Any food magazine with huevos?

By huevos, I mean a magazine that doesn't slide into the chirpy dungeon of everything's great, with nice pictures and transparent, children's book prose.
I guess I mean something that Anthony Bourdain could regularly publish in, without the censorship I feel he's getting currently in his reviews in Gourmet (or is it Bon Appetit?--they're all the same). Something that accepts a small side of swearing and sexual references with their main fare--something akin to Jim Harrison's excellent food writing.
Anyways, looking for places to publish.
Thanks for any help or pointers.
Cheers,
Parker
(hopefully I'll have a report on my Haggis experience a week ago soon, if my pictures come out)

Other than the "in print" part, it sounds like you are describing LTH Forum.

Parker,

I think your best bet is going to be a non-food magazine that publishes food articles or columns from time to time. The best example I can think of that fits your description is Esquire. They usually have a food article, they certainly have some huevos, and they're smart enough to publish stuff that intelligent people might actually want to read.

Best,
Michael / EC

I've been enjoying the Spring edition of

http://www.gastronomica.org/

Reading the first half of Parker's post, I was going to suggest Harrison's book. Esquire is where Harrison really shined with his column, "The Raw and The Cooked." I will have to look at the introduction to his book of the same name, but I think he started the column at another magazine, or was writing a different-named column at another magazine. His column's were my introduction to quality food writing.

Sadly, Esquire in my estimation, along with Playboy, and other magazines of that genre, had their huevos surgically removed by some post-femininist, ultra-modern, political-correctedness, neo-con, ball-busting, focus group think, two-bit censors, pussy publishers and sellout editors. Yes, Virginia-slim, there were those of us who liked to read the articles. The idealist in me thinks it wasn't just a matter of economics. Anywhoo....you should pick up a copy of "Best of Food Writing" for some of the less well known writers.

You might also scan some of the articles or blogs linked to Saute Wednesday.

While certainly not the raw side of Harrison or Bourdain, if the Joy of Room Service written by Parisian girl-next-door-Madonna-fanatsy-fulfillment-candidate, Clotilde, on the blog Chocolate and Zucchini doesn't have you creaming your crisco and sugar together, then perhaps you need to be directed elsewhere.

I think you have to go onto the Internet to find the kind of fearless food writing you want. For instance, there's this Dave Hammond guy...

Thanks for the tips. Gastronomica looks especially intriguing.
And I agree that Esquire and Playboy have had their laced-up skivvies handed to them. I attributed the downfall of mags such as these to the incoming of such verbal smegma as Maxim.
Anyways, hopefully i'll find a place for this article on Danny's BBQ in Carlsbad, portions of which were posted a ways back.

Chow magazine isn't bad...they actually rate products, slam things deserving slamming (Pom Wonderful) and publish articles by writers who publish in...Esquire. It is sassy, snarky, and fun without kissing too many be-hinds.

And if you could write off your sub, like I do (work, doncha know), you could subscribe to all of them....

Has "Chow" changed things around?

I greatly anticipated the first issue being on the email launch list for maybe a year. However, the first issue was pure crap, nothing but puffery. I swore I wouldn't buy the rag again.

Well, I don't know if things improved from the first issue as I never saw it. Given that I had no expectations, I actually think it is very good - much more enjoyable than the pompous saveur, more informative than food & wine or gourmet or bon appetit. I like the edge it has. I like that they have at least one incisive article per issue, lots of funny food stuff, and interesting comparative reviews of products with no holds barred. If you expect a magazine that changes the world, this isn't it, but it is fun. Frankly, I find magazines like gastronomica too academic and self-congratulatory (oh yes, we are the elite of the culinary history world, let's go to oxford and talk about ourselves and authenticity for a few days). So given my penchant for lcd writing, Chow has suited me just fine.

Queijo wrote: Frankly, I find magazines like gastronomica too academic and self-congratulatory (oh yes, we are the elite of the culinary history world, let's go to oxford and talk about ourselves and authenticity for a few days).

