I’ve written before about the factors that make a restaurant perfect for solo dining: a good table that doesn’t face a wall or, worse still, the bogs; a great view to enable people watching; a menu that doesn’t make you feel like you’re missing out – no small plates or other “everything has to be shared” formats – and staff that respect rather than judge the choice made by solo diners.
Get all that right and, whether you’re up at the window at Mama’s Way or tucked away in a corner of London Street Brasserie, you’ll have a brilliant time. Take a book, if you want to pretend you’re not going to scroll your phone, order a glass of wine, sit back and enjoy. I really like solo dining these days: so much so, in fact, that I was even quoted to that effect in the Independent. Fancy, right?
The criteria for picking a restaurant to review on your own, though? That’s another kettle of fish.
The thing is, reviewing restaurants is about giving readers a representative picture of what a place is like to eat at. Some of that – the room, the service, the view, the background music – is largely the same whether you have a table for 1 or 11, this is true. But it falls down when you come to the food, because in many restaurants you want to see a decent range of what the kitchen can do. With two of you, that can be six dishes – more, if you’re greedy. On your tod it risks giving a lopsided perspective.
What that means is that when I review solo, I think some kinds of restaurants lend themselves especially well to that. Places where most of the dishes – be they pizza, tacos, momo or biryani – are variations on a single theme are ideal: I may like or love my pizza, for instance, but the one someone else might have eaten with me will share a lot of its DNA. It’s a safer bet that my view of that restaurant will be a typical one.
Casual places tend to be better too, because people are more likely to eat at those alone, possibly in a rush – although it’s a hill I will die on that an unhurried solo meal is one of life’s great joys. And some restaurants are particularly unsuited to reviewing solo, and here’s where the overlap with the opening paragraph comes in: anywhere with small plates or dishes designed for sharing, for instance, is a bust.
I always think of my poor friend Jerry, who went on a solo holiday to Valencia determined to try paella, only to find that the restaurants there would only serve it for two people; he came home with a paella pan but no first hand experience of the city’s most famous dish. Personally I’d have ordered for two, got them to box up the leftovers and eaten them in my hotel room the next day, but Jerry is far less gluttonous than I am (and awfully nice and polite, for that matter).
The reason I tell you all this is that this week’s review was meant to be of a fancy food pub out in the sticks, the kind of place that as a non-driver I don’t review anywhere near as often as you might like. But my dining companion, who has a lovely car and enjoys giving it a run-out, cancelled on me at fairly short notice, leaving me looking at my to do list and scratching my head, trying to work out the best option.
So this week you nearly got a review of Paesinos, the new pizza place that has opened opposite Jackson’s Corner, a perfect candidate because one pizza will tell you if the dough, the base and the tomato sauce are good. And I nearly dropped in next door instead to Just Momo: even the name suggests they only do one thing, although they offer chow mein too. I also considered Biryani Mama, although their name is misleading as biryani is a fraction of the dozens of dishes on their menu: they do more different kinds of chicken starter than biryanis, for crying out loud.
I swerved all those places because I had a better option in mind. Creperie Doux Sourire (it translates as “sweet smile”, and if you thought it meant “two mice” you and that Duolingo owl need to have a word) has been open since late last year in the glass-fronted site on the Oracle Riverside next to Vue Cinema. It’s their second branch: the first opened last May in the salubrious surroundings of Windsor station, although it looks like it was either a replacement or a rebrand for a wine bar called Gregory & Tapping that used to occupy that pitch.
Subscribe to continue reading
Become a paid subscriber to get access to the rest of this post and other exclusive content.
Formosa Street, an enclave in Little Venice less than twenty minutes’ walk from Paddington Station, could be the platonic ideal of a London street. It has a little cafe, a chocolate shop, a ludicrously handsome Victorian pub with wood-panelled walls and glass compartments, with tiny doors linking them together. It has a little Italian restaurant that has been there thirty years, and a craft beer place two doors down, the past and the present coexisting cheerfully.
