Has anyone else noticed the changes at Gourmet? I was just telling a friend the other day that, although I subscribe to Gourmet, I barely read it. As much as I believe in supporting local agriculture and want to understand the implications of buying wild v. farmed salmon, the last year or two Gourmet has felt a little -- well, okay, a lot -- preachy. It also felt like maybe it wasn't sure who it was. Was it for gourmands? (See elaborate dinner party spread, pp. 96-104) For politicos? (See article on the evils of pig farming, pp. 84-87). For busy home cooks? (See Gourmet Every Day, pp. 60-62).
I picked it up in the bookstore yesterday, and started flipping through February. (Candied bacon caught my eye.) And I noticed that it looked a little different. There wasn't a single article that dealt with the business or politics of food. All of the features were first person narratives that intertwined food and travel. A shot of the Mediterranean's azure seas and rocky, goat-climbed crags screamed Turkey from one page; muted gray-greens and barren trees announced a piece on Massachusetts eating come wintertime from another; photos of Charlie Palmer and his family smiled out at me in an article about his charmed small-town life in Healdsburg from a third. Hell, even the piece pimped on the cover about soups was written by a woman who ran an English-language newspaper in Ecuador about the soups she ate on her lunch break served up from "battered aluminum pots" by "stout matrons wearing aprons."
I picked up January, which was still on the stands, and leafed through it, too. Same thing. I noticed some other changes as well. Like, Colman Andrews is writing the restaurant column (no more bad boy Bourdain?). Ruth Reichl, who rarely writes for the magazine, has a piece on Italian ceramics in one issue. And the Gourmet Everyday Quick Kitchen section seems to have expanded. I counted 13 recipes in one, 15 in another, each of the photos sniped with a bold number indicating how long it takes to make the dish: 10 min, 15 min, 35 min.
Someone asked me recently if I'd noticed any change in Saveur since their new editor-in-chief took over. My answer was, not really. But Gourmet? It's beginning to feel a bit like Saveur, with stories about real people in faraway lands and food as the backdrop rather than front and center.
I like it. I bought both issues and plan to sit down and read through them today.
But I'm curious. What do you think? Have you noticed other changes? Do you like them? Do you still read Gourmet?
Well, I've been an avid reader since Ruch Reichl took the helm and I've always liked it--before her they were offering recipes for food to eat while you are "darning socks by the fire" (!!the horror, the horror)--yes, 06 did seem to have a lot of "responsible eating" articles but I swear in every issue there was eye-widening photography and adventure and compelling narrative. But yes, I agree, I think the last couple of issues spectacular--I ate up the Italia-focussed issue--the writing was so good and about lesser known cities and areas (not just Tuscany or the Veneto or Lombardia or Lazio) and the photography made me want to jump on a plane.
I'm intrigued by the addition of Colman Andrews--didn't Reichl paint a verrrrry unflatting picture of him in her memoirs (Comfort me with Apples?) as her condescending, critical lover?--I was amazed at how frank she was in her dislike. I thought him rather creepy. And now....he's writing for Gourmet. That must have been an interesting rapprochement.
I'm glad you're enjoying and share your enthusiasm for Gourmet..as it is right now.
Posted by: E&G | January 25, 2007 at 04:12 PM
I like Gourmet Magazine.
Posted by: elle | January 25, 2007 at 04:27 PM
I vote for Gourmet.
Posted by: Karen | January 25, 2007 at 05:41 PM
I live in Japan, so don't have access to any of these (I'm an in-print girl, so the website is only foreplay for me). My husband has been touting Cooks. Any opinions?
Posted by: erika | January 25, 2007 at 07:20 PM
Karen's obviously biased. ;-) (She also wrote a wonderful article on Vietnam for the Jan issue).
But I do like this transformation, if that's what it is. I've always just kind of flipped through Gourmet before, saving my time to read each and every article in Saveur. But I actually read most all of the Jan Gourmet. Saveur is struggling, unfortunately. I haven't noticed any changes, but if the general public is open to this kind of Gourmet, why aren't they loving Saveur as well? (I'm obviously biased, too!)
Posted by: Robyn | January 25, 2007 at 07:29 PM
E&G - I was just discussing Colman Andrews with a friend, and wondering how that writing gig came about. Apparently it started in December, and not everyone is happy about it.
Karen - Looking forward to reading your article! And good luck with the move...
