From my amazon review, "It was not by accident that Paris became the world capital of gastronomy. But -- how did it happen? David Downie, who in his marvelous books has walked you all the way around the City of Light, now walks you back in time to her secret history, through the centuries-long saga of how Paris was fed. The logistics are staggering, the characters unforgettable, and the stories of the kind you can dine out for a year on. Reading, you may just feel that gastronomy as we know it in the best Paris restaurants is the tender flower of mighty and continuous labor dating to the deep, deep past. As always, David Downie leads you to see Paris anew, through any lens he crafts for you. Don't miss this one!"
Yes -- a really, really good book. But, do I have the cred to review it? I am a chef and writer/editor. I worked in Paris for several months a year for 20 years.
Now, I see a few nasty reviews here. When that happens, I check out the credentials of the reviewers, to see if anything they have written previously suggests a background sufficient to make them credible as negative reviewers in this instance. I don't see that background in the negative reviewers here. Which brings me to a philosophical as opposed to personal point -- the one about being very careful what you say to derogate from a writer's years-long, indeed lifelong, efforts, unless your expertise is greater than his, and you can fault-find from a deeply informed perspective. I am anything but certain a negative review on Goodreads is useful to the community if it comes from any other kind of source.