CucinaDiva

I read all Elizabeth David's books more for a sense of time and place than for actual recipes. She creates a world out of time as much as providing recipes - character sketches, vignettes about places she's visited, meals she's eaten - really a wealth of knowledge. You have to keep in mind, too, that at the time she was writing, recipes were not formatted and delineated down to the finest detail. If you can get hold of an old Gourmet magazine from the same period, you'll see their recipes follow that non-format, too. It's just an indication of how things were done then - maybe giving the cook credit for a bit more sense and skill than we do now. Her recipes work just fine, but they expect a certain level of competence or willingness to learn from the cook. I haven't looked at Italian Food in a long time, but my favorite of hers, Summer Food, gave me an idea that led to one of my signature dishes when I was catering. It was a small part of the dish, but her recipe, the combination of ingredients, was so unique, it knocked my socks off. There's a lot of that in her books. Great reads and great resources.

I wonder if the recipes you're finding are really like a Chambord-type. That's sweet and a bit syrupy. Framboise is more like a raspberry eau de vie, I'd think, more fermented berries/juice than a liqueur. To do it the easier way, maybe wash and dry the berries, then mash them and just steep them in the grappa, or whatever alcohol you choose, to flavor it??? If you could take some early berries and do a small trial batch, you could see if that gives you the result you want. You're really lucky to have access to all those wonderful berries!

There are a wide variety of readily available, gelatin-like products approved for food use, which many chefs, at least ones I've known, use to avoid the whole animal product issue. Heck, is Jello even gelatin anymore? These products have been used in commercial ice cream forever, for example. The technology to develop QimiQ and the fact that it's based on, or paired with, cream, seem to be the only things setting this apart. At the same time, I can see using a product like this, a stiffener/thickener, not necessarily QimiQ, to make a lighter cheesecake, or, as you mention, a non-leaky terrine, a fluffier mousse - lots of things you might want to "lighten up" in texture or calorie count while maintaining structure. I have no argument with the concept. Their marketing bothers me - not saying you can lighten high fat dishes for the benefit of calorie conscious diners, but you can cheap out on the expensive ingredients, the subtext, to me, being "and no one will know." Yeah, putting words in someone's mouth. But this kind of marketing strategy is going to appeal to corporate bean counters who will only see, ooh, saving money, not, oops, we're going to be sued. Much less, our food may suck. It argues a lack of respect for the food and the diner. Can you, anyone, see any strategy besides making "lite" versions of popular dishes that could be done with this product without subterfuge? I mean, how would you gracefully bring that whole hoof-y thing to diners attention? Does anyone know if this issue is addressed by the FDA? I know the presence of nuts or nut oils in products has to be there, even if it has none but is made where products with nuts are also made. But this whole vegetarian-vegan-religious dietary thing, is it addressed anywhere?

I'm sensitive to these issues because I'm going through the labelling thing in another industry, so the inadequacy of food labelling requirements is a real red light for me. Even if we're talking packaged food, does the FDA require a breakdown of QimiQ's constituents on the label? As someone mentioned cheesecake, I'll use that example - would an ovo-lacto vegetarian, if they read the list of ingredients on the label, be able to tell that there were animal products in the mix? In a catered or restaurant setting, though, all bets are off. It would have to be listed on the menu or a sign on the buffet, or the server would have to say, "Oh, by the way, there are pig and cow hooves in our hollandaise." Eeee! So, not happening. Maybe love the technology but hate the mess it will engender. Just because it got patented doesn't mean it's a good idea to use it - it only means it fulfilled its claims.

Sorry if I'm being hard-nosed, but whatever its mechanism, it's a big bad because it will allow animal products to be slipped in under the radar of people with dietary or religious restrictions against eating them. Bad and illegal. You notice that one of their selling points is that it saves you money on expensive ingredients - I believe mascarpone was specifically mentioned. If you use less mascarpone, replacing part of it with QimiQ, do you then tell diners that they're getting a cheap version of the dish, a version with what amounts to high tech filler adulterating the good stuff? I doubt it. How is this a good thing? It's cheating the customer.

Mixing gelatin or gelatin-like products into sauces, cold or hot, to give them body and keep them from breaking or deflating is an old caterer's/restauranteur's trick. They've been doing it for decades. At least. Nothing new. Adulterating foods (that would not normally be expected to have them) with undisclosed animal products is a legal nightmare just waiting to happen, as several people have already mentioned. That said, yuck! Why would anyone who truly loved and respected good food do such a thing? Bread that never goes stale? Sounds kinda creepy to me. Hollandaise that has a half-life of a millenium or two? I don't think I want to eat that. Can you say, "lazy, cheap, and no respect for food or customers"? Bet it's called a delivery system and is patented, though, so someone's feeling important. Ouch! Was that too mean?