After digesting Alan Richman's absurdly vitriolic ax job on the city of New Orleans, its cuisine and its entire culture [GQ, November '06], I was left with a few burning questions.

First for the writer: What's wrong, Mr. Richman—did you lose your per diem lunch money in the slot machines at Harrah's? Has your wife stolen off with a washboard player? Surely, there must be some source to your reservoir of venom other than a few overcooked oysters and an unimpressed maître d'. As an independent rock critic who lives and works in New Orleans, I know all about harboring unpopular opinions about hallowed institutions; I disseminate them on a monthly basis. But your bitter rant reads less like a balanced critique from a celebrated gastronomic authority and more like the outsider observations of a jerk who's just jealous that he wasn't invited to the party. More malignant than merely picking on a scuffling populace, your rank, error-riddled writing is akin to intentionally tripping a hapless cripple. There isn't a person in this city who hasn't been through hell in the last 12 months, be it from losing their loved ones, their house or simply their job. Instead of pointing out the positive angles to their story—e.g., that 75 percent of New Orleans' eateries have now reopened, or that several world-class restaurants have since started up—you saw fit to set fire to their rebuilding efforts with overt falsities. You are a heartless arsonist, sir, and for that, you should be ashamed.

To the GQ editorial board—the same people who, I can only assume, commissioned this baseless piece of yellow journalism from an ignorant, admittedly biased author and are therefore left to answer for it: What if I wrote food articles for a swank, Southern-based mainstream fashion magazine and traipsed around Manhattan on the company's dime back in the Summer of 2002? What if I decried the supposed "newness" of the New American menus at David Burke & Donatella and the River Café; bitched about being presented the wrong bottle of wine only five blocks away from ground zero; whined about the dry franks and lumpy shakes at Gray's Papaya; and then proclaimed that Spanish Harlem had never existed because I didn't run into a single Puerto Rican during my limo ride from Yankee Stadium to a hotel on the Upper East Side?

The obvious answer is that I'd be unceremoniously dismissed—the very same action that the gentlemen who steward this suddenly afflicted Quarterly will take with regard to the embarrassing Alan Richman, should they seek to retain even an ounce of the fallow dignity it once so fervently flaunted. Only then will you regain New Orleans' respect and, more to the point, its growing potential readership.

Noah Bonaparte Pais

Senior Editor, ANTIGRAVITY Magazine

Mr. Richman,

I am not going to try to out do Noah Bonaparte Pais on his brillant response to your rather pitiful survey of New Orleans restaurants after Katrina. He hit the nail right on the head. I too am interested to know why you have written about New Orleans and all she has to offer in such a meanspirited and uninformed way. Your opinions could be described at best as ignorant, at worst as hateful. I am a native of New Orleans, and when I say native I mean my family originated with the colony. I am one of those mystical creoles you claim to not have ever seen. Creole culture is rich and prevalent in New Orleans, even though your ignorant eyes couldn't catch it. To illustrate, you had a conversation with Leah Chase- guess what, she's CREOLE. You see, you don't even know one when it's staring you in the face and serving you fried oysters. As for the food, if you go to any city and dine at the most touristy restaurants, you are bound to have a few bad meals. I suggest you get more informed tips next time you go, which may require you to get off the beaten track and meet some real New Orleanians who cook real New Orleans food. I resent your suggestion that New Orleans in its rebirth should rethink it's cuisine and become more like New York? Washington, DC? I've lived in both places and love both cities but I would never pick the food I get there over my home. And for all your love of Cajuns (and i love them too) you don't even know the difference between Cajun and Zydeco music. You think it's the same thing. WRONG. Zydeco was developed by Creoles of color in South LA, heavily influenced by Cajun music, but distinct nonetheless. If you knew anything about South LA you would know that while Cajun and Creole are two distict cultures, we borrow heavily and influence each other. We share a common French bond and our communities intermingle in South LA. Finally I want to take exception to your claim that "The citizens of New Orleans might not be the most energetic Americans-I believe their morning exercise regimine consists of stumbling out of bars..." You must have us confused with the tourists from places like wherever the hell you're from, who come to New Orleans to escape their terribly boring lives to live it up and drink to oblivion before packing it up for nowheresville. If you ever want to really learn about LA, I suggest you get to know some of us, eat some real food, gain some knowledge of cajun and creole culture, learn about the history of New Orleans, so you don't write a crap piece like this again. If you do decide to give New Orleans a real shot, please feel free to email me and I'll help you out. You can find this creole in Washington, DC, working for a cajun Congressman.

