Or it could be titled “Places to eat in Texas, New York, California, and a sprinkling of other places”. But I get the Travel Channel’s title; short and catchy.
A few weekends ago, the Travel Channel re-aired its series of shows touting its Chowdown Countdown. This has replayed every so often since its original airing a few years ago. It’s a mesmerizing collection of entertainment. They feature various eateries in their 101 Tastiest Places to Chowdown from hole-in-the-walls to renowned restaurants coast-to-coast.
But, the thing I notice about Travel Channel’s Chowdown Countdown is that they don’t disclose the criteria for making their list. Yeah, it’s cool to have a countdown, but by numbering these restaurants you imply the best, which they didn’t quantify or explain the reasons why. Well, dear reader, I did the viewing for you and after watching the five hours of programming, I’ve found that the chief criteria to place is to have a calorie-laden, protein-heavy dish that wallops you with enough fat to survive winter hibernation. Some of these things are gastronomic wonders, and in some cases it isn’t a good thing
That said, I was entranced with the show and always had it on in the background as it aired. And I got some ideas for new places to visit. But there were some places that I would avoid. Sorry, but a five-pound burrito isn’t my idea of fun. I barely even stand some of the mega-burritos we have locally in Seattle, so there is no way I’ll go out of my way for that 80 ouncer.
It’s an odd show, sometimes they’ll provide context to a place; tell a backstory, give sense of appreciating the people. For others, they zoom right by. And the show often leans heavily on certain states and cuisine. Texas, New York, and California are frontrunners. Are you from Virginia and think you have some hole-in-the-wall gems? Well, the Travel Channel doesn’t really agree with you, because Virginia is amongst the states that don’t have a single entrant. As for food, if you love barbecue, pizza, or fried chicken, you’re in luck. There are a ton of those types of places. I would’ve loved to some of the history on these places, learn more about their staff and why they are iconic. Alas, it wasn’t to be.
For many of the restaurants that made the list, bigger isn’t better. Some of these places were jokes. When it comes to what I eat, I want to know the why, not just the what. The Travel Channel did a great job with the what. In many cases they just featured the dishes that were preposterously massive. But my main squabble is that they never talked about flavor and context. Why should I care about a 6 lb burrito? Or a 12 patty burger? Outside of horror, much of the list included places that had over the top dishes. Sorry Travel Channel, you had a window to shine a proper spotlight on cool places across America, but you reduced many of them to a gimmick. Not cool. If you can’t tell already, I’m conflicted with the show. It’s American to love lists. And to gripe about them. So yeah, well done Travel Channel, you got me talking about your show.
As a proud Washingtonian, I had major beef that our state’s few representatives were Paseo and Beth’s Cafe. Paseo, I’m cool with because their sandwiches are delicious. As for Beth’s? Because it’s TV and cliched, they focused on Beth’s 12-egg omelet. Whoop-de-doo, it’s been featured before. And there are other mediocre overrated breakfast places in Seattle, so they went with the most obvious. Darn Texas took all of our other spots.