Paula Deen’s Magazine….um, that rhymes.
I love Paula Deen–I like her recipes, and I like her TV show. I love that she CHOWS down at the end of her TV show, often getting whipped cream all over her face. I love that she piles a triple serving of whipped cream on any dessert, and isn’t afraid of cream or butter. I love that she often sticks her finger (ala Julia Child) into the food to nab a taste.
This is a woman who is NOT afraid of food at all (unlike Giada Larentiis, the size zero chef with gobs of makeup and lip gloss who eats her food all dainty-like at the end–she makes me lose my appetite).
Plus, I like her recipes. They are good.
So when I saw Paula Deen’s new magazine on the grocery store shelf, I nabbed it.
But, dear reader, her magazine sucks. If you want recipes, go to Cook’s Illustrated. If you want a narrative on food and ingredients, go to Gourmet or Saveur or even Martha Stewart Living. Paula Deen’s magazine reads like the Pennysaver in its writing style, and the recipes are presented like they’re appearing in a coupon book. (Basically, there are tons of pictures and recipes without a narrative tying the recipes together–but then the recipes themselves are not that intriguing, like discount clothes on a sales rack).
There were a few sections outside of food. For instance, there was a two page layout on “red white and blue” bouquets in celebration of July 4th. The ugliest bouquets ever.
Paula, I’m sticking to your TV show and your cookbooks. Omnipedia, you ain’t.
Update: another reason this magazine looks sub-par…all the photographs seem to be taken with FLASH (a no-no in food photography), and I noticed that the articles tend to just be a list of recipes, as opposed to being attached to a narrative or some sort of intro. which makes it come off like a Pennysaver.