MarketStEl

The running comments are sort of a touchstone for satire of whatever sort of chi-chi "foodie" trend may be sweeping the country as well as variants on a more sarcastic or tongue-in-cheek form of Sara's own response. Take the latest one, posted on January 18: Of course, Gourmet having gotten more serious about good food for its own sake rather than as status symbol over the past decade or so, this "recipe" and running commentary are less of a swipe at the magazine from which it was lifted than it might have once been. (My guess is that the "recipe" is probably a sentence isolated from a longer article of basic cooking tips.)

Oh, dear. Another viewer whose brain circuits have been fried by the video techniques of the short-attention-span generation. I think the logic goes something like this: Those 18- to 35-year-olds have grown up in a hyperstimulated world, what with TV and video games and other really visually busy stuff. The fear is they will tune out of a program that has only a few camera angles or spends most of its time showing the host at work cooking.

Julia and I had the same problem! I fell lots better now. SB (has used the procedure successfully many times since)(after cleaning the oven) ← That makes three of us, though my kitchen is such that when the oven starts to smoke, it fills the apartment. Guess I need to clean my oven again.

Does the tutorial mean that this thread now gets moved to the eGullet Culinary Institute?

Having shared this with Magus in a pm, I'll go public with my preference for No. 9, if for no other reason than that it is unusual and very personal. Who knows? Maybe he could even give the name a backstory of its own, much as my "handle" in my .sig and its anagram in my ID have stories of their own. Not to mention that when you combine it with that fire-engine-red-with-yellow-lettering package design he laid on us way back when, you get a whole lot better associations than Charles Manson (and the Beatles song I associate with him is "Helter Skelter," anyway). Think "Engine Co. No. 9." (Edited to correct form of communication.)

A lot of the stuff in bags tends to spread across a flat surface if left unconstrained, and a bag provides only moderate constraint. I guess I could pack the bags together tightly enough to counter this tendency, but I must confess that I like cardboard boxes' easier stuffability on shelves. I recently received a sample of Tetley's round tea bags in a canister just a little larger in circumference than the tea bags. I think those containers might have some potential, but I really see no problem with boxes full of tea bags in neat rows. Or were you referring to loose tea? In the case of the latter, I prefer tins or canisters too. I hear that in Canada, milk is sold in plastic bags. I'd be interested in hearing how you pour the milk out of the bag. I'd love it if Canadians had those milk dispensers you find at diners and soda fountains, in which you stick the tube sticking out of the bag through the shutoff handle and then cut off the end that protrudes down. But I suspect that the home setup is different from that. Probably when plastic became cheaper to make and ship. I remember the similar tins that Nestlé Quik used to come in, and I think those are neater than the current packaging--although it's easier to get every last bit of powder out of today's plastic cans with their can-width openings.

Saltines, cheese-flavored, buttery, or water crackers?

In that FCI course I took, written about on another thread, we had Sam Sifton (former Times dining ed.) speak to our class. He said working in a restaurant or as a cook wasn't really necessary. Dean Richman said the same, for various reasons. But everyone who has done both agrees with what Mr. Ruhlmann said right here.I think you can write about stuff. Or, you can 'get' it. It makes a real difference to the readers, and to the people you're writing about. I've found that the people you're covering respect that you've done what it takes to understand them. And that can be pretty nice. ← Writing, like cooking, is a skill that takes lots of work and dedication to perfect, and pardon me if the following sounds a little sharp-elbowed, but I would suggest that a culinary professional who has written little or no prose will be just about as good a food writer as a writer who has little or no familiarity with the inner workings of the places where food is prepared or produced. But the writer has the distinct leg up in this particular pairing if for no other reason than that he or she can organize thoughts and observations into understandable and we hope engaging prose. This, BTW, is not unique to food writing. The fact that the majority of journalists working in the US majored in journalism or English or communications rather than the subjects they are interested in should tell you (a) what skill counts most when it comes to entering the profession and (b) why the profession has the shortcomings it has. However, if this were not the case, we would have far less readable newspapers and magazines, even if their content contained fewer errors and a deeper understanding of the subjects being reported upon.

See upthread for my opinion of uncured hot dogs. But hey, it's a free country. If people want to feel virtuous while eating "junk" food, let them. As for me, I'll revel in all its adulterated, bad-for-you glory.