Rarely have I been so incensed about an article. What a disgusting, bigotted piece of hack "journalism." I was born and raised in New Orleans and have seen so few accuracies in this article that I can only surmise this piece of literary genius to be complete fiction... exercise by stumbling out of bars? never seen a Creole? Was Alan Richman even "in" New Orleans? Did he not drive down picturesque St. Charles Avenue and see the throngs of joggers and dog walkers at any given moment? Did he not speak to Leah Chase and cite her several times in his article? I have to agree with the many analogies swirling around which compare this article to writing about eateries and ethnicities about town in New York after the World Trade Center attacks. There was absolutely no reason to publish this piece of crap and at this time, no less. It is one thing to write an opinion piece, it is entirely another to set yourself up as putting forth a true piece of journalism simply to bolster your one - sided, unresearched and wholly inaccurate point of view. If GQ's readership drops due to this irresponsible piece of work and its great offense to readers who both live in and love New Orleans (and there are many), maybe the magazine will think twice about publishing a piece based upon someone's credentials alone and maybe, just maybe, the editors will require some supporting facts and a hell of a good reason before allotting several of their pages to cutting down a beautiful and diverse City after such a major disaster. I think the restauranteurs as well as the rest of New Orleans are owed an apology.

Ah, yes, and I should also direct readers to Brett Anderson's article in the Times Picayune and on NOLA.com, "Renowned restaurant writer rips New Orleans but only embarrasses himself," which thoroughly addresses Mr. Richman's Nov, 06 GQ magazine article and exposes his completely uneducated and considerably one-sided opinions on New Orleans food and culture. As of today, the article is currently on NOLA's homepage as well as in the Tuesday, Nov. 2 Times Picayune.

The City of New Orleans has always caused people to either hate it or love it. It's like great art it creates passionate reactions both pro and con. However I do think that Mr. Richman's comments were in "bad taste".

Kicking folks when they are down isn't journalism or entertainment, it's just cruel. Aren't there better things to write about?

When I need an opinion about hair jelly I'll consult GQ otherwise I think there are better places to read about food.

Creoles don't exist? Not asking how to pronounce the name of a restaurant? Not understanding why New Orleans is where it is. That's Journalism!

Here I am Mr Richman. One of many born and raised Creole women from New Orleans just checking in.

QUOTE:

"RE: 'I know all about harboring unpopular opinions about hallowed institutions.'

Obviously you don't.

Best of luck.

Alan Richman"

Mr. Richman:

Thanks for your response, however rote. It's entirely plausible that you were, at one point, an intrepid, relevant reporter; the French Culinary Institute is an estimable organization, its inclusion of you as an ethics professor notwithstanding, and it's doubtful that the dear James Beard Foundation could have erred a dozen times over.

That said, your piece on New Orleans was so poorly planned and ineffectually argued as to be deemed laughable -- if not for its lackadaisical reductionism, libelous bigotry and grave implications of serious sabotage on the city's one functioning economic engine. Amazingly, you seem not to know (or, worse, not to care) what corrosive effects your high-profile hack job could inflict upon the region and its ongoing recovery. Such lack of foresight and insight into one's own professional and ethical responsibilities is beyond contemptible. From someone in your decorated position, it's downright unpardonable.

I thought that by listening to your podcast I might better grasp why an honorary like yourself would choose such a lowbrow approach to his craft. I only grew more confused. You sling hateful hypocrisies as if they were poison-tipped arrows from atop an ivory tower; express unprovoked contempt for a culture you barely understand (your friend Leah Chase is one of your "faerie folk" Creoles, you should know); and wield the resources of a respected, 70-year-old journal as a soapbox for dispensing ridicule and racism in the guise of sardonic marginalization. Not to mention the continual mispronunciation of "Louisa's by the Tracks," your second favorite joint in the city even though you don't know its name ("I've never said it aloud"), and your confession of a simpleton's comprehension about the general tenets of social geography ("New Orleans shouldn't exist ... Why have they built there? Because it's nice living on a river"). Following your rationale, it's no wonder 12 million people settled in the equally precarious New York City: Situated as it is, on not one but two rivers, Manhattan must be just swell.

More offensive than your offhand generalities are your misleading, mean-spirited specifics. Could it be that poor Derek Guth, the Parkway Bakery daytime manager you ruthlessly skewer for displaying a photo of his damage, was simply excited to have a luminary like yourself eating in his humble establishment? You liken his ebullience to some sort of masochism: "Maybe the residents of Pompeii had the same macabre sense of fulfillment, pleased that they were being buried in hot ash like none before them." Were New Orleanians not so busy "stumbling out of bars" and "loving the dinner table too much," you pompously posit, we could have done more to prepare for Katrina's unprecedented devastation. Read your own paragraph once more, and then imagine the outcry had someone in 2001 gallingly suggested that the $350 prix fixe at Per Se somehow prevented New Yorkers from properly defending their borders. Your logical jumps would make Evel Knievel jealous.

"New Orleans has always been about food and music, with parades added to the mix," you oversimplify in the same sorry passage. "In the North, where I come from, we like to think we're about jobs and education, with sports thrown in." Might I suggest, Mr. Richman, before embarking on your next sensationalist smear campaign, that you properly educate yourself about the region you are about to excoriate -- it might save you and your unfortunate employers from another internationally distributed ignominy.

That is, if these eight pages of repugnant excrement don't first cost you your job.

