# Glorious French Food by James Peterson



## suzanne (May 26, 2001)

If I may be so bold: I have had a review of Peterson's new book published on the new webzine of eGullet.com. Please check it out, and add your comments there if you like, or here.


----------



## jim berman (Oct 28, 1999)

Suzanne,
Very well put! Your review is enticing and forthright.
-Jim


----------



## isa (Apr 4, 2000)

Great review Suzanne!!


----------



## phoebe (Jul 3, 2002)

Suzanne,
As someone who is used to reading the all-too-brief reviews of cookbooks found in my local newspaper, yours was really a surprise and a pleasure. It demonstrates what an excellent cookbook review should be--which is an entirely different animal from reviews of other types of non-fiction books. The attention paid to audience, structure, language, physical presentation, and testing of the recipes was terrific. Add to all that, a real person comes through in your writing, a real person cooking real food.

Wow, now that I've said all that it makes me think again about the string Devotay started about creating a writers' forum. We could start by taking examples of different types of food writing, reading them, and then exchanging thoughts about what makes them strong pieces or what could have made them better.

Sorry to have gone off on a tangent, but clearly Suzanne's writing (and possibly the beef short ribs I have slow-cooking in wine on the stove) are having an effect on me.

Thanks so much for sharing your review with us!


----------



## kokopuffs (Aug 4, 2000)

WOW!


----------



## isa (Apr 4, 2000)

Phoebe you are absolutely right in your description of a cookbook review. It's so rare to find one that conveys the right information about a cookbook.

P.S. Have you checked outChef Talk's cookbook reviews?


----------



## mezzaluna (Aug 29, 2000)

Well done, Suzanne! Much more well done than that chicken...


----------



## shroomgirl (Aug 11, 2000)

Great review Suzanne....I really like the way you broke it down into what different folks will get out of the book. 50 minute chicken...with raw thighs?! Were his maybe less endowed?


----------



## pastachef (Nov 19, 1999)

That is impressive and interesting writing.


----------



## bouland (May 18, 2001)

Great review...I was looking at the book in a store recently...wondering if it was worth the price.

I recently reviewed another *French Cookbook* for the truly brave cooks out there. The review also has 26 recipes included.


----------



## isa (Apr 4, 2000)

For more French cookbook reviews, here.


----------



## chiffonade (Nov 29, 2001)

I'll be coming back to read your review but I have a question. Past Peterson books seemed to _complicate_ things that should not be complicated. Does he do that with French food? (Which is already perceived as complicated by some...)


----------



## suzanne (May 26, 2001)

Chiff -- I thought that for once he simplifies. He gives a basic recipe for each of the 50 "classic" dishes he's chosen, and then gives variations based on the same ingredients, or the same cooking method, or some other variation that sort of makes sense. I think his basic idea is to make these classics, and some of their variants, more accessible. There is nothing in the book that a mid-level home cook could not do. No exotic ingredients, not unusual procedures -- his recipes are well-written and easy to follow here.

There are other recipes (besides the ones I tried for the review) that I would like to make, and that I am pretty sure will work.

Does that answer your question?


----------