I now need to come up with a similar retort that a British person would find equally offensive. By an identical metric, you could say equally that Fish and Chips isn't real food either. You're padding protein with lots of carbohydrate batter, accompanying it with pure carbs and immersing it in hot grease. Does it deserve venerating as real food when done correctly and with care? Yes, absolutely. The same goes for the Hot Dog. ← Leave aside the offense, he didn't even get the nutrition right. Hot dogs are Atkins-safe, being very low in carbohydrates. Here's the nutritional data on the package of Hebrew Nationals currently in my fridge: Fat 14g-22% DV (saturated fat 6g-30%), Cholesterol 30 mg-10%, Sodium 420mg-18%, Total Carbohydrates 1g-0%, Protein 6g. If you're going to do a nutritional slam on hot dogs, the villain is fat, not carbs--130 of a Hebrew National frank's 150 total calories come from fat. But why am I arguing nutrition in this discussion? We don't eat hot dogs because we're nutrition-conscious. We eat them because they're easy to eat and taste good.

Okay, time for a confession: I often eat hot dogs unheated, right out of the package. After all, they are fully cooked before they're packaged. That said, I need to cook one before passing final judgement, but I did buy a package of Hebrew National dogs on my most recent grocery trip, and they are the beefiest-tasting franks I've yet encountered.

No San Diego Trolley shot , but everything else about the week you've shared with us has been absolutely wonderful. As my own preferences run towards the spicy, I'd vote for the Szechuan place. But I also get the impression that you, like me, are about value for money, so with that as a criterion--and the old adage, "The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom," as a guide--you should do the buffet. Thanks for taking us through your food life, Ellen. But I do have one question: Is that really a church you went to on Sunday? Must be a fabulously wealthy--OK, quite affluent--congregation, judging from that kitchen and the art-gallery-like appearance of the church social hall.

I believe it was no less an essayist and writer than Samuel Johnson who once said, "None but a blockhead ever wrote except for money." Of course, by participating on these boards, I am violating Johnson's rule every day. Seconded. I got the following advice from the managing editor of The Kansas City Star, where I interned before going to college in 1976: "You already know how to write news stories. Major in something you want to write about." And so I majored in political science. Of all the articles I've written for pay, I'd say about 15 percent have been about politics.

Could you comment on this recipe that was posted on Epicurious.com from a 2001 issue of Gourmet? Would you have any suggestions to improve this dish?

That's what makes shows of this kind great.

Didn't the Food Network have a show once called Food 911? I could have used a quick call-in -- maybe to Cooking Live -- when I tried Blasted Chicken for the first time tonight. I had a 7-pound Oven Stuffer at the ready, liberally sprinkled with barbecue seasoning, seasoned salt and black pepper. I put it in the 450F oven, added a side dish of scalloped potatoes 45 minutes later, and pulled the bird out after an hour while to let it sit while the potatoes finished cooking. I guess I should have shoved it back in the oven the moment I noticed the juices inside the bird weren't running clear. It turns out the chicken was OK up top but underdone on the bottom. Can this be fixed after you've cut through the bird? BTW, the part that was cooked tasted great.

As a little confession is good for the soul, here's mine: I do enjoy watching Iron Chef, even though it's really self-parody.* (Anyone else out there enjoy listening to P.D.Q. Bach? Remember his famous "play-by-play commentary" on a performance of Beethoven's Fifth Symphony? Well, Iron Chef is the same shtick moved into the kitchen.) As this conversation is going on, I just happened to return home from an errand at midday today to find my partner watching Sara's Secrets on the Food Network--the episode on grilled cheese sandwiches. Unfortunately, I caught it halfway through and had to go do other work, but I did stick around to catch the end of the Monte Cristo sandwich recipe. Great-looking sandwich and everything was easy to follow. You'll be right at home on PBS. *Edited to add: Make that "because it's really self-parody." And the Food Network's American adaptation takes itself just seriously enough to raise the parody to the next level.

Ouch. Sorry, but yes - you will get some flack for saying this. First of all, the question is about learning to write about food, not simply learning about "getting it" or "finding why it may taste a certain way". There is more to writing than "getting it". In your post alone, there are enough spelling and grammar mistakes to make any knowledgeable reader grimace. . .and unfortunately they are not the sort of "mistakes" that are simple to make. The mistakes show ignorance about "how to write". Did you take English classes at UCLA? What were your grades? A fair question, and I agree with the substance of what you say. However: As far as the grammar and spelling go, even though it is important to know how to spell and the rules of grammar and usage--one of my favorite sayings is, "In order to break the rules properly, you must first know what they are"--there's a reason they have editors. And every good writer needs one. I've heard anecdotes about people who really do have interesting things to say and interesting ways of saying them, but apparently very little they learned in high school grammar classes stuck to them. These people's prose usually needs major patchwork to get it fit to print. One of the benefits and banes of freelancing is that you can make time for just about anything you want. I know that I treasured the letter I received from the author of my favorite books in fifth grade, and while that may not count as "mentoring," it played no small role in my ultimate choice of career. I wouldn't consider myself a "great author," but--pardon my immodesty in advance--I am one of the best writers I know, and were someone to approach me for advice, tips, or commiseration, I would certainly find some time to share them. Isn't that exactly what's happening in this thread? A few other comments: While master's degrees are increasingly required items for consideration for plum jobs, journalism is still one of those fields where you can get started on your way to the top without one. Ultimately, you will be judged on the accuracy, fairness, and reader appeal of what you write, and that requires first that you write for publication. But you're already well on your way there. BTW, my own credentials as a food writer are sparse, consisting overwhelmingly of posts on this forum and the occasional short item for Philadelphia Style; when it comes to this subject, I'm as much of a novice as you are. The stuff I get paid for deals more often with cities and the built environment than it does food and cooking, but I am an eclectic writer with an interest in many things. Observe what's going on around you, ask lots of questions, taste what's on your plate, and you will be fine. One more thing: As with so much else in life, a sense of humor helps.

