Reviews: Tandem Bakery & The Jewel Box

The Dig Portland site is now live with content from the first 4 issues including reviews of The Bearded Lady and Tandem Bakery.

But great drinks, made with homemade bitters and drams, are what made Nathaniel legendary before the Jewel Box ever opened…At the bar a short cocktail menu changes weekly. They are indeed well-crafted and beautiful in their glass. On a recent visit the best was the bourbon-based, turbid, and frothy-textured Lion’s Tail. An allspice dram adds some rum sweetness and warm spice, and lime gives it a sour bite. The Japanese cocktail had a candied lemon flavor, with a darker licorice underneath. A Boulevardier had a syrupy depth with orange and spice. And the Martinez, reddish and thin, in a lovely glass with curving ribs, sweetens and spices the martini with a dash of maraschino liqueur and various bitters.

2 comments on “Reviews: Tandem Bakery & The Jewel Box

  1. Tandem Bayside “cool and clinical?” For Christ sake, it’s a freaking coffee shop Dig Portland, get a grip.

  2. I wholeheartedl concur with the previous commenter’s exhortation to digportland to ‘get a grip.’ My curiosity was piqued by the appearance of digportland, but the site is going to have to raise its standards for writing to gain any sort of loyal or trusting readership.

    I am at a loss to determine whether the review of Tandem Bakery published in digportland was simply badly written by its author, or poorly edited by whomever edits the site. My suspicion is that the former scenario is the case, and that it was never edited at all. I would more happily think that such pompous highfalutin twaddle is the result of an individual’s effort: it revolts the mind to think that anyone who could actually read or write modern standard English, or profess to edit a fairly ambitious website, would claim to have edited this tripe, let alone pass it for publication. For the love of all that’s holy can someone get a freshman comp course for the writer? The piece is a cesspit of bad writing, including a terminal lack of clarity, muddiness of intent, nonsense, non sequitur, misspelling, and bad punctuation. Each line reveals a new horror to gasp at. The reviewer seems allergic to the idea of finding one apt word, supposing in his befuddlement that two, when linked by ‘and’, will distract attention from weak composition. On the subject of linking things, congratulations to the writer for the following bits of hyphenated nonsense: ‘coffee-didacticism’, ‘austere-supremacist’, and ‘moist-dense’. Utter poppycock. And, if he insists on being so airheadedly pompous as to cite Malevich, one could wish that he would at least spell the artist’s first name correctly. That way Malevich can join Mondrian, Federer, and Winnicott in their eternal groaning protest at having their names evoked in a piece that did for journalistic writing what pantyhose did for digital penetration.

Comments are closed.