It doesn’t have a butcher, although there’s one just round the corner on Clifton Road. But tucked away seconds from the Tube station, one stop away from Paddington, a stone’s throw from the strikingly modernist St Saviour’s Church, it is a deeply pretty pocket of London that few people know about. If this was your neighbourhood, you would be very happy indeed. Of course, if this was your neighbourhood you would also be filthy rich.
I’ve frequented this part of the world, on and off, for many years. I think I ate in that Italian restaurant not long after it opened, and I’ve drunk in the handsome Victorian pub a fair few times. Just before lockdown, I tried out the craft beer place a couple of times, and I’ve admired the steeple of that modernist church on more occasions than I can recall. I am no closer to living there, or even pretending that I could do, but it’s nice to try to pretend.
Just before lockdown, five years ago, Zoë and I went for dinner at a small French restaurant on Formosa Street called Les Petits Gourmets. At the time, I had the idea of publishing some London reviews, of places close to Paddington, thinking they might be useful to people wanting somewhere good to eat before grabbing an off peak train home. And it might have been a good plan, if I hadn’t hatched it about a fortnight before people stopped taking trains in general, going to the office or indeed leaving their houses.
So I never wrote a review of Les Petits Gourmets, although that might have been for the best because it was small, eccentric and nuts. On arriving we were told that their oven had packed up, so we could have whatever we liked from the menu as long as it was something they could cook on the hob. The place was dark and atmospheric, our table tiny and cramped. Another table, weirdly shaped and right next to the bar, with a couple of high stools, was so bad that a couple came in, were offered the table, had a shouting match with the staff and stormed out.
I can’t remember anything about what I ate, but I do remember that. And I was tempted to publish a review, if only because it was so surreal, but what would have been the point? It was just a place you would never have heard of, and a review that wouldn’t have sent you rushing there, at a time when you couldn’t have rushed there anyway – even if, for whatever reason, a dingy spot with no working oven and some shocking tables was right up your alley.
I thought no more about Les Petits Gourmets, really, until last summer when I read a rave review in the Standard of a French restaurant in Little Venice called Paulette. I know that area, I thought. I wonder where it is? And then I checked the address, and thought Isn’t that where that weird French place used to be? And then I Googled some more and discovered that it was exactly where that used to be, and opened later in 2020. Les Petits Gourmets was an early casualty of the pandemic: perhaps the cost of fixing that oven was the final straw.
The review I read of Paulette made it sound like everything I had wanted its predecessor to be, so I made a booking there and on a drizzly Saturday morning I caught the train up into London, ready for a long overdue lunch with my cousin Luke, last seen as baffled as I was by supercool Haggerston spot Planque. Fun fact: both Planque and Paulette featured in Conde Nast Traveller‘s listicle last summer of London’s best on-trend French restaurants although, as we will see, they couldn’t be more different.
The walk from Paddington is a lovely one. You start out exiting the station right by the Paddington Basin and cross over it, right by the floating barge restaurants, walking past craft beer and pizza spots and impossibly spenny-looking modern apartment complexes. The route ducks under the grime and bustle of the Westway and then, suddenly, everything is beautiful: the streets widen and are flanked with gorgeous redbrick mansions, huge buildings made up of pinch-me-if-I-live-here flats. And then you’re at the canal, and you wonder how such a fetching residential area can be hiding in plain sight here, in Zone 1.
I stopped for a latte at the brilliant D1 Coffee, a stone’s throw from the waterway, and thought to myself that as usual I was trying to pass myself off as congruous in a neighbourhood far, far above my station. I chatted to the couple next to me about giving up smoking – something I did twenty years ago and still think of as one of my greatest achievements – and as we did, countless cosmopolitan types ambled past, walking dogs or just chatting happily. One was carrying a MUBI tote, and I wondered how it had happened that I’d wound up living in a postcode so far from my tribe. It’s almost as if I just hadn’t tried hard enough to make something of myself.
