In view of the spate of letters defending restaurant critic Colman Andrews (Reader Comment, Jan. 27 and Calendar Letters, Feb. 3), I'd like to stick in my two cents.
Andrews is one of The Times' better judges of food, at least when compared to those two snob-queens, Lois Dwan and Ruth Reichl.
Not only must we put up with Dwan's nauseatingly patronizing attitudes, but we're forced to suffer along with her trials and tribulations due to sub-par menus, thoughtless maitre 'd's, bored waiters, and (oh my!) noisy restaurants. All this mixed in with pointless quotes from ancient Chinese philosophers. It's enough to make you want to gag.
And that gastronomical half-wit Reichl is even worse. Her rather, ah, intimately graphic descriptions of food border on being downright pornographic, if you ask me. Perhaps she should go to work for Hustler.
Besides, the whole notion that we need food in order to exist is merely a myth. I, for one, have subsisted on a diet consisting solely of peanut butter (Skippy's chunk-style) and black coffee (20 to 30 cups per day) for the last 10 years. I also smoke 5 packs of cigarettes (Lucky Strikes) a day. I'm 53 years old and my doctor tells me I'm as healthy as a man 20 years my junior. And my 19-year-old wife has no complaints about my sexual prowess, either.
Anyway, everybody knows that Dennis Hunt--who manages to mention the spot where he ate lunch in every article he writes--is The Times' real restaurant critic.
IRVING MELROSE JR.