Yeah, those self-congratulatory elitist types are really hard to take... (link)

its nice to know that some of you pompous types can be self-effacing too.

pdaane wrote:

Sadly, Esquire in my estimation, along with Playboy, and other magazines of that genre, had their huevos surgically removed by some post-femininist, ultra-modern, political-correctedness, neo-con, ball-busting, focus group think, two-bit censors, pussy publishers and sellout editors. Yes, Virginia-slim

Offensive? Yes. Blaming women for removing men's balls on a forum that talks about eating bulls balls? yes.

Just stop it.

Queijo wrote:its nice to know that some of you pompous types can be self-effacing too.

And in turn, nice to that the lcd can climb up on the soapbox, every now and then.

ParkerS:

Gastronomica I find to be an interesting but in ways odd publication. The mix of pieces included varies considerably, from genuinely academic articles on food history (e.g., an outstanding little piece of scholarship in the first issue on Sicilian cheese in Medieval Arab cookery by Charles Perry) to journalistic treatments of current food-related topics (e.g., a recent piece by Alma Marin on eating and not eating in the besieged Sarajevo of the early 1990's ) to artistic pieces, including original work in poetry and the visual arts. It is unquestionably geared toward a well-educated and well-read audience and tries to make connections between things culinary and broader intellectual discussions of the day. Post-Modernist approaches to food do not especially inspire me but even some of the least appealing pieces that appear in Gastronomica I find at times thought-provoking and worthwhile. Whether the journal overall should be accused of being pretentious is a matter for each to decide for himself but it remains that many articles that are published therein are interesting, informative and well worth the while for those who enjoy reading things that aren't dumbed down for a very broad audience. All in all, I think the editors want to be maximally different from the mainstream and so their magazine may well be a destination of interest for you.


***

Queijo wrote: Frankly, I find magazines like gastronomica too academic and self-congratulatory (oh yes, we are the elite of the culinary history world, let's go to oxford and talk about ourselves and authenticity for a few days).

Queijo:

I strongly suspect you have never attended an Oxford Symposium or read the papers to be discussed at one; it also seems likely enough you don't know much about this kind of gathering or what the people who contribute to it actually do. Strong opinions based on real knowledge are always welcome but the sneering assertion you throw out above demonstrates that your opinions are at least sometimes based on nothing more than uninformed ill-will. We should all bear this in mind whenever you post.

Antonius

Antonius:

Tsk tsk too bad you take it all so personally - you assume I've been following you and your exploits when in truth it was only when Amata linked your 'news' that I learned of your involvement. If a dislike for some scholarly research of food (which can come across in the hands of some writers as snobbery and conjecture) is enough to be snubbed by you and yours, then so be it. My lowest common denominator friends and I will continue to eat, will continue to reflect on it, and will do so freely, knowing that it will be without comment from you.

And funny, Antonius, I actually have spent a great deal of time researching food history at the Schlessinger in Cambridge. And reading papers from prior meetings. But you wouldn't be able to tell that from my posts, would you? Don't assume anything about someone you don't know. I can have opinions you don't like and be educated at the same time. Just because something exists in singularity doesn't mean all involved in the field support it. Now I'll go cuddle up with one of my 750 cookbooks and do some research. Cheers.

Queijo:

Please accept my most humble apologies. Had I known you possess so many cookbooks, I never would have responded in such an impudent manner.

Antonius

some are even hardcover.

Alright you two, let's get this thread back to the subject topic...finding writing with edge or huevos.

BTW, I am pretty sure huevos is a reference to male genitalia, used slang wise to mean exhibiting more stereotypical masculine characteristics than feminine characteristics, in this case unapologetic vulgarity and sexual references. If this offends you, I suggest you not read the #@$%^&* thread.

Quijo, I agree with you, Gastonomica always puts me to sleep. I would tell you what I really think about a symposium on authentic recipes, but I kind of like Antonius Anyway, that's his shtick and that is fine by me. I haven't read an issue of Gastonomica in a while, but from what I recall, I wouldn’t call it edgy or a place that Bourdain could publish without getting censored.

Let me be a bit more descriptive about what I didn't like of the one issue of Chow that I read. I can find all the LCD writing in the Tribune and Sun Times...I don't need to pay an additional $5.00 to get it from a magazine. I raced to the bookstore to buy the first issue of Chow. It contained at least 4 (IIRC) articles that were engineered puff pieces (you know that same feeling when Jimmy Johns is selected as a great find in Cheap Eats and the Friday section has full page JJ advertisements).