I got to Paulette before Luke did, and it was unrecognisable from the room I’d eaten unsuccessfully in five years before. Still eccentric, yes: all mismatched patterns on the walls and ceilings, mismatched cloths on the tables, mismatched light fittings, all maximalist and unashamed. But it was bright, cheery and welcoming. Even with the canary yellow awning out, light flooded in from the full length windows and all the tables were full of people who seemed profoundly happy with their life choices. I ordered a kir while I waited for my cousin, and it was sweet sunshine, a liquid escape from rainy London. Even noticing that the gorgeous Victorian boozer opposite was closed for renovations couldn’t dent my joie de vivre.
Nor could the discovery, when Luke turned up and ordered a Meteor Zero, that he was off the sauce. He explained that he’d bust his hip and that alcohol interfered with his rehabilitation regime: news to me, as I’ve always found Dr. Booze an invaluable consultant I’ve involved in my recovery from pretty much anything affecting me.
I thought it would bother Luke, a man who runs more marathons in a year than I’ve eaten Marathon bars in my lifetime, but he was surprisingly sanguine about it. “I figure everything goes through a fallow period” he told me later in the pub, showing a kind of Zen perspective I’d have loved to have twenty years ago when I was his age: come to think of it, I haven’t attained that mindset even now.
That meant that I had to forego the delights and dilemmas of choosing a bottle from the enormous wine list, seemingly covering all of France in compendious detail. But it wasn’t all bad – just under twenty wines were available by the glass, a great spread including half a dozen dispensed using a Coravin. I picked a Sancerre, which was terrific, and we started doing a bad job of making our choices from the menu and a much better job of catching up.
The menu was a tad lopsided, with about a dozen starters and half that of mains, but everything on there was tempting. Many of the things I’d read about in advance and hoped to encounter, like a Roscoff onion tarte tatin with mascarpone, were missing in action, but even so the challenge was very much what you missed out on, as much as what you picked. On another day you would have wound up hearing about the classic onion soup, the scallops or the halibut with sauce Meunière, but I will have to try them next time, assuming they haven’t been whipped off the menu by then.
As it was Luke and I agreed to share a few things to try and cover as much as we could, helped by pricing which encouraged you to try a bit of everything. Starters tended to be at or around the fifteen pound mark, with mains mostly between thirty and forty quid. But everything was so fabulous, and generous, that I didn’t object to that in the slightest.
We kicked off proceedings with a small selection of charcuterie, which was easily enough for both of us. All of it was marvellous, from the bresaola to the pork loin but especially the coppa, dried and intense, and a doozy of a jambon de Bayonne: again, dry and coarse, which very much said tiens ma bière to both Serrano and Parma ham. This came with bread (which should be a given but isn’t always), butter (which was a very welcome surprise) and, best of all, a ramekin containing a deeply acceptable quantity of sharp, tart cornichons.
Fourteen pounds for all that, and for a pound more our second starter was every bit as stellar. I love pâté en croute, and Paulette’s version was the best I’ve tried – a glorious slab of heaven, golden burnished pastry housing coarse pâté, shot through with dark prunes. On occasion I’ve had this kind of dish in Paris and it’s been painfully close to Pedigree Chum, but no such worries here: no dodgy jelly, just densely packed meat – pork and duck in this case – topped with yet more pickles and a quenelle of exceptional whole grain mustard. A very well-dressed salad completed an impeccable plate of food.
I wish I’d had one of these to myself, but to do that I’d have had to go without the charcuterie. This is the problem with sharing food, isn’t it: you always end up wanting twice as much of everything, everywhere, all at once. I was about to start a sentence with Next time, but I’ll try to stop myself or I’ll be doing it for the rest of the review. Truth be told, even by this point the only question in my mind was when exactly that next time would be. It was already a given that it would happen.
