MrBern
I'll Lock Up
- Messages
- 4,469
John in Covina said:Often in this situation the writer has actually formed an opinion before going to an event and then works to that end inspite of what they've seen, heard or read doing research.
Also, there is often an approach in which the writers own likes and dislikes are foisted on everyone as to what everyone's opinion should be, in sort of a "well this is obviously crap, you'd have to see that unless you're an idiot" style of writing. Sort of this way : "Of course everyone hates Yellow mustard, it's so ubiquitously non-descript, now Dijion that's mustard!"
Well, I can totally see that youd like to see a positive story. But the writer seems to have made his case by pointing out that this 'craze' wasnt really much more than a PR stunt with some lackluster results. Do you really expect the writer to mislead people by spreading some hype that he didnt find authentic????
Absinthe1900 very kindly posted this observational reply from a blog:
http://boozynyc.com/2009/01/the-times-takes-down-absinthe.html
The best part of the reply blogpost is in the COMMENTS which listed these two other articles in NYMAG:
http://nymag.com/restaurants/wheretoeat/2009/53183/
http://nymag.com/restaurants/wheretoeat/2009/53182/
Of those two links, one mentions being tired of 2008's retro absinthe fad. The other lists "Death in the Afternoon", an absinthe/champange cocktail as amongst the best cocktails of 2008.
Does that contradict?
NO.
The SCENE might be lackluster, but the cocktail could be fabulous.
Its a simple rule of logic, you cant compare a part to a whole.