Jump to content

chef gui

participating member
  • Posts

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by chef gui

  1. Probably the only way to make sense of the inquiry is to use a common-usage approach, in other words pizza is whatever large numbers of people in any given place call pizza. This approach is typically going to yield some weird definitions, but I guess it's a starting point. ← Yes, I think that's the point I initially wanted to make.
  2. Ok. Let me try to address some of the points raised following my initial post. Many good points, especially by slkinsey. I agree with you. And maybe I shouldn't have used "authentic" because it's not really the point. Sure, Pissaladiere has more to do with Neopolitan pizza than Chicago-style pizza. But that's not really the point either. I'm not interested either in knowing all micro-regional types of pizza. Of course, anybody can make up a pizza style and call it say, "flying monkey style pizza". Kind of a catchy name; i'll give you that. But again, not the point of my initial post. The point is this, and i'll try to make it as clear as possible. Over the years, Americans have been calling pizza a lot of things. It's very true, slkinsey, that Chicago-style pizza is so remote from "authentic" pizza, namely Neopolitan pizza, that one may really ask the legitimate question: is that really pizza? But that doesn't matter either. It doesn't matter because Chicago-style pizza is so rooted in the American culture that it has become a pizza. Just a different style than "authentic" Neopolitan pizza. And I think that's my point. What are the pizza classifications that are accepted by the American mainstream food culture? Which ones are part of pop culture, and which ones are considered fringe? My initial post cited 8 main styles. Do you agree? Would you add one? Would you substract one? A good test may be: Do you consistently notice one or more of those 8 styles listed on American menus, or cookbook recipes, or on the food network. To be part of pop culture, a pizza style has to be significant. We've all heard of NY-Style pizza because it is served and called that way significantly all across this great country. Well, tell me... what makes a NY-style pizza? Did I make my post clearer or more confusing than it was on the first place?.. Thanks for your feedback.
  3. I'd like to hear authoritative opinions on the different pizza styles in America. I'm writing a technical culinary book, coming out in December. While i'm not at the liberty to discuss it in details, please know that it's a reference guide about various classic dishes in America. Not a book about pizza by any means. However, i'm researching serious information about the different styles of pizza a home cook may encounter in a US restaurant or cookbook. I don't need an exhaustive list of all the pizza styles available. Rather, i'm looking for the most usual characteristiques and dough recipes for each. After a little research, it is my belief that there are 8 big styles of pizza in the US: NY-style / Neapolitan thin. little toppings. cheese on top. Chicago style/ deep dish thick. similar to a pie or a quiche, even. baked in pie dish. tomato sauce on top, cheese underneath. St Louis style roughly same as chicago style but with the characteristic 3-cheese (provolone, swiss, white cheddar) Sicilian style rectangular. thick crust. sauce on top; cheese underneath. square sliced. Nonna / grandma style similar to sicilian but i'm unsure of the real differences with the other 7 styles. feel free to comment. New haven style similar to NY-style but thicker. oblong shape. Greek style thin crust. oily bottom. lots of oregano. thick layer of cheese. California style similar to neopolitan. lots of fresh vegetables, goat cheese, arugula, etc... My 3 big questions are: 1. Would most of you agree with this classification for the US market? 2. Would most of you agree with the above descriptions? 3. What are the differences in the recipes for the dough? Note that I'm looking for informed sources (people who really know what they are talking about). Thank you so much.
  4. Great post by chef Tony. Very instructive post on Plating & Presentations. If i may, here are 2 links to articles on food design and plated presentations. They compliment the course well and should be of interest to eGullet readers. Brief history of food presentations Plating food: choose your support
  5. The links below reflect what I estimate to be the best in blogosphere. I try to read them all regularly and I'd say they all deserve your attention. http://steamykitchen.com http://www.foodsiteoftheday.com http://www.deliciousdays.com http://fxcuisine.com http://www.tastingmenu.com http://www.davidlebovitz.com http://chadzilla.typepad.com http://101cookbooks.com http://ideasinfood.typepad.com http://l2o.typepad.com http://www.offalgood.com http://blog.ruhlman.com http://www.chezpim.com http://www.nordljus.co.uk http://www.latartinegourmande.com http://waiterrant.net http://mattbites.com And of course, i'll gladly point you to my very own food blog.
  6. Ferran Adria explains it this way (from memory/loose translation): "In gastronomy, between 1900 and now, there were only 3 movements. Cuisine classique, nouvelle cuisine, and techno-emotional cuisine". From 1900 to more or less 1970, it was the cuisine classique, which was not about interpretation. You had a recipe and you carried it out. Then in the 70's, as it has been rightfully explained in various posts before mine, Bocuse, Troisgros and the like came up, aided by influential food critics Gault & Millau, with an extraordinay way to break up from the conventionality. In other words, they started to think outside the culinary box. At that time, granted, Nouvelle went crazy. Most diners ended up with a very pricey, large white plate with stuff like a 2 oz of unilaterally grilled rare beef tenderloin, 3 bright-green Correze peas and a tiny drizzle of balsamic reduction. It was ridiculous. But the only reason it was ridiculous for the diner, it's because Nouvelle was not about the diner. It was about the chef. They needed, at that point in time, to break away and explore their own creativity instead of following Escoffier. And thank god it was about them, because Nouvelle deeply transformed gastronomy and utterly modified the way chefs thought about their food. It wasn't about Escoffier anymore, it was about them! I started chef school in 1986 in France. And let me tell you, it was ALL about Nouvelle Cuisine. Sure, we had to learn Escoffier and cuisine classique, and know what a sauce Espagnole or a potage St Germain was. But mainly, it was about techniques and creativity. It was a great time . A very similar time, in fact, as right now, where we observe that techno-emotional cuisine supplants the last remains of Nouvelle (it can be argued that nouvelle is dead but really, fine dining in America or in Europe, with the exception of chefs practicing techno-emotional cuisine, is a re-calibrated, time-tested, better and more satisfying version of Nouvelle). Note that it was at that time that the way culinary students were taught completely changed. Being a chef was not anymore about learning classic recipes by rot; it was about learning techniques, and finally have the liberty to create. Before my time at chef school, students had to learn recipes. The problem with that, of course, is that if you know how to make a Bechamel, you don't necessarily understand how to make a Mornay (only difference is the addition of cheese). It was so stupid. With Nouvelle, and the new way of teaching students, a chef knew how to make mother sauces (it's the same technique) and could come up at every stage of the elaboration, with additions or omissions of his own. Very liberating. In my humble opinion, what we are seeing now with techno-emotional cuisine, and the way Grant Achatz, Ferran and others revolutionize the world of gastronomy, has just a very familiar air of deja-vu. Aided by food critics, these great chefs are the new Bocuse and Troisgros. They are finally breaking with the ground rules of Nouvelle, and take diners to unexplored territory. This is as exciting as the birth of Nouvelle back then. To conclude, the phantom of Nouvelle still lingers in virtually ALL fine dining restaurants today. But yeah, the term "Nouvelle" is so obsolete and somewhat gives us tired, tacky flavors reminiscent of the Bee Gees and Saturday Night Fever.
×
×
  • Create New...