Regarding Ruth Reichl's review of L'Orangerie (May 12): I was both outraged and saddened at the vicious attack on this fine establishment. And no, I do not have friends at L'Orangerie. This is not a letter to defend its food. It is a letter about fairness and ethics. Having read Reichl's reviews for the past couple of years, her blatant favoritism toward certain restaurants and total lack of sensitivity with regard to the hard-working, dedicated staffs at others has forced me to stop reading all reviews from The Times.
Who is the food critic here, anyway? Reichl or her Reluctant Gourmet, whose underdeveloped palate cannot differentiate between a hamburger and a piece of prime rib? Isn't it interesting that when a bad review is given, it is always the RG with his redundant negativity who wants to take off for the nearest hamburger stand? When a certain trendy restaurant opened recently, Reichl was there to give it glowing reviews. I have had dinner there three times and have sent my food back twice. Where was the RG during all of this?
It is obvious to me and countless other readers that Ruth Reichl has a vendetta against certain establishments and proprietors, no matter what quality their food may be, while her handful of favorites will continue to get the repetitive thumbs up.