As a lover of food and travel, I’ve seen my fair share of so-called “best of” lists. From the best pizza in New York City to the best Po Boy in New Orleans, these lists are ubiquitous in the world of food journalism. But let me tell you, I really despise them.
The idea of ranking something based on one person’s personal experience is ridiculous. Taste is subjective; what one person loves, another person may hate. So why do we insist on creating these lists?
We all have our favorite cheesesteak spots, but once someone starts ranking these places, it completely takes away from the corner Papi store that was there for you when you might have had a few too many the night before. Suddenly, people stop going to the lower-ranked spots; before you know it, they’re gone.
I believe “best of” lists harm the food community. They take away from the authenticity of ourselves and feed into our inability to think for ourselves.
For the consumer, eliminating the possibility for discovery can be detrimental. It’s important to try new places and find what we personally enjoy. It’s okay to have a bad meal and learn from it. “Best of” lists take away that sense of adventure and exploration.
For the purveyor, it could be challenging to get off the ground because they haven’t yet become incorporated into the food media bubble. It’s not always just new places, but even mainstays that have been doing their thing for years and suddenly are touted by a food critic with no credentials other than “I like this.”
Overall, it may be said that “best of” lists may seem like a quick and easy way to find great food, but they can be potentially harmful. I say, let’s trust our own tastes and preserve the sense of discovery when it comes to finding great food spots. In the words of my good friend Kevin, “ if you only eat at “good places” how do you know what’s actually good?”