Teaching modernist cuisine in eight hours

[Dave the Cook]

If you've read my recent Daily Gullet piece "Flameout," you know that I teach cooking classes. (If you haven't read it, please do so now. I'll wait.) What I didn't say in that story is that I have a full partner in these classes: Janet Zimmerman, known in these parts as JAZ.

About three years ago, we asked Society members for their input on what to teach people who wanted to be intermediate cooks; it was extremely helpful for us in figuring out what to present and how to present it.

So we're turning to you again. We've just committed to teaching a two-day class on modernist techniques, equipment and ingredients. Here are the details so far:

• No centrifuge and probably no liquid nitrogen. The former is expensive and impractical; the latter is probably impractical, and besides, Richard Blais is an Atlanta boy, and his restaurants have made the nitro-shake an every-day occurrence in these parts.
  
• We will have siphons, multiple sous-vide baths (SVS), vacuum sealers (but not chambers) and a steam oven.
  
• We have chemicals, and we're talking to the school about stocking the Artistré series.
  
• We'll have two hands-on sessions (Saturday and Sunday) of four hours each.
  

So, should we teach? What are the principles, and what are the principal techniques we should teach?

[gfweb]

A modernist thanksgiving dinner. Sv turkey can be impressive. Everybody knows how dried out white meat tastes. You could make turkey stock in a pressure cooker from the carcass and do that mashed potato thing with the initial low temp simmer (the term escapes me damnit. Steingarten wrote of it). Perhaps some agarized pumpkin pie for dessert.

Addendum- the term is retrograded

Edited May 16, 2011 by gfweb (log)

[gfweb]

To me the most important modernist principle is the concept behind sous vide. The idea of doneness as a temperature point that is determined by the structure of the meat is an important one. It isn't as magical as spherification, but it is central. Even if a cook never does sous vide, the concept will inform his roasting and pan cooking.

Edited May 16, 2011 by gfweb (log)

[Lisa Shock]

Do they know basics like using a scale instead of volume measurements for dry ingredients? How about temperatures to cook basic food types to for particular results?

I tend to like teaching classes where you learn the big theory behind a category, or ingredient, rather than having the focus be 'let's learn some recipes.' For example: muffin method baked goods, separated foaming method, biscuit method, etc. Or: pan sauces, mayonnaise type sauces, etc. Or: green vegetables, starchy vegetables, cruciferous vegetables, etc. This way, a student learns to look at the ingredients and think of how they could/should be handled and the methods they know how to use to get particular results. So, later, when they see a corn cake recipe they can place it in a mixing method category in their minds, as well as knowing the cornmeal ingredient, and know what the style of result will be even if they have never made it before. And, they won't keep viewing the world of cooking as a huge list of recipes they have made vs the recipes out there they haven't tried.

[mcdiarmid]

As you are looking to modernist cooking in particular, I would focus the teaching on basic modernist techniques that can be replicated at home - first I would suggest a nice long cooked flank steak. You class is over two days - this is perfect for a 24 hr 60˚C sous vide flank steak which showcases the great benefits of using this technique on tough meats with wonderful buried flavours. Start your class by talking about SV principles and then make each person or "couple" prep, vacuum seal, and then group the steaks into several water baths - they will be ready for searing (you could show off burners) and eating at the end of the class on the second day.

I would also spend some time going over food safety and the controversies of time/temp with the FDA tables/history. You can tie this into the SV cooking by talking about shock chilling, proper thawing and par-cooking. Working families love to par-cook and with busy weekdays, the weekends can produce many par-cooked meals.

This will leave many hours left for the "nerdy science" stuff. Start with thickeners - this topic can easy be applied to sauces and gravies at the participant's home later. Talk about the "chemicals" used to decrease suspicion or fear of the unknown - relate them to baking soda/powder. You can always made the MC cornbread since it uses isomalt and is geared to metric weights, another aspect of modernist cuisine that is foreign to many home cooks. Gels/spheres can certainly be fun if there is extra time.

[Mjx]

If you can get people to think just a bit like researchers – look it up, don't guess/wing it when you don't know, take notes of what you do, the importance/technique of accuracy in measurements – that's probably the most crucial thing you can teach, and it needs to be rammed home that thinking this way needs to become habit. I don't think successful MC is going to happen without this mindset (and it's relevant to other sorts of cooking, too).

Explaining the bit of the historical background of MC may also be a good idea, since it situates in the broader context of cooking, and makes people aware of the fact that a number of the actual techniques involved are not new; the approach, the thinking behind them, are.

For the hands-on sessions, I think something straightforward and sort of everyday (e.g. stock, flank steak), and something fun (e.g. spherification) would offset each other nicely.

