Alvaro Cunqueiro, critic and winemaker
I do not know if the title of this article corresponds exactly to what I want to say in the lines below, with regard to the interesting discussion to formulate food critic on Sumito Estévez in his column last Sunday. As the arbitrary metaphorical title could be confusing, once declared that he was thinking about a text by Alfonso Reyes when I came. I refer to the Monterrey conference that issued the August 26, 1941 at the Palacio de Bellas Artes in the capital Mexican. His readers know it as Aristarchus or anatomy of criticism , luminous essay quickly became a Latin American classic on the subject. In it, Reyes says with unsurpassed efficiency verbal, the real criticism is also a creative act. After discussing their grades (printing, exegesis and trial) and some of its pleasures (speech, swallow and the hawk), reveals the high social duty of an office which fertilizes the enjoyment, pleasure spreads, share images , preserve or renew values \u200b\u200band something that is fundamental: education finely. Many are those who conclude moved reading these unforgettable pages of Alfonso Reyes, enthusiastically thanking the critics, or wanting to be such.
After reading the text alfonsino I find it difficult to avoid its influence. I step, then, and without any resistance, to the expected analogy: food critics also can (and should) be an act of creation. Let's see. While fulfilling its role as counselor, the food critic does not have to be at odds with literary grace. On the contrary, it strengthens and illuminates his desire of communication and its desire for dialogue. Illustrious names attest to this assertion. I say the July broadcast Camba, Alvaro Cunqueiro, Joan Perucho, Xavier Domingo, Manolo Vázquez, Néstor Luján, to name a few English, Rodolfo Hinojosa, D `Artagnan, Jaguar, Julio Pazos, Ben Ami Fihman, to name the South Americans who remember at this moment. While we can not require you to reach high levels of Cunqueiro (and other of the above), food critic, well dried culture, must have a decent pen, at least. Anything you would not ask reasonable manner to any journalist who is respected. Unfortunately, more often more illusory this basic demand. For this reason, another obvious analogy Reyes stemming from the trial: the restaurant critic should be educated. This brings a wealth of knowledge in the service of good writing. Piracy is not compatible with genuine criticism. A firm support must accompany the job of food critic, if it is true, it must be a honest hobby and not a pose. Not have to be learned in culinary cultures or any science, but can not be ignorant to the extreme of ignoring the basics and dare to pontificate from a blog or a magazine page or newspaper, on chefs and meals.
The food critic is part of a scope that goes beyond what some involved. I mean, this noble profession is not limited to writing on public or restaurant kitchen. Covers a huge range that includes the popular tables, fairs, products, markets, schools , not to speak of history, traditions, techniques or innovations own or foreign. Finally, the field is the innumerable variety. To serve as a better way to work, the food critic must be free to scan the vast horizon. Just know you are not alone and that is one more piece of food culture, not reduced or fashion brands. May not be over stated that the exercise of criticism is not compatible with the flattery, but not with ninguneo and slander. The critical intellectual is a toilet, not a fan of misery.
Finally, do not forget that the cook should be critical of himself. Sometimes it is better to hear the inner voice of a brainy "critical" being "around all" does not tell the difference between yams and taro, or between the cilantro and parsley.
0 comments:
Post a Comment