Andy's Reviews > Dirt: Adventures in Lyon as a Chef in Training, Father, and Sleuth Looking for the Secret of French Cooking
Dirt: Adventures in Lyon as a Chef in Training, Father, and Sleuth Looking for the Secret of French Cooking
by
by

I'm a foodie. I've been to some of the places mentioned in the book and met some of the chefs. I read an excerpt of this book in the New Yorker and though it was beautiful. "Dirt" should have been perfect for me, but it wasn't.
The author writes about assorted weird obsessions more than about anything in the title, and the narrative skims around from one thing to the next without a clear progression of depth despite the duration and intensity of the underlying experience.
-Chef Michel Richard is one of the main characters even though he's not in Lyon. I understand why he was dropped in; because he is fascinating. That just pointed out how a biography of him would likely have been a better book.
-The author narrates the audiobook. His French pronunciation is painful, and this reveals a lot about the likely quality of his immersion experience. It's hard to imagine how he lived in France for years and worked in a bakery but can't say "boulanger" (he keeps saying "boulangère").
-This is mainly a sort of personal memoir as opposed to a book about food or French culture. But the author's personal story is disturbing. Without a goal of becoming a chef, he chooses to work 80 hours a week for months on end in kitchens so that his wife and small children are pretty much invisible.
-His "sleuthing" is I think referring to his trying to prove that French cuisine doesn't really exist because 500 years ago it was introduced from Italy, although it's not clearly proven exactly if, how or when. Whatever. Who cares? And even if you do care about such things, then why not take apart Italian cuisine and say it doesn't really exist and is actually American, given that tomatoes came to Europe from the Americas 500 years ago?
-There is a rich culture in Lyon to talk about and he touches on it with the bouchons and the peasants and the mères, etc. But he seems to be antagonistic to it all the whole time, so the tone is wrong and overall it's just a shame.
-There are so many books about the foibles of "those crazy French" or about French cooking. I don't think this is the one to start with.
Related books to consider:
Paris to the Moon
Bringing Up Bébé: One American Mother Discovers the Wisdom of French Parenting
A Year in Provence
Kitchen Confidential: Adventures in the Culinary Underbelly
Saveur Cooks Authentic French: Rediscovering the Recipes, Traditions, and Flavors of the World's Greatest Cuisine
The Apprentice: My Life in the Kitchen
Julie and Julia: 365 Days, 524 Recipes, 1 Tiny Apartment Kitchen
Clochemerle
Bruno, Chief of PoliceChewing-gum et spaghetti
The author writes about assorted weird obsessions more than about anything in the title, and the narrative skims around from one thing to the next without a clear progression of depth despite the duration and intensity of the underlying experience.
-Chef Michel Richard is one of the main characters even though he's not in Lyon. I understand why he was dropped in; because he is fascinating. That just pointed out how a biography of him would likely have been a better book.
-The author narrates the audiobook. His French pronunciation is painful, and this reveals a lot about the likely quality of his immersion experience. It's hard to imagine how he lived in France for years and worked in a bakery but can't say "boulanger" (he keeps saying "boulangère").
-This is mainly a sort of personal memoir as opposed to a book about food or French culture. But the author's personal story is disturbing. Without a goal of becoming a chef, he chooses to work 80 hours a week for months on end in kitchens so that his wife and small children are pretty much invisible.
-His "sleuthing" is I think referring to his trying to prove that French cuisine doesn't really exist because 500 years ago it was introduced from Italy, although it's not clearly proven exactly if, how or when. Whatever. Who cares? And even if you do care about such things, then why not take apart Italian cuisine and say it doesn't really exist and is actually American, given that tomatoes came to Europe from the Americas 500 years ago?
-There is a rich culture in Lyon to talk about and he touches on it with the bouchons and the peasants and the mères, etc. But he seems to be antagonistic to it all the whole time, so the tone is wrong and overall it's just a shame.
-There are so many books about the foibles of "those crazy French" or about French cooking. I don't think this is the one to start with.
Related books to consider:










Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read
Dirt.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
December 4, 2020
– Shelved
December 4, 2020
– Shelved as:
to-read
January 16, 2021
–
Started Reading
January 23, 2021
–
Finished Reading
Comments Showing 1-4 of 4 (4 new)
date
newest »

message 1:
by
Andee
(new)
-
rated it 3 stars
Jul 02, 2021 10:11PM

reply
|
flag

Having said that, I'm sorry to say that you're comment was one of those that kept me away from this book for almost two years. See, the problem is you missed it altogether - you might have been more sympathetic to it had you read Heat first, and understood how the author embarked in a journey of learning food, and how this book may not be so much about Lyon itself, but rather about how one can, through pain, sweat and tears, gain knowledge of an art through its best practitioners, and connect with the culture and the soul of a region - and allow his whole family to do so too.
Never mind that you've read different, or more structured. Never mind your idea that you would have been a better husband or father. Maybe, as a family, they all gained from the experience. Maybe for other readers, the account of the experience, of how a family takes to what is an uprooting to a new country is interesting - mighty interesting indeed.
See, I'm sorry that I read your review 2 years ago, because it kept me from the pleasure of reading the book for so long. It might just be my fault, for reading and believing it to be accurate. But in any case, what a misleading, misdirected review you have here sir. A bad parent, a bad french speaker, a bad writer. Pedantic is the word. Shame you couldn't keep it to yourself.

One of my Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ friends rated this book 5 stars and I "liked' her review. I didn't write a nasty comment on her review. She loved the book; I didn't. Chacun à son goût.
You accuse me of being inaccurate. Could you give an example of where my review is factually inaccurate? Does he not mispronounce boulanger? Does he not keep coming back to this notion that French cooking is really Italian? Etc?
You say I call Buford a bad writer. Did I not start the review by saying the excerpt of this book in the New Yorker was beautiful?
Have you read any of the books I listed in my review? They cover uprooting a family to France, for example, so I am in no way implying that such topics are uninteresting.
Also, for what it matters, I did read "Heat" first, as documented here on Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ.
So, sorry to be pedantic, but it seems there are some problematic elements in your comment.