I gave Luke first pick of the main courses and, torn between the fillet of beef and the bourguignon, he eventually chose the latter. He chose extremely well. The pan brought to his table was a one-stop shop of pure happiness – a deep, reduced sauce full of wine and care, with a few waxy potatoes, plenty of mushrooms and a transverse beast of a carrot, heftily substantial and yet superbly cooked.
But of course, none of that gets top billing in the name of the dish, and this all comes down to the beef itself. I’m used to having this dish with shin or chuck, but Paulette opted for beef cheeks and, with hindsight, it was an inspired choice. The food writer Harry Eastwood once said that cheek was perfect for this dish as, in her words, “the meat surrenders completely”. I can’t improve on that description, so I’ve nicked it instead.
And it’s true, but only if the kitchen is absolutely on top of its game and the beef is braised to the point where any gelatinous quality is gone, replaced with that terrific stickiness where the beef and the sauce become a symbiotic dream team. That’s what had happened here, and it was a wondrous thing. Trying a forkful I thought back to my friend Graeme’s bourguignon at Côte the previous month, and the difference between good and great. The difference, it turns out, is nine quid and forty miles.
“This is the best French food I can remember eating” said Luke. I’m a relatively frequent visitor to France, but I could see what he meant.
If I had been Luke, I would have wished that I’d saved some bread to mop up that final layer of sauce coating the bottom of the pan. But if I’d been Luke he’d probably have a forty inch waist and far less success online dating and would get over the disappointment of busting his hip (which would be more likely to happen by, say, getting out of bed awkwardly) by medicating with the finest mid-price reds the restaurant had to offer. Instead I offered him some of my frites, and after refusing twice – he is Canadian after all, so awfully polite – he took me up on my offer.
I’ve seen quite a few reviews online talk about how Paulette does the capital’s best frites. They might or they might not: I’ve had nowhere near enough frites in London to be qualified to judge, but they were up there with the best frites I’ve had in this country or any other, irregular, golden, salted and decidedly moreish. They were so good I wasn’t sad that I didn’t get to try the gratin Dauphinois, and frites have to be pretty damned good for that to happen.
My frites accompanied my order from the specials board, duck breast cooked pink, sliced and served simply with a boat of what was described as a duck velouté, in practice one of those ultra-reduced, fantastically concentrated sauces that French cuisine seems to do better than almost anybody else.
I’ve had duck breast many, many times in my life and a lot of the time, afterwards, I wonder if I’m doing it because I think I should like it rather than because I do. It’s often a tad tough, a smidge fatty, somewhat poorly rested: much like me, most weekday mornings. This was more like me after a full day in Nirvana Spa, utterly relaxed, thoroughly cosseted, treated like a king.
The analogy breaks down at that point, because this duck was also enormously tasty and I imagine most people wouldn’t be able to get enough of it. But it was good while it lasted.
By this point I had moved on to a Saumur, which was perfect with the duck: Paulette has the sort of outstanding staff who will compliment you on each of your wine choices even though you’re the poor schmuck muddling your way through the list of wines by the glass.
Luke and I decided to eat as Frenchly as possible, which meant a cheese course and then some dessert: the wine list distinguishes, winningly, between “cheese wines” and “dessert wines” so I nabbed something from the former section, a 1986 Muscadet. I have no doubt the Coravin was involved here, and the result was stunning, an amber marvel with a hint of sherry sweetness, outstanding complexity and length. A 50ml pour, in this case, was plenty.
Paulette does a small or large assiette de fromages with three or five cheeses respectively, and they are in principle a deli too, so I did wonder whether you could pick which cheeses you had. When our server authoritatively told us you got a Comte, a truffled brie and a Saint Nectaire I realised this was a choice best left to the experts, so that’s what we had.
The picture here probably doesn’t fully convey this, but it was a generous wodge of each, easily enough to share without needing a scalpel and a protractor. They were all outstanding: the Comte with all the crystalline grit you would want, the Saint Nectaire, not a cheese I’d ever seek out, bringing a savoury depth to justify its seat at the table.