Erika - Do you mean Cooks Illustrated? Or is that different from Cooks? I used to really like Cooks Illustrated, esp. the reader tips up front - there is some really clever stuff there. But ultimately, I read cooking magazines for inspiration, and CI's thing is all about scientifically proving they've got the best roast chicken recipe. The recipes just aren't very interesting to me, but if you're learning to cook, or you're testing recipes, it's probably a must-have.
Robyn - Ya know, I'm kind of with you. Haven't been loving old Saveur as much as I once did. I'm not sure why but it just isn't as fresh as it once was. I kind of feel like, if I have to read one more article about the author's [fill in the nationality] grandmother's recipe for [fill in the blank food item] I will scream! And yet, I'm happy to read that in Gourmet. ??? Maybe the writing is just better.
Posted by: Catherine | January 26, 2007 at 10:00 AM
Enjoying this blog. I don't read Gourmet, but have been a Saveur subscriber for maybe two years. Lately I too have really been irritated with the "author's [fill in the nationality] grandmother's recipe for [fill in the blank food item]."
The change I've noticed is that Saveur now really seems to like highlighting some of the old American home "classics," but with very little updating or fiddling. And in their top 100 issue this year, canned peas and takeout Chinese were among the picks. That took me a little closer to cancelling my subscription.
Posted by: Christina | January 26, 2007 at 10:08 AM
Christina - As with Gourmet, I am guilty of flipping through Saveur so I think today I'll do a sit-down, side by side reading of the Jan issues of both mags and see where I personally net out. Just so I know where I want to spend my precious little reading time in the future. But your observation about American classics strikes me as correct. See, I actually like that - I am obsessed with the American South, so even though it's been done, I still really enjoy reading about it. I would be up for discovering some areas of the country outside the South, Maine and Texas tex-mex however.
Posted by: Catherine | January 26, 2007 at 10:17 AM
Hey, you guys, it's James, the editor of Saveur. I was just reading your intriguing posts. But hang on: Saveur isn't Gourmet, and Gourmet isn't Saveur! We just happen to be two American food magazines who've shared a lot of the same staff and writers and photographers over the years (though Gourmet has a higher circulation base than us, and, thus, generally speaking, it is less likely to experiment and push the envelope than we are--their stakes are higher). All I ask of you is to sit back and revel in BOTH of our efforts! It's not a competition! It's food, it's fun, enjoy! (And for every item that you disliked in the recent Saveur 100--the canned peas, the Chinese takeout, for example--surely there were others that caught your fancy. The Saveur 100 is ALWAYS like that. But that's what makes us Saveur.) Talk to you guys later.
Posted by: James Oseland | January 30, 2007 at 08:19 PM
No matter what, food magazines are still my guiltiest pleasure, but I wondered if anyone noticed how Food & Wine has become very similar to Bon Appetitm, with lots of glossy lifestyle features. I still like aspects of both, but am leaning towards Food & Wine.
I think in order I like: Saveur for the articles, Food & Wine for the recipes and Gourmet for the photography and recipes.
Posted by: SN | January 30, 2007 at 08:31 PM
James - thanks for stopping by. I just read the Top 100 issue the last two nights and personally, I don't mind the canned peas -- I think it shows chutzpah, and it also takes Saveur out of the land of the overly precious. I mean, we all eat canned peas (or frozen ones) and Chinese takeout, let's be thankful for that. But I do feel like somehow the magazine has gotten a bit...I dunno, less exciting?...over the last few years. I'm going to keep reading though, b/c like Robyn, I have been a fan for ages, and I really enjoyed January -- esp. the piece on homemade bitters. True to your POV and also very current. If you have time, I'm sure I speak for everyone in wondering how (or if) you plan to tweak Saveur in the months to come. For instance, is Christina right in noting more of a focus on American traditions?
SN - I don't read Bon App, truth be told, but I agree that they share some similarities with F&W. I read F&W primarily for the restaurant news.
Posted by: Catherine | January 31, 2007 at 08:40 AM
Well, I can't really comment on how "exciting" Saveur has or hasn't been over the last few years--I've only been in the driver's seat for the last three issues. But I think in those issues there has been some truly exciting stuff: Madhur Jaffrey's fantastic piece about tamarind; Irene Sax's respectful story about casseroles (yes, I do have a strong weakness for American food traditions); food editor Todd Coleman's fabulous reinventing of the Kitchen section in the back of the magazine.... As for what the future holds, just stay tuned!
Posted by: James Oseland | February 03, 2007 at 01:23 PM