Jump to content

the_nomad

participating member
  • Posts

    41
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. I thought that Egulleters might be interested in this - it's a repost of a blog post over at Kamikaze Cookery, where we've been testing celebrity chef recipes to see whether they're usable by the average person. After trying Jamie Oliver and Nigella Lawson, our latest attempt was with Johnnie, a normal, geeky guy who cooks a bit, trying to cook Gordon Ramsay's Brussels Sprout and Goat Cheese Souffle. (original recipe here. It didn't go so well, although I'm told that the episode we made of it is hilarous. Anyway, various people told us that novices shouldn't be trying to make hard recipes, and so we asked one of our viewers, who certainly isn't a novice cook by any stretch of the imagination, to try making the recipe himself. And this is what happened, which I thought Egulleters might find entertaining, both for a lovely description of a cooking adventure and in light of the ongoing debate about whether celebrity chefs actually write useful recipes or just serve up "food porn"... --- My name is Stu, and I can cook. And you should know from the start that I don't like Gordon Ramsay. I think he's a massive prick. Now, cookery is manly. It helps you survive, and that's manly. It helps support your loved ones, and that's manly too. And I'm pretty manly. I go to the gym a lot, and lift weights in a manly way. I have a pretty geeky job — I'm a science and technology writer — and geekiness is manly. In the kitchen, I wield a massive, wickedly sharp Japanese knife with swirly patterns on it. That's manly. However, I freely admit that I'm not as manly as Gordon Ramsay. He's so manly, his face is actually turning into a scrotum. He swears more than me, which I don't really object to, but he insults and victimises people, which I do object to. He is, as I said, a massive prick, and you can't get much more manly than that. I also think his recipes are lousy. I tried his 'easy watercress soup' recipe once, and it didn't work. I was quietly satisfied when Hugh and Co demonstrated that his recipe for "goat's cheese and brussels sprout soufflé":http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/food_and_drink/recipes/article3263942.ece was pretty much impossible for a cooking novice to follow. Chatting to Hugh on Facebook this afternoon, I happened to mention that I was quite tempted to have a go at it, just For Science. Go on then, said Hugh. And tell us how you did it, in a way that anybody could understand. Now, as I said, I cook, and I do it quite a lot. I'm good at it. Individual cheese soufflés, however, are pretty high on the list of things I wouldn't normally cook. For a start, they're very high in fat and salt, and I'm diabetic; I really shouldn't eat that sort of food. Also, they're very faffy and fiddly; what I normally call stunt cookery. It gets loads of pans and bowls dirty. And cheese is expensive (rightly so, when it's good — cheese-making is a skillful process which involves keeping animals, and it has to be stored under the right conditions before it can be sold) and I don't think making it into a soufflé actually improves it; I'd rather just have the cheese. But this was a Challenge. And it was For Science. How could I refuse? So, the first thing you have to do with a recipe you haven't used before is read it. All of it, not just the ingredients. That way, if there's anything in there which you don't understand, you've got time to check it out before you get stuck with a pan boiling over and no idea what to do. Looking at Ramsay's recipe, it's obvious that it's badly written. For a start, it doesn't tell you why you'd cook these things. They're a starter, and a fairly rich one; you'd cook them for a dinner party with a fairly light main course. If you like that sort of thing. There are also undefined technical terms, like scalding (heat to boiling point then take off the heat immediately) and season (add salt and pepper), plus some unexplained processes (how to beat egg whites and fold them in). And some of it is frankly bizarre. That bit with the mashing together flour and butter? That's a classical French technique called beurre manié, but it's for thickening stews and pan sauces, where you've cooked something in a liquid which doesn't thicken as it cooks. You mix it in just before serving to thicken it up and make it shiny. You don't use it for thickening a white sauce, which is basically what we're doing here. So I'll be using another fat-and-flour technique called a roux instead. Sod you, scrotum-face. Also, it's a very annoying recipe. You have to keep leaving things to cool. Who can be bothered? Like I said, it's faffy. A challenge is a challenge, though. So. It's 8.10pm, and I'm making a start. First off, we need to infuse the milk. We could cook the sprouts at the same time, but that'll get two pans dirty and I can't be arsed. I'm halving the quantities, so we need to chop a quarter of an onion — it needs to be fairly fine, to extract the maximum amount of flavour — and chuck that into a pan with 100ml of milk, half a bayleaf, half a star anise and two cloves. Then heat that to just boiling and whip it off the heat, pour it into a bowl and leave it to cool and infuse. 