But, after your post, I am going to check out the magazine again...I won't buy it, but I'll flip through it at the bookstore. Perhaps they found their legs...I think the publisher had great difficulty getting out the first issue, but it was a sellout (her background was pr for the dot com industry, no?)

I miss the days when Jim Harrison wrote for Esquire. You see when I was impressionable there wasn't such a variety...sure we had a Galloping Gourmet that was a real piece of work and a Frugal Gourmet, that was....well, may he rest in peace, I will always appreciate the hours of entertainment he provided.

Well anyway, stumbling upon Harrison's work in Esquire at the barber shop (coincidentally, the first time I was also asked if I wanted a shave). Here was a man's man. Here was a guy that could write. Here was a guy that referred to all commercial brands of BBQ sauce as bung drainage. This was a guy that talked about hunting and gutting deer and making a savory soufflé to go with a rack of venison. A guy who in three pages went from daydreaming about young nude coeds bouncing through the quad and then explaining in easy to understand terms why a certain sauce should never be used with meat. Let's just say, as Harrison might, my pink morel was at full attention.

Sadly, I don't think the market supports Harrison-esq writers. Perhaps the only place to find them is on LTH and blogs. The marketplace or society (NOT JUST WOMEN TO BLAME), have told me that I can't appreciate Miss September and intellectually stimulating writing in the same magazine. I either have to be an enlightened intellectual eunuch or a dirt bag...screw verisimilitude. I have to choose, Maxium or Gastronomica. They are trying to make us all out of ticky-tacky, They are trying to make us all the same. They are trying to put me in a box. “In a box?” In a box before I am yet dead. Now, that is just wrong.

Has Al Goldstein done any food writing?

Christopher Gordon wrote:Has Al Goldstein done any food writing?

Don't you mean 'Joyce Goldstein'?

Fans of JG: Just kidding!!! I've never read any of her stuff but will one of these days.

pdaane wrote:BTW, I am pretty sure huevos is a reference to male genitalia, used slang wise to mean exhibiting more stereotypical masculine characteristics than feminine characteristics, in this case unapologetic vulgarity and sexual references. If this offends you, I suggest you not read the #@$%^&* thread.

[*omitted*]

Sadly, I don't think the market supports Harrison-esq writers. Perhaps the only place to find them is on LTH and blogs. The marketplace or society (NOT JUST WOMEN TO BLAME), have told me that I can't appreciate Miss September and intellectually stimulating writing in the same magazine. I either have to be an enlightened intellectual eunuch or a dirt bag...screw verisimilitude.

See, now, this I agree with. The problem (ok, *my* problem) with your original comment was the claim that feminism (or post-feminism, which I'd love to see a definition for--I thought post-feminists were pro porn) was responsible for taking the good writing and articles out of Playboy. My gut says blame marketing consultants and the insatiable public demand for dumbed down entertainment. Why pay writers and take risks with controversial material when those pages could instead be filled with more ads and airbrushed, safe photos? (Or, in the case of food magazines, one more recipe for flourless chocolate cake or fajitas.)

Just my two huevoless cents.

Kristen

I am glad you now agree

"Post-feminist" was used in the OP as a time-period adjective to describe the genderless two-bit censors, pussy publishers and sellout editors. The period was to invoke the negatives that came from the era, rather than the good. Actually, genderless may be extreme; as I would rarely describe a female exhibiting more female stereotypical characteristics (i.e., a lack of risk taking huevos) as a pussy publisher...I meant those males in control of the content at Playboy and Esquire.

My use of Virginia-Slim was also confusing. Although, I like the turn of that phrase. Yes, Virginia, a belief does not need a physical manifestation to exist.

