozen places in the top 30, you would be eating really well. You’d have to supp,event with some QPR spots, but would then be doing fine.