8.26, and that's done. I chucked it back into the jug I'd used to measure the milk, then washed up the pan and put it back on the heat with some water for the sprouts, which I'd peeled and halved while the milk came to the boil. No point leaving them whole when we want to purée them anyway and we want them to cook evenly. Now, let's cook them and see how long it takes for the milk to go cold, shall we? 8.37, and the sprouts are cooked and puréed. I did not 'refresh in ice-cold water', I just ran them under the cold tap for 30sec, which is far more efficient. And I don't have a food processor — I used to, but I hardly ever used it — so I used the little blending cup that came with my Braun stick blender (you know, the sort the KKC boys tried out a few weeks ago) and that did the job fine. So now I have some sprout purée, some funny smelling milk which isn't cold yet, and some washing up. I'll go separate some eggs while I wait. 8.45. Well, that was a deeply unpleasant egg-sperience. One of the eggs had gone off, and it was the second one I separated, so I had to get rid of both whites and wash the bowl, then separate another two. Urgh. Also, the milk still isn't cold. And I've buttered the ramekins, too. 9.15, and the base is done. This is how you make the roux: put the amount of butter specified in the recipe into a small pan, melt it, then add the flour and stir with a wooden spoon over medium heat until it goes a shade darker. You need to do that to cook the flour, otherwise it tastes floury. Then strain the milk into the pan and whisk hard until it thickens, which only takes seconds. The Worcester sauce, parmesan, goat's cheese and egg yolks are added, and it's been seasoned (salt and white pepper). And the puréed sprouts are in. It's now cooling in a large bowl (ANOTHER one), and I've tasted it: slightly odd, and not entirely pleasant. Also, it looks like there's too much for my two ramekins. I've also done some washing up and put the kettle on, and the oven is heating. Christ on a bike, this is an annoying recipe. 9.30, and now I’m getting really grumpy. The egg-whites are now beaten. Here’s what Ramsay doesn’t tell you. You need a deep glass or metal bowl, which must be absolutely dry and absolutely clean. Your whites must have no trace of yolk in them. Beat them until it’s expanded a great deal in volume, and so that the whites around the whisk are billowy. When you take the whisk out, the whites should hold their shape in soft peaks but not stand up stiff and dry-looking. The observant among you will have noticed that the recipe uses three eggs and I’m halving it. This isn’t a problem with the yolks, because a bit of extra yolk won’t hurt it. But you don’t want too much white, so just wash a big tablespoon of the stuff down the sink. Now the folding in. You have to do this with a metal spoon, because you’re trying to keep in all the air you’ve added and a wooden spoon will knock it out. You’ll end up with a rubbery soufflé, and nobody wants that. So you loosen the base mixture by folding in a spoonful of whites — scoop it up from the bottom and cut across it to mix — then add that to the rest of the whites and keep folding until it’s all mixed in but it still looks foamy. It doesn’t look promising. Hugh and Johnnie’s description of it is right: it’s mostly yellow, with green flecks, and it looks like something the cat threw up. Maybe Scrote-face Ramsay actually hates Times readers, and this is some sort of manly revenge? Is he standing over my shoulder, heaping insults on me? Or is this just a lousy recipe? My girlfriend just came home, wrinkled her nose, and asked what the hell I was doing. I told her it was Hugh’s fault, and she could blame him when she had to taste the stuff. She asked me why I was doing it. I explained it was a Challenge, and For Science, and she sighed and said 'Men!' See? Manly. In the meanwhile, the soufflés are in the oven. There was almost twice as much mixture as I needed to fill two ramekins. Currently, I am not inclined to keep the excess. There is washing-up debris all over my kitchen. I notice Gordon does not tell me what they’re supposed to look like once they’re cooked for half an hour. Thanks, Gordon. 9.55, and they’re out of the oven. They actually smell quite nice, in that baked-cheesy sort of way. They’ve risen hugely and cracked on top, so they look sorta like foamy yellow cheese-flowers with browned edges. As soon as they’re out of the hot water, they start to collapse, but they’re twice-baked souffles and they’re supposed to collapse. Scrote-face didn’t tell us that, did he? So now we wait for them to cool down. Again. For God’s sake. 10.55, and they’re finally done. Left them to cool down while I watched Heroes - so it turns out it's good for something after all - then turned them out into individual oven-proof dishes (yeah, I know, they were left over from some ready meal thing), grated some gruyere on top, drizzled some cream around them, baked. And they actually taste quite pleasant, although what they mostly taste of is toasted gruyere. No hint of sproutiness, or for that matter goat’s cheesiness, although the texture was quite nice. ‘If it was served to me for a starter,’ my girlfriend said, ‘I certain wouldn’t complain, but I wouldn’t be in raptures either.’ It took us less than three minutes to eat them. There we go. An experienced cook took well over two and a half hours to cook this and found it very annoying. It created a huge heap of washing-up, used expensive ingredients, and was... well, OK. So basically, Gordon Ramsay’s idea of a good time is to spend ages faffing around, stopping at irregular and frustrating intervals, at the end of which he probably feels very smug at showing off his technique, but doesn’t really satisfy his partner, and doesn’t do her much good either. It’s Mrs Ramsay I feel sorry for.
