I may have been enticed by the premise but the book contained such bad writing/editing that I could not bear to finish it.

I am actually a big fan of personal essays and "stream-of-consciousness" writing but, as someone who has studied professional writing and editing for publication at a post-secondary level, I can tell you that "steam-of-consciousness" writing is not usually literally just how it came out: It is tightened at various points in the process in order to pull the reader along. A good editor will help the writer trim to achieve that perfect balance.

Also, as a naturally curious person (trivia fan) and an ADHD-er, I love sidebars. Yes, Digress! Tell me these cute little fine details that ground a story further! Only, they didn't ground the story. In fact, they became so numerous that the stories became completely lost. Again, a good editor will would have trimmed them - not necessarily in frequency but in length to keep the story in focus - or had the author lengthen the story in contrast.

There were also a fair number of poor grammar choices, ranging from run-on sentences to overly complex or disjointed sentences. While it is important to use these structures in a work, they are like seasoning in a dish: too little leaves it bland but too much overpowers and can even make something indigestible. Everyone can read good writing but not everyone can read bad writing; the poor structures left me re-reading paragraphs over and over to understand the content (a shame from someone in the 96th percentile for reading comprehension!).

While some of the blame can lay on the writers' shoulders, as any writer self-edits prior to submission as a part of professional image, the "buck stops" with the editor (and truly Winegardner's work in the book was the worst: he could not edit his own work). In the end, there are much better books on food and eating. ( )

I may have been enticed by the premise but the book contained such bad writing/editing that I could not bear to finish it.

I am actually a big fan of personal essays and "stream-of-consciousness" writing but, as someone who has studied professional writing and editing for publication at a post-secondary level, I can tell you that "steam-of-consciousness" writing is not usually literally just how it came out: It is tightened at various points in the process in order to pull the reader along. A good editor will help the writer trim to achieve that perfect balance.

Also, as a naturally curious person (trivia fan) and an ADHD-er, I love sidebars. Yes, Digress! Tell me these cute little fine details that ground a story further! Only, they didn't ground the story. In fact, they became so numerous that the stories became completely lost. Again, a good editor will would have trimmed them - not necessarily in frequency but in length to keep the story in focus - or had the author lengthen the story in contrast.

There were also a fair number of poor grammar choices, ranging from run-on sentences to overly complex or disjointed sentences. While it is important to use these structures in a work, they are like seasoning in a dish: too little leaves it bland but too much overpowers and can even make something indigestible. Everyone can read good writing but not everyone can read bad writing; the poor structures left me re-reading paragraphs over and over to understand the content (a shame from someone in the 96th percentile for reading comprehension!).

While some of the blame can lay on the writers' shoulders, as any writer self-edits prior to submission as a part of professional image, the "buck stops" with the editor (and truly Winegardner's work in the book was the worst: he could not edit his own work). In the end, there are much better books on food and eating. ( )