But the truffled brie – oh my goodness. Luke and I agreed that we shared a suspicion about truffle being brought out to zhuzh up the ordinary, but in this case it turned a gooey, creamy delight into a total showstopper. As with the charcuterie, this came with a generous helping of bread but once we had finished all of the bread and nearly all of the cheese the twinkliest of our servers returned with a couple more slices, urging us to use them to clean up the very last of the brie. We did as we were told.
Normally I would have a different dessert to my dining companion, but I figured we’d got through a decent range of dishes already and I’d seen the chocolate mousse being carried past to other tables and decided there was no way I was leaving without trying it. I mean, just look at it in the picture below: a stegosaurus of a thing, plump and shiny, with a spine of caramelised hazelnuts sitting in a pastel-green lake of pistachio crème Anglaise. How could I not order that? How could anybody?
And it tasted every bit as beautiful as it looked. By now I’m used to chocolate mousses in fancy Spanish places where they drizzle it with extra virgin olive oil and pop some salt crystals on top, the modish way to revamp a staple. But this had no interest in playing those tricks, so like everything else at Paulette it was a classic rendition of a classic dish, prepared by a kitchen that revered the classics.
Don’t get me wrong – there is a place for deconstructing, reconstructing and reinventing, and I’m a fan of those things as much as anyone. But whatever that place is it isn’t Paulette, I’m very glad to say. This was a dark, glossy miracle – so smooth, almost not aerated at all, and I wished every spoonful could have lasted hours. The final spoonful, as it always does with such dishes, came too soon, and I found myself wishing there was some sweet equivalent of bread I could use to mop up those last bits of crème Anglaise. Maybe that, rather than ruining burgers, is the point of brioche.
When you book lunch at Paulette you get that standard issue we want your table back in X hours gubbins that London restaurants so often do. But none of that happened here, and over three hours after I ordered that kir pretty much every table was occupied by somebody new despite it still being mid-afternoon, the evening service around the corner.
I’ve never understood restaurant reviewers who insist on eating at a place twice before writing a review – mainly because they need to get over themselves – but if I could have eaten at Paulette again that evening I would have seriously considered it. But the craft beer place a couple of doors down was calling to us, and the pub after that, so it was time to reluctantly pay for the wonderful time we had had. Our bill for two, all that food, a couple of beers for Luke and five different glasses of wine for me, came to just over two hundred and ten pounds, including a 13.5% service charge. It felt as much like a bargain as I suspect any meal will this year.
Later on, Luke and I were in the Bear, just around the corner from Paddington, having one last drink and comparing notes before going our separate ways.
“The only thing that stops it getting the highest mark, for me” said Luke, “was that it just lacked that thing that would make it a truly transcendental experience. That and the bread, I guess, the bread could have been better.”
I knew what Luke meant, but I also suspected that looking at Paulette that way missed an important point, which was that Paulette had no interest in being that kind of restaurant or delivering that kind of experience. It was more interested in transporting you completely by delivering something unfussy and unfancy but, in its way, truly outstanding. Paulette was about as good an example of this kind of restaurant as it’s possible to find, and I loved it. Absolutely loved it, unreservedly, from start to finish.
It’s twenty minutes from Paddington, and Paddington is thirty minutes from Reading. Just think about that: you could be at Reading station, and within an hour you could be eating in this place. If I don’t do so a couple more times this year, I will be extremely surprised, not to mention deeply disappointed. I know most of my London reviews, lately, have been of spots in the centre where you hop on the Elizabeth Line to get there, very much a tribute to the march of progress in the capital. But this? Simply timeless.
As of January 2025, Edible Reading is partly supported by subscribers – click here if you want to read more about that, or click below to subscribe. Whether you’re a subscriber or not, thanks for reading.