  2. You can probably get some of the more common "molecular gastronomy" products from local health food stores, if you know of any. Soy Lecithin and Xanthan Gum are both available from most health food shops. You can probably buy lecithin at nutritional supplement shops too. Agar-agar is commonly used in Chinese cooking, so try a Chinese supermarket if you have access to one. That's all I've got! Anyone else?
  3. My impressions of the book have echoed Douglas's, as well as some of the other commenters here. It's very interesting to read how Keller uses sous-vide, but some of the information in the book is, erm, a little surprising. The total lack of mention of cooking times varying by thickness of cut is a major omission, for example, and like Douglas, I was very irritated by discussion of the "danger zone". I was interested by the descriptions of and instructions for cook-chill, but given the scientific omissions in the book, I'm frankly not sure how much I trust them, especially in a home environment. Anyone? So far, the section of the book I've used most often has been the lengthy table of cooking temperatures at the back - which also contains cooking times, which I've been totally ignoring. (I'd be worried that a total novice to sous-vide might pick the book up and decide to, for example, cook a bone-in chicken leg for an hour at 64 degrees, which would probably leave the inside under temperature, but I may be being paranoid there.) Just about every recipe includes liquid in the bag, meaning that you'll need a ($2,000) chamber vacuum sealer to try a lot of them. Having said that, as other commenters have mentioned, a lot of the liquids are freezable. My impression was that some of the recipes required the liquids to be prepared or added into the bag in rather specific ways, but I haven't checked thoroughly enough to be sure whether there are any total dealbreaker recipes for us poor people with FoodSavers. Having said that, there's a lot of good stuff to be said about "Under Pressure". Its descriptions of the uses of sous-vide to cook various types of food, and the advantages therof, are really fascinating reading. The aforementioned multi-page table is a great resource (and has produced fantastic results with everything I've tried). And the recipes are wonderful inspiration for the variety of things that sous-vide makes possible. But the gap in the market for a home sous-vide cookbook is still open.
  4. Woo! It does have contents! Fantastic. Now, there doesn't happen to be a button somewhere on it to shrink it until it's easily liftable, does there?
  5. Interesting - thanks, everyone. It appears I've accidentally happened upon the Blender Of The Gods... (For reference - we've got the 160 Watt Wand mixer.)
  6. Just wondering if any of you guys use Bamix wand mixers? We picked one up for the Blenders test episode of Kamikaze Cookery (warning - crap blenders and some truly spectacular splashing featured, plus quite a lot of swearing...) and ended up recommending it pretty much unreservedly. Best foam-making hand blender I've ever seen. But in my experience very few things do exactly what they claim. It's really impressive so far, but are there any gotchas with the Bamix experience? Also - anything you'd recommend instead?
  7. My copy of the Fat Duck cookbook arrived today. My god, it's gigantic. To put it in perspective - I can barely straight-arm lift the damn thing with one hand. And I'm not a small nor a non-active guy. I've had a quick skim - 1) No table of contents. This is going to be a colossal pain in the ass for someone who actually wants to cook from it - there's no list of recipes I can find. I'm going to make my own, and probably put it up here. 2) Really, it's very big indeed. I had pain in my lower back after bending over reading and holding it at an odd angle for a couple of minutes. It's really damn big. 3) It looks gorgeous. Absolutely stunning. It's also INCREDIBLY long, with each recipe probably taking up as much space as they did - including discussion - in the Perfection books, and there's a lot more of them. £60 is pretty darn reasonable for the quantity of top-class content. 4) The appendices, where Heston discusses food science, are probably worth the price of admission on their own. Well-illustrated and look like they're well-explained at the level of On Food And Cooking. 5) Despite the size, and probably because of the page quality (this is a really, really nice book) it sits open very easily, which will make cooking from it... more possible. Having said that, it'll also take up half my countertop. 6) Did I mention it's absolutely bloody huge? I have no idea where I'm going to put it - it won't fit on my bookshelves and will probably break my cookbook shelf. 7) Initial impressions are that the recipes are pretty doable, if very, very complex. Quite a few don't even seem to need much complex equipment. I'm looking forward to reading it, although I fear I may need special equipment to do so.
  8. the_nomad

