Perhaps Times restaurant critic Ruth Reichl and her Reluctant Gourmet companion are good people ("Going 4 for 5 at the Plate," July 10). But how can they continue to spend hundreds of dollars a week on restaurant meals and live with their consciences?
Surely the article is a savage and subtle parody of rampant materialism. Instead of spending $400 a week on restaurant meals, perhaps Reichl is chiding us to spend one night at home and to contribute the minimum $50 saved to Love Is Feeding Everyone or to one of the many worthy rescue missions.
Perhaps she is challenging the reflective reader to forgo one night's dining per week in a restaurant and instead to spend one night a week teaching someone to read so that he or she might get a job and earn enough to dine in a decent restaurant.
Oh, you had me going for a moment there, Ms. Reichl, but in the end you restored my faith in humanity!
SAVERIO G. BONO