This week’s review came about because of a comment on the Edible Reading Facebook page. I’d posted a link to my do list, as I regularly do, asking if there was anywhere on it that I should prioritise. Somebody chipped in and told me I should check out Shawarma Reading on West Street. “Their mixed shawarma with rice is great on a cold day”, their comment said.
That was all well and good, but the comment wasn’t from just anybody. It was from Mansoor.
Mansoor has been a reader of my blog for as long as I can remember, an early and vocal supporter of what I do. He came to the very first readers’ lunch at Namaste Kitchen, over seven years ago, bringing a blue Toblerone because I’d enthused about them on the blog. He told me that when he was first courting his wife, he used my blog for tips; despite that, it seems to have worked out nicely for him.
He was also one of my very first subscribers, when I launched that last month. “Lifetime subscription please” he said, which moved me more than I can say. And that’s despite the fact that Mansoor, his wife and his beautiful daughter have moved to Bristol now, which makes him one of my few readers who avidly looks forward to reviews from that part of the world rather than ones from the ‘Ding (don’t worry Mansoor, you’ll get some later in the year).
But that’s not why I give Mansoor’s words such weight. Back when he lived in Reading, Mansoor tipped me off about all kinds of places which went on to be favourites. He was the one who told me to check out La’De Kitchen, out in Woodley, and Rizouq on the Wokingham Road. And perhaps most life-changing of all, Mansoor told me once about a little spot doing samosas, also on the Wokingham Road, that I ought to investigate. Years later I still stop by Cake & Cream regularly for their epic samosas and pakoras, and have recommended them to countless others.
So when Mansoor says somewhere is good, I pay attention. And he first mentioned Shawarma to me at a readers’ lunch about eighteen months ago. “Give it six months, and I think it will be worth you reviewing it”, he said. Well, that six months had more than elapsed, and Mansoor’s initial “you might want to try it out” had morphed into a “go here”.
Subscribe to continue reading
Become a paid subscriber to get access to the rest of this post and other exclusive content.
Here’s what happened: I was making Friday night dinner plans with my friend Graeme and I said I’d give him some restaurants to choose from, a mixture of places I wanted to review (or re-review) and others I just fancied eating at. My text was all ready to send, and then I stopped for a minute and thought what about Côte? So I added Côte to the list of places I was due to re-review and pinged the message over to Graeme, fully expecting him to pick somewhere else.
Why don’t we do Côte? came the reply. I haven’t been for a while, and it’s such a good chain restaurant.
Appropriately Graeme’s reasons for choosing it were the same as mine for including it in my selection. The last time I went there was something like eighteen months ago, with my family, to celebrate my just having got engaged. But before that? I honestly couldn’t tell you. And yet before the pandemic I used to go an awful lot – it was one of my regular spots.
I do wonder whether the pandemic had something to do with it. Because when Covid struck national Côte did what many restaurants did, diversifying into heat at home options. But Côte did it differently to everybody else, and unlike nearly everybody else they are still doing it years later, when for most restaurants their schemes, entirely born out of necessity, were shelved ages go.
Côte decided to take advantage of the fact that many of its dishes were prepared in a central kitchen and then finished in the restaurant, turning what you could potentially see as a weakness into a Covid-era hidden strength. And it continues today: Côte At Home still offers many of the dishes you can get in their restaurants, portioned for two people, for decidedly less money.
Back when I was reviewing takeaways and meal kits, I reviewed Cote At Home. And the truth was that I didn’t know what to make of it: it was good value, and undeniably polished, and somehow occupied a completely new genre that wasn’t takeaway, wasn’t meal kits, wasn’t eating in restaurants and wasn’t ready meals. What on earth was it, then? I’m still not entirely sure.
But I can’t help feeling that Côte At Home, although it may have saved the chain from going under, slightly changed the way I thought about the restaurant. Because if many of Côte’s dishes were just glorified ready meals you could cook at home, was there still a point to going to the restaurant to eat them there, spending more money in the process? And if that was the case three years ago when the shockwaves from the pandemic started to subside, wasn’t it even more the case now, when eating out is more and more of a luxury?
