"Kitchen Chemistry" article in Time

[takadi]

Joel Stein is a sarcastic little bastard but I suspect he might be a foodie from the interesting articles he tends to write. This article is part of a series from the cover theme of Time's 3/24 mag "10 ideas that are changing the world".

http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/art...1721651,00.html

You've been cooking like an idiot. You press on meat and compare it with the flesh on your hand to guess how rare it is; you throw spaghetti at the wall to see if it's done; you add an amount of salt that looks pretty when it's in your palm. If people made medicine this way, we'd all be dead.

Home cooks are about to learn what Kraft Foods and McDonald's have known for more than 50 years: placing food over heat is science, not art

When I think of the "scientific revolution" of cooking, I think of processed food, artificial flavors, thickeners preservatives...which is the very thing that the "slow food" movement is reacting against. But of course Joel took care of that at the end of his article

There's a pretty big difference between heating an egg at 60 C and 61 C." Kraft Foods knows that, and soon you will too. Whether you want to or not."

Is food bound to lose its soul or just get an upgrade?

Edited April 17, 2008 by takadi (log)

[theisenm85]

I'm not quite sure why Kraft and McDonald's need to be the poster boy for taking a more academic approach to cooking. Or, at the least, why they're mentioned before people/companies that don't.... promote a number of processed foods/terrible farming practices.

I suppose that the blurb is about food chemistry, which is popping up everywhere lately. Corporations, by necessity, were among the first to start tackling these issues. Mass quality control was down to a science for quite a while before we really saw a scientific movement become popular in less mass produced food.

I just didn't like how large corporations were mentioned first... They may have been quicker to take a truly scientific look at food, but those who care about how the food gets to the kitchen and what it does to people after it leaves will always be more important to me.

Edit: "Will food lose its soul or just get an upgrade?"

I don't think this has anything to do with food losing its soul. The people creating food products are the ones who have control over that. Taking a more involved approach to getting a desired result in food isn't the loss of soul, it's just a different approach. The loss of soul in food, in my opinion, is much more related to being divorced from the process of how food gets to the table, start to finish. I think one of the biggest culprits is how meat gets to the table.

I believe that thinking hard about that fact that something died to make your dinner last night, (Vegetarians/vegans/whoever excepted) is something everyone should do once in a while. Slaughtered.... for our pleasure. Yes, everything dies, and I sure prefer them before me. But does that give us free license to treat animals they way they're treated for the most part? My reflection on these realities definitely insures that whenever I cook meat, I try to do it to the best of my ability. In some way, that helps me to respect the life that was given. Corny, misguided, whatever, it works for me.

I'm far from perfect. I don't exclusively buy free range meats/eggs/whatever else. I don't actively campaign for the humane treatment of animals. I do have fast food every once in a while. Hopefully I can work on those things. For now, making sure that I don't buy in excess, and cooking everything to the best of my ability is what I care about.

I think that's the sort of connection that is represents soul in food. We might try different techniques, with varying degrees of exactness, some of which will have strong basis in science, others not... but that has nothing to do with soul. Connection to food is where the soul comes from.

Edited April 22, 2008 by theisenm85 (log)

[docsconz]

It is a common misperception about Slow Food that it is anti-science and opposed to all change and evolution when it comes to food. Slow food is about the preservation of biodiversity and culture in an increasingly homogenized world, because diversity is more likely to succeed for the long term as it has throughout history based on some simple but important biological principles. There is nothing within Slow Food that says that eggs can't or shouldn't be cooked in a water bath to a specific temperature. That is absurd. Slow Food is all about good, clean and fair. If food is produced within that framework, it really doesn't matter how big or how small the entity producing it is.

[Dave Hatfield]

Ho hum & so what?

There's nothing new in this article. Yes, there's more food science available to the home cook. Good!

But, when did McGee first publish? I know I've had his books for well over 10 years.

Blumenthal in the Uk & Adrian in Spain have led us all into the 'secrets' of many dishes.

I'm still somewhat suspicious of some new equipment, i.e. induction rings, which are efficient but require a whole new set of pots & pans & in my experience still aren't as good as good old gas. But I'm willing to listen & try as soon as reasonable given budgetary constraints.

Good standard potboiler article full of standard BS in my opinion. Time is certainly NOT where I'd go to get the latest on culinary technique.

edited for typos.

Edited April 22, 2008 by Dave Hatfield (log)

[takadi]

There is nothing within Slow Food that says that eggs can't or shouldn't be cooked in a water bath to a specific temperature.

←

I think there's more of a fear of onion ring alginate gels than water baths, and just the sense of increasing artificiality and "plastic-ness" with cooking. Some people will swear by a good ol' bare cast iron dutch oven and be threatened by that weird sounding sous vide. It's not just slow food, but just change in hard-set traditions and the therapeutic qualities of cooking as an art, not a science.

This may seem like trivial issue to the foodie or professional, but to some casual cooks and old timers it's threatening

[docsconz]

There is nothing within Slow Food that says that eggs can't or shouldn't be cooked in a water bath to a specific temperature.

←

I think there's more of a fear of onion ring alginate gels than water baths, and just the sense of increasing artificiality and "plastic-ness" with cooking. Some people will swear by a good ol' bare cast iron dutch oven and be threatened by that weird sounding sous vide. It's not just slow food, but just change in hard-set traditions and the therapeutic qualities of cooking as an art, not a science.

This may seem like trivial issue to the foodie or professional, but to some casual cooks and old timers it's threatening

←

You are undoubtedly correct that there are those within Slow Food who fit that bill, though it is not inherent to the philosphy of the organization itself.

[ermintrude]

I'm still somewhat suspicious of some new equipment, i.e. induction rings,

edited for typos.

←

I was too till I got one, my chef friend hated it when she came to mine - but after staying here for a few days and getting used to it she now prefers it to gas because of the control.

Best of both worlds, induction (Efficient & most control) and gas (any pan and can burn peppers and stuff) - just seen a hob that does this

http://www.tradingpost-appliances.co.uk/st...?productid=2946

Interesting

Edited April 22, 2008 by ermintrude (log)