Home / Books / Book Reviews / Book Review: Let Me Eat Cake by Leslie F. Miller

Book Review: Let Me Eat Cake by Leslie F. Miller

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

"Quirky" perhaps best describes Leslie Miller's writing style. Several years ago, someone applied that descriptor to the sense of humor revealed in my blog. At the time, I didn't know if it was a compliment or a pejorative. I still don't know, but now I understand what might lead a reviewer to use the term. It is a good, vague word to use when your reaction is neutral or so mixed that it is impossible to wildly favor or to disapprove a piece of cake – I mean writing. I am leaning toward liking Let Me Eat Cake, but am often enough confused or not comprehending, so I wonder about it and its writer.

Let Me Eat Cake could be as dry as some of the pastries Miller describes (after all, I think it began life as an academic work, a thesis to win an M.F.A. from Goucher.) However, the chick-lit touches, embarrassing self-revelations, and occasional dips into the roiled stream of the author's mind and memories are cake-saving icings, if sometimes tasteless. Aw, it's really sweet, I guess. Just behold all the cutesy chapter titles (both in word and decorative images, like the word CAKE in the title on the cover – probably the publisher's fault, not the writer's.)

Because I usually read the back matter first, I thought Let Me Eat Cake would be an in-depth review of the history of the confection. The extensive references were the first clue about the genealogy of the book. "This looks like my thesis bibliography," I thought. Then I noticed most items were Internet citations. I was impressed until I realized some sources were unreliable – Wikipedia and anonymous blogs. I mean, what kind of primary source is "Old Foodie"? For this she got an M.F.A.?

Maybe not. Maybe the resources I question are a later, hipper addition for commercial publication. Do they still say "hip"?

Miller's book is the first I have read that makes flagrant reference to using the Web and email (what, no SMS?) for research. The book is designated "Cooking,” but it is not a cookbook and contains few recipes. With a subtitle like A Celebration of Flour, Sugar, Butter, Eggs, Vanilla, Baking Powder, and a Pinch of Salt, you might expect detailed baking instructions. No, it is the story of an unresolved case of substance abuse. The addictive substance happens to be sugar in the form of frosting on cakes. She eats cans of frosting, minus the cake. But you can't write a book just about cake frosting, right?

Perhaps reflecting the sugar high Miller must live on, the book jumps about in time, space, and topic. It is disorienting and disorganized. Some chapters are only one page in length. The table of contents offers no map, being organized into eight sections called "Tiers" and 45 chapter titles like "Losing Isn't Everything" or "Dessert.” When isn't cake dessert?

The tidbits about cake stuffed between layers of Miller's mind are interesting for anyone who likes to cook. If it weren't for the excellent citations and references in the Notes section, this wouldn't find space on my shelf of cookbooks. Maybe I'll keep it in the office instead, as reference material on, well, references. My plans for writing a book about authentic cooking are solidifying like margarine in the fridge.

Powered by

About Georganna Hancock

Retired San Diego publisher, journalist, freelance editor and writer, blogged almost daily for eight years at A WRITERS EDGE. She helped writers on the path to writing success with critiques, edits and publishing advice. Find her author page on Amazon and her tweets on Twitter, where she's aka @GLHancock. Georganna's first writing appeared in print in the 1960s. She worked as a journalist for many years. She reviewed books for the FORT PIERCE NEWS TRIBUNE and THE LOUISVILLE COURIER-JOURNAL and wrote for THE MIAMI HERALD, regional publications, and many national magazines. She was a member of the National Book Critics Circle, the San Diego Professional Editors Network and the San Diego Writers/Editors Guild, for which she served as Web Manager. Books reviewed may have been received as gifts. All her writings are protected by U.S. copyright law.
  • (Sorry about the glitch above—”than your review should be discounted because it is online.”

    Darn the laptop.

  • Thank you for reviewing the book. I think. You really only spoke about the things you didn’t like, so I wouldn’t call it mixed or ambivalent.

    I do want to point out that times have changed, and this is evidenced no more by a bibliography that shows ample internet research (also ample personal interviews and ample book research—ample everything, with that many notes) than it is by the fact that you are writing a review for a blog and not a newspaper or magazine.

    All research these days begins with a simple Google search. It doesn’t end there, but scholarly journals and magazines and online food librarians should not be discounted because they are online any more than your review should because discounted because it is online.

    I’m still curious to know what you might have liked about the book!