So delighted learning that a joint two blocks from my boyhood home in New Orleans was Mr. Richman's pick for second best restaurant in New Orleans, I dined on his celebrated choices: gumbo and barbecued shrimp po-boy yesterday. With enough hot sauce dumpend into both by the "chef" to burn off your nose and tongue despite their clearly visible ingredients which might have been delicious otherwise, they evidence Richman's shocking lack of culinary expertise and unworthiness to qualify as a gourmet let alone the anthropoligist he fancies himself in off-hand assessments of the NEw Orleans population and its culture. That Richman has visited here only three times in as many decades, loves stake, dislikes fish, didn't know until now that po-boys should be "dressed" and the bread should be "warmed" a.k.a. toasted, bare further witness to his lack of "taste" and basic knowledge of a body of culinary selections so vast and unique, it is easy to see why some consider it America's only unique cuisine, while the rest of the nation can only point to their few local and regional dishes and renditions of the cuisine of other nations and cultures. I could go on about his dismissive attitudes regarding or utter failure to mention great chefs, famous restaurants, unique seafood delicacies rarely found elsewhere, but the really remarkable thing is that GQ editors are so disconnected that they allowed Richman what precious little editorial space their ad-bloated rag offers -- one reason I read Richman's attack free at Barnes and Nobel and haven't bought a copy or subscription in years.

Richman is appallingly ignorant.

How can anyone who claims to be a food writer not know even the most basic background about Cajun food yet still hold court on it? The food came from Canada? Cajuns were exiled because of their religious beliefs in the 19th century? My god, most reasonably intelligent seventh graders would know this is totally wrong.

Richman is not in any definition a journalist. He's proven himself here a hack of the lowest order.

Quotes from Mr Richman:

"New Orleans shouldn't exist. Let's start with that premise. New Orleans has no business existing, certainly not as it is now."

"Why have they built there? Because it's nice living on a river. And who is responsible for damage if they do live there? Well, you know, for the most part, the people who live on those rivers say they should be helped by the government and should be helped by other people if it floods. But they made the conscious decision to live there,"

Suggest you start reading here:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-08-29-katrina-forum_x.htm

Then here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/02/us/nationalspecial/02corps.html?ei=5088&en=ae00c01a3e49a614&ex=1306900800&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&pagewanted=all

and here:

http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-6/1161842104280850.xml&coll=1

I am actually not angry with Alan Richman for his piece on the post-Katrina New Orleans food scene. Instead, I feel sorry for him because it must be terribly embarrassing to write something so ignorant and ill-informed in a publication with the vast circulation of GQ. I imagine that Alan is huddled in the corner of his closet, locked in the fetal position, stuffing his face with a variety of Little Debbie snacks. The pain must be excruciating.

Alan can critique food all he wants, but what he has no business doing is critquing the rebuilding of New Orleans or questioning why the city was built here in the first place. Every American, including Alan, has benefited from New Orleans being located where it is. The port of New Orleans is 5th largest in the country and the fossil fuels that are extracted off the coast of Louisiana are used by a great number of Americans.

It is not worth my time to point out how pathetic Alan's grasp of geology, hydrology, and physics must be, but I do have a few minutes to guess at Alan's motives for penning something so vitrolic:

1. He needs the attention. Perhaps his mom and dad did not hug him enough as a child and as a result he has an unfulfilled need for attention which drove him to write something that he knew would rile up an entire city's population. If this theory is correct, hopefully the e-mails and letters he is getting in response to his New Orleans article are filling that void.

2. He is full of self-loathing and instead of directing his anger at himself, he lashes out at other people. I know that if I was only a food critic, and I never actually created anything or made a significant contribution to society (but took shots at people who did), I would probably be filled with self hate too.

Which of these theories is correct? I do not know. But what I do know is that I am not stupid enough to make vast generalizations about a group or region of people like Alan does. He wrote that people who live in the north are more about jobs and education. Really Alan? Does that go for the intellectuals in Camden, NJ that are gunning each other down in record numbers?

If I was to engage in bigotry like Alan, I would be forced to cancel my subscription to GQ, because using the logic of bigotry, everyone at GQ must be ignorant, arrogant, and incompetent like Alan. I am smarter than that. I know that most of the writers and editors of GQ are smart, capable people, not functioning retards like Alan.

So Alan (if you are reading this), stick to what you know (stuffing your face with food) and leave the rebuilding of New Orleans to the people who realize that it was not our location or geology that flooded most of the city, it was the incompetence of the Army Corps of Engineers. See, the levees that flooded much of New Orleans were not built properly by the Army Corps. Had they done their job properly all those years ago, much of the city would have been spared the catastrophic flooding. But the Corps is inept, incompetent, and arrogant. Hey! Maybe you can be their food critic, you would fit right in.

Stuffing his face with Little Debbies? Definitely. And likely pairing them with a nice reisling or something of that order as he thinks of how to elevate the snack food into something of greatness in his next article.

New Orleans still waits for her apology and should Richman set foot in this beautiful city again, I hope he is chased out or his food is "garnished" appropriately.