    Foam Recipes

    If you want an absolute ton of iSi compatible recipes, Khymos's free Hydrocolloids book is the way to go. http://blog.khymos.org/2008/06/25/hydrocol...collection-v21/ Seriously amazing free resource.
  9. "No Reservations" - seconded. That was a much-underrated movie - in particular, Catherine Zeta Jones' chef character, with her compulsive cooking for her shrink, was really well-drawn. And Aaron Eckhart was great as always. The script's a little windy, but it has some really fine moments. "Ratotouille" is of course just brilliant. How can you not like an animated film where Thomas Keller was their food consultant? I understand he actually created the ratotuille dish seen at the end.
  10. the_nomad

    Pork Pie

    I tend to think that anything involving minced meat depends entirely on your source. A good pork pie is stunning, a bad one invites epic fail on a spectacular scale - and with a good, traceably-sourced one, you know you're not eating Unfortunate Pig Bits too. FWIW, if you're in Scotland ever, North Country Lass at the Edinburgh Farmer's Market does a beautiful pie, and an equally stunning cornish pastie. They have sausage rolls, too (yep, that's sausage meat in pastry in a roll form), but I've not tried them.
  11. Would the unused space be vertical or horizontal? Provided you've got a lid on it, excess vertical space shouldn't be a huge problem, I don't think - you'll get minimal loss of temperature upward from the increased space. Horizontal space is more of an issue, though - given that water's high specific heat capacity means it's an absolute bugger to heat, comparatively, you'll end up wasting a lot of energy you don't need, and I suppose depending on what you're poaching in you could end up diluting the flavour too. I've never really had a problem using mildly overlarge pots, though - in my experience, mildly oversmall pots are more of a problem. I guess it comes down to whether you'll need a larger pot for anything else you cook, and if you have enough money and space to buy both if necessary.
  12. Now that's *very* interesting indeed. Hmm. Don't suppose you'd be willing to name names? I shall mention that on the Kamikaze Cookery blog. Thanks.
  13. I must admit, I avoid Mark Peter White books just because his personal style makes me want to - well, suffice it to say I'd be extremely and proactively unhappy if anyone threw a knife at me, under any circumstances. I may overcome that and check out one of his cookbooks. Heston Blumenthal, on the other hand, kicks ass. I'm actually intending to try and recreate the tasting meal I had at the Fat Duck some time later this year, once the courier actually manages to deliver the Big Fat Duck Cookbook. And yes, it will probably be on film. I've cooked his chilli, his low-temperature chicken and his spag bol in the past, all of which were stunning, and the techniques we used on Kamikaze Cookery Episode 1 (The Perfect Steak) were heavily inspired by his Perfect Steak (which, frankly, was almost certainly better). Nigella - we actually test a Nigella recipe under similar circumstances later on in the series. I'll be sure to post about it! Interestingly, Nigella is getting rave reviews on our discussion thread about the Jamie episode from all sorts of people - I'd never realised she was that highly thought of. Jamie's Italy - interesting. I thought he'd heavily adapted a lot of them. We may have to shoot a Return To Jamie episode in the next series, then...
  14. Huh - in the US too? I'm waiting for mine in the UK right now, and again, it's been delayed. Lots of popularity or a delay in printing?
  15. I'd certainly say that Bourdain had hit "sleb chef" status at this point, yeah. Interesting - I'd kinda assumed his book might be great fun, but wouldn't be very cookable. At risk of being horribly ignorant, who's Rocco? I fear I don't know of him, and I rapidly discovered that Googling his name was not likely to lead me to culinary marvels in the most literal sense (very, very NSFW if you do it). (And I had to look up Jaques Pepin. I had no idea that the list of celebrity chefs was so different in the US. Do you guys get our lot? I mean, I believe you get Ramsey and Oliver, but Nigella, for example? Ken Hom?) Actually, thinking about it. Ken Hom's pretty darn good.
×
×
  • Create New...