Taking it in
It's no secret that we are what we eat. But it's as true on a collective level as it is on a personal one. I've been struck by this fact as I've toured my new hometown with an eye for Bloody Marys and bloody steaks, learning about the life, vibrancy, art, and activism of San Francisco through its tamales and tajines. Having come most recently from Los Angeles, with the strip-mall predictability of its restaurants, I find myself falling more in love with this bayside city with every PBR I polish off. Not that there aren't good places to eat in LA — there are. But a city's culinary landscape is indicative of its culture, values, and politics — and while LA's sweet spots are few and far between, hidden, often elitist, usually too expensive, and always hard to get to (hello, traffic), San Francisco's are plentiful, varied, egalitarian, ecofriendly, and accessible. They have personality and heart. They provide nourishment and pleasure. Most of all, they serve damned good food.
This is a guide to this city's characteristic places for dining and drinking, the places that express our great diversity and our activist nature, the places that cater to our exciting nightlife and to the many ways we recover from it. From green restaurants to places to get cocktails, from high-end to lowbrow, from ethnic treasures to all-American classics, these are some of our favorites. This list is by no means comprehensive, as we are blessed to live in a city with so much to offer that a full list of places worth visiting would read like a phone book. For even more, check out our weekly restaurant reviews, in the paper and online at www.sfbg.com, and keep an eye out for our Best of the Bay issue in July. And in the meantime, raise your glass — or your fork — to the fact that we live in one of the most exciting, eclectic, good-eatin' cities in the world. I for one am happy to drink to that.
Molly Freedenberg
Feast 2007 editor
Although I agree that some of LA's restaurants are not always accessible and not so ecofriendly, its "sweets spots" are hardly "few and far between," elitist, and too expensive. One need only look at the numerous listings on Jonathan Gold's LA Weekly website, "Where to Eat Now?" to see that Los Angeles is filled with amazing, VERY low-cost restaurants that are hardly elitist.
[link]
Of course, LA has its host of in-crowd, expensive spots, most of which have less than savory fare. If Ms. Freedenberg's palate only extends so far, then perhaps she is right that San Francisco's trendy spots sport tastier food than LA's.
Yet, for all but perhaps the truly elitist SF restaurants (usually Californian and New American) and perhaps Italian, SF can hardly compare to LA's food scene--especially for Thai, Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Persian, Mexican, Ethiopian, Armenian, and Lebanese food--at least if one desires truly authentic international cuisine. (I'll also grant that if one travels down the Peninsula that the Indian and Vietnamese food is better in NorCal, though not significantly so.)
Chinese cuisine is a perfect example--compare Monterey Park-Alhambra-San Gabriel's 250 or so Chinese restaurants usually populated by recent immigrants with the San Francisco's perhaps 20-30 restaurants in the Sunset/Richmond district ... there is no comparison in quality, flavor, or selection. Similarly, LA boasts the largest Thai population (and number of restaurants) as well Korean population (and restaurants) probably outside of Asia.
I am not sure where Ms. Freedenberg ate at in LA, but I'm to happy to respond to any specific comparisons she might make to support her contention.
Comment on: FEAST: the Guardian Guide to spring food and drink
In order to comment on an article, you must Log In.