You mean to tell me it might have something to do with the food?

Boy, this opens up a whole new can of worms. But it does explain the redirection, sort of--and it explains Alton Brown, sort of (more on him below). I'm thinking back to my post-college years, and while I enjoyed cooking even then, my concerns weren't really with technique, or ingredients, or the history behind a dish. Most of the cookbooks I used growing up (predominantly the Better Homes and Gardens New Cook Book) didn't really concern themselves with these matters either, though the Woman's Day Encyclopedia of Cookery--a supermarket series that my Dad purchased and gave to me as a gift, which I still have--does make a nod in this direction. My suspicion is that the 15- to 35-year-old males who are interested in these things either already have both old and new editions of Joy of Cooking and/or have already enrolled in a good culinary school. For the rest of them, food is another form of entertainment. I'd like three things: a good history lesson, a good explanation of how things work and why, and some personality. Julia Child routinely offered all three on her program. By contrast, Graham Kerr had personality in spades (or should I say fifths?), but wasn't that great in the other two departments. This brings me to Mr. Brown. His show also does a very good job combining the three elements in a highly entertaining fashion--and I suspect the reason he survives on today's Food Network is that he does so in a cooking-for-geeks style that I think would appeal to the target demographic.

Hello, Sara: I'll confess up front to not having followed your shows closely, though I have watched Cooking Live on occasion. I found that show informative and to the point. But I hope that doesn't prevent you from elaborating a little more on the decision you made to move to PBS, which has been discussed here on eG. I guess it shouldn't come as a surprise that the total audience for PBS cooking shows is greater than the Food Network's, given that not all U.S. households have cable and PBS has affiliates in even the smallest markets (often through repeaters of larger stations in a state). But I still wonder how much this decision was influenced by the Food Network's decision to emphasize entertainment and travel over food itself, as symbolized to a large extent by the transformation of what was in the beginning an infomercial for Emeril Lagasse's seasoning blends into a sort of culinary Ellen DeGeneres Show (no slight meant to Ellen). Had the network stuck to its original purpose, would it have been more difficult for you to leave it? And is the shift in the network's emphasis proof positive that a commercial network devoted to food and cooking can't make it in the United States, or rather just an example of failure of the imagination?

Wandering back through this thread, I noticed this: A piece of advice for the both of you: Next time you make this dish, go wild--really let your hair down--get adventurous! Use canned cream of broccoli soup instead. Or if you are really feeling flush, cream of asparagus.

You can find him. You just need to know where to look.

I like the stadium term too, but as I tend to associate a certain level of spiciness with the phrase "red hot," I am invariably disappointed when I order one of these puppies. They're still delicious, though. Maybe I should smuggle some Tabasco into the ballpark and secretly spike the hot dog water with it.

I haven't ever cracked open a copy of Larousse Gastronomique, but I suspect that what the entry cited here may have been referring to is the use of the phrase "hot dog" to refer to a "frankfurter" or "wiener" sausage. I vaguely recall reading something--here on eG, I think--about the phrase catching on when an advertising copywriter designed an ad featuring a wiener altered to resemble a dachshund. My recollection is also that the frankfurter or wiener was one of those food products popularized at the Louisiana Purchase Exposition in St. Louis in 1904--as was one of the most popular condiments to put on a hot dog, French's yellow mustard, which made its debut at the fair. French's mustard packages up until a couple of years ago even bore the legend, "An all-American favorite ever since its introduction at the 1904 World's Fair!" In fact, it might be argued that the 1904 St. Louis World's Fare, um, Fair, was to American eating habits what the 1893 World's Columbian Exposition in Chicago was to American city planning. But as for the semiotics of the hot dog, you really don't want to get a gay man started on the subject, now do you?