I didn’t know the answers, and it felt like a return to Côte might provide them. Besides, it was a Friday night at the end of an incredibly long week at work, and I figured I’d earned a good meal, a catch up with a good friend and at least a bottle of wine, and I was hoping for an enjoyable evening irrespective of whether my visit also solved those bigger, thornier questions. After all, nobody can dissect stuff for its deeper meaning 24/7. Not even me.
Subscribe to continue reading
Become a paid subscriber to get access to the rest of this post and other exclusive content.
If I asked most Reading residents to name Reading’s most famous restaurant, the chances are the majority of them would say either Kungfu Kitchen or Clay’s Kitchen. And that makes sense because those two, the Lennon and McCartney of Reading’s food scene, are the ones that have broken out into the national consciousness, as much as Reading ever does. If we had a round of Reading restaurants on Family Fortunes, asked 100 people to name a restaurant in Reading, those two would top the leaderboard. God knows what else would be on there – Sweeney Todd, probably, and a rogue vote for Munchees.
But that would only happen if you asked Reading residents, and is indicative of the bubble we live in. Because, last year at any rate, the most nationally known restaurant in Reading was Good Old Days Hong Kong Ltd, a nondescript Cantonese restaurant just the other side of Reading Bridge. And the reason for that is that last February it was reviewed in the Observer by journalist, jazz musician, TV show judge, relentless self-publicist and life president of the Jay Rayner Appreciation Society, Mr Jason Rayner.
He raved about the place, and explained that the chef used to cook at the Hong Kong Jockey Club, and Hong Kong’s Four Seasons Hotel. “It feels like finding a senior chef from the Ritz… doing their own thing in your local caff” he declaimed. The unspoken implication was that this was almost as extraordinary as finding the U.K.’s greatest restaurant reviewer doing his own thing in a Chinese restaurant most Reading folk had never heard of, slumming it for the greater good. Lucky us!
Now, don’t be fooled into thinking Rayner had come to Reading specifically to review Good Old Days. He was in Reading recording an episode of his Radio 4 series, and I suspect he decided to kill two birds with one stone before heading back to London: after all, if there’s one thing people like to moan about below the line on his reviews, it’s how many of them are of London restaurants.
That roving Radio 4 series must be a positive boon, as it gives Rayner an excuse to visit parts of the country he otherwise wouldn’t touch with a barge pole. And I think we can include Reading as one of those, given that he described Caversham as “Reading’s Latin Quarter, as nobody has ever called it”. Such a charmer. But anyway, it was close enough to the station and he had a friend who recommended it, so Good Old Days it was, rather than one of Reading’s more high profile restaurants.
And he did seem to enjoy it, sort of. He said that “if… you happen to live nearby, get the food to go. Because in truth Good Old Days is a takeaway that just happens to have a few tables.” And that’s the funny thing about Rayner’s review – it didn’t make me fall over myself to visit. And I don’t think it galvanised Reading either, because I still know relatively few people who have had a takeaway from Good Old Days and fewer still who have eaten in there. The ones who have, that I’ve spoken to, have told me that it was “nice”, or words to that effect. I’ve never had an oh my god, you really must go – can I come?
Especially that last bit. Despite it being on my to do list for almost a year, every time I mention it to someone in terms of joining me there on duty they ask if we can go somewhere else instead; people just didn’t seem to fancy the place. In that respect, Rayner’s review is a remarkable one – if you can praise food and still leave people lukewarm about going to a restaurant you definitely have some kind of skill, albeit not one most restaurant reviewers would want to develop.
Very few of the comments on the Observer review were from people in Reading, and what ones there were were evenly split between Don’t give the secret away and We went there on your recommendation and it was awful. So it looked like there was a gap in the market for a reliable review of Good Old Days, and I was happy to fill it.
Subscribe to continue reading
Become a paid subscriber to get access to the rest of this post and other exclusive content.