Anyway, we can get off this gender digression and just concentrate on food writing for either sex that is not dumbed down....the field is still pretty small, but happily IMHO it is growing

BTW, I think Saveur is best in this class. I can usually get past the pretentious travel article and the one product placement as necessary evils of the trade. The balance is well written and inspirational...I have often passionately discussed articles from Saveur with other LTH'ers to my great amusement. I find it more unapologetic for its quest of the best, which can as often as not be found in the humble confines of family traditions. To me, that is not pompous.

pdaane: I think the Lydon family's vacation in Nantucket feature is one of the most obnoxious articles I have ever read in that magazine - it is precisely that article which inspired me to fling the 'pompous' word at Saveur. Featuring a gin and tonic on the cover may have been interesting if the Lydons suddenly abandoned Boston politics, radio, and the stiff jawed accent they favor while speaking to distill their own gin. Which, I will hazard, won't be happening anytime soon. I started subscibing to Saveur in '96 or so and those issues are amazing -- I have kept all of them...but ten years on, the most interesting summer feature they can wrestle up focuses on the Lydons? Oh, please...I can get that in Town & Country. If I could bring myself to read it.

Until your boys at Maxim, FHM and Stuff learn a thing or two about food, I guess there aren't a lot of options for 'writing con huevos'. Zannen.

Queijo wrote: I guess there aren't a lot of options for 'writing con huevos'. Zannen.

I am not ready to give up just yet. I went in search of Chow magazine the other night, what I found instead was The New Yorker food issue. Read what Saute Wednesday has to say about it.



[Edited pursuant to Aaron's post below]
I did find Chow at Border's the other night.

BTW, I still can't get over the pseudo-hip-what's-new-in-the-zoo articles in Chow that are really just product placements, its more than half of the magazine. And, I don't even mind product placement. Check out what a magazine like Culinary Trends does with product placements. At least they have the courtesy to not treat me like a half-wit.

I also picked up the current Gastronomica. I wanted to read Julia Child eulogy issue. I only read the Jacques Pepin article so far, but the rest looks to be enjoyable reading.

Finally, Time Out Chicago seems to have a bit of edge without trading integrity...although I admit a bit of bias, since a few LTH Mods have written articles.

pdaane wrote:I am not ready to give up just yet. I went in search of Chow magazine the other night, what I found instead...

I'm not sure if you found it or not, but I did see Chow magazine for the first time today at Fox and Obel, by the cheese counter since they apparently got a mention. Didn't have time to take a look, but it's there.

Is it just about style, because from what they show on their website, Chow isn't doing anything anyone else isn't doing. Maybe there's just too much emphasis on the cooking part. I mean, there are a lot of mags that cover how to cook and recipes and really, do you want attitude with your recipes, or just a good recipe?

So if it's going to be done, I think it would have to focus more on travel and dining, except it might be more backpacking and chowing. That's not really covered that well. I'd like to see someone like Bourdain publish/edit such a monster, you could even call it No Reservations, and have it emphasize, like he does, off-the-beaten-path dining and travelling with down-to-earth writers. Something that celebrates the good, but isn't afraid to wallow in the mud or fling a little poo now and again, when appropriate.

I can see why some wouldn't like Gastronomica, but at least they truly are their own thing. They're not like any of the other food mags. For me, there is Cook's Illustrated, Saveur, Gastronomica, and then all the mags that are cloning each other and overlapping with the big food sections. How many more articles on Per Se need to be written? How many more on the blah blah of Tuscany? Even on the low-end, how many more articles do we need that cover the same crappy BBQ places, like Corky's, extolling them despite the shitty quality of their food?

extramsg wrote:For me, there is Cook's Illustrated, Saveur, Gastronomica, and then all the mags that are cloning each other and overlapping with the big food sections.

Ahem.

E.M.

Haven't seen that here in Portland. I'll ask at Powell's.

I don't think Art of Eating is sold in bookstores, it is by subscription only. I have sort of a love/hate relationship with Art of Eating. At $10 a pop, I am often frustrated with the monothematic issues; particularly when you can find several good used books with more depth and research at that price.

Behr is a terrific writer, I am just not sure I want only his perspective on dining all the time. I subscribed before, and I probably will again someday...like I said love/hate and that's my problem. Anyone who is interested for a first shot, should look at ordering one or two of the back issues, one on a subject of interest and one not...that way when you subscribe and get three issues that don't hold much interest, you will understand where your 40 bucks went.