[Chris Amirault]

I'll be following this closely. If possible, I'd set up a few different baths at different temperatures -- 55C, 60C, 75C, 85C, say -- and stick a few different things in each. Having a 24h gap between classes could provide some pretty informative results.

[emannths]

Chris--I was thinking about the same thing. I'd also like to see the effect of time in addition to temperature--what does a short rib cooked for 24, 48, 72 hours look/taste like?

I think "modernist cuisine" has two somewhat independent concepts associated with it. Sure, there's the ooo-aaah, can we make A look like B and B look like A part. But the other, which I tend to feel is more relevant, is the concept that the chef should choose the technique and ingredients that allow the food to reflect the goal as closely as possible. This is why we use sous vide--it's because we can get good browning and NOT overcook the food in the process. It's why "modernist" thickeners are used instead of flour or cornstarch--they allow things like cheese sauces to be cheesier. This part of modernist cooking is not about "hey--we have a SV bath, what can we do with it?" It's about "hey, we have this piece of beef, how can we cook is best, even if we have to build a machine to do it?" It's about wanting a beer sauce that actually tastes like beer and figuring out how to make it. By teaching this way of thinking, you don't even have to teach someone that sous vide or carrageenan even exists. They'll probably discover it on their own! Of course, when teaching this part, there are plenty of excuses for breaking out the fancy techniques and fun equipment.

[JAZ]

A modernist thanksgiving dinner. Sv turkey can be impressive. Everybody knows how dried out white meat tastes. You could make turkey stock in a pressure cooker from the carcass and do that mashed potato thing with the initial low temp simmer (the term escapes me damnit. Steingarten wrote of it). Perhaps some agarized pumpkin pie for dessert.

We are considering building the menu around a traditional meal, but due to a nightmarish private class last year, I doubt we'll ever teach a Thanksgiving menu again. One thing we're thinking of is traditional Southern foods with a modernist twist -- for instance, the MC version of fried chicken and something with pimento cheese. But at this point we're open to just about anything, so keep the ideas coming.

[Chris Amirault]

The modernist fried chicken would be an excellent thing to teach, and you'd get to play with a wide variety of techniques and ingredients, most of which (save Activa) are easy to find.

[Dave the Cook]

There are some great ideas here. Thanks, and keep them coming!

To me the most important modernist principle is the concept behind sous vide. The idea of doneness as a temperature point that is determined by the structure of the meat is an important one. It isn't as magical as spherification, but it is central. Even if a cook never does sous vide, the concept will inform his roasting and pan cooking.

I'm not sure I agree that it's the most important principle, but certainly it's one of the central techniques. We'd been asked multiple times to do a sous-vide class -- the store where we teach sells the SVS -- but until we hit upon the context of modernism, sous-vide by itself seemed like a class in watching paint dry.

Do they know basics like using a scale instead of volume measurements for dry ingredients? How about temperatures to cook basic food types to for particular results?

I tend to like teaching classes where you learn the big theory behind a category, or ingredient, rather than having the focus be 'let's learn some recipes.'

. . . .

And, they won't keep viewing the world of cooking as a huge list of recipes they have made vs the recipes out there they haven't tried.

We agree, and this is how we teach, though in our most popular class, "Kitchen Basics," recipes are extremely important. But even there, we teach them how to read a recipe before they start cooking, a skill that we hope broadens their ability to plan and adapt in the kitchen.

In the end, though, we have to feed the students, and the food should be good if not excellent. Like almost everything else that goes on in a class -- especially a hands-on class -- recipe selection and menu construction are teachable moments that we don't like to miss.

As you are looking to modernist cooking in particular, I would focus the teaching on basic modernist techniques that can be replicated at home - first I would suggest a nice long cooked flank steak. You class is over two days - this is perfect for a 24 hr 60˚C sous vide flank steak which showcases the great benefits of using this technique on tough meats with wonderful buried flavours.

. . . .

I would also spend some time going over food safety and the controversies of time/temp with the FDA tables/history. You can tie this into the SV cooking by talking about shock chilling, proper thawing and par-cooking. Working families love to par-cook and with busy weekdays, the weekends can produce many par-cooked meals.

Yeah, flank steak seems like a good candidate, given the timing, and as you say, starting out with sous-vide is a natural place to discuss safety and sanitation.

If you can get people to think just a bit like researchers – look it up, don't guess/wing it when you don't know, take notes of what you do, the importance/technique of accuracy in measurements – that's probably the most crucial thing you can teach, and it needs to be rammed home that thinking this way needs to become habit. I don't think successful MC is going to happen without this mindset (and it's relevant to other sorts of cooking, too).

Explaining the bit of the historical background of MC may also be a good idea, since it situates in the broader context of cooking, and makes people aware of the fact that a number of the actual techniques involved are not new; the approach, the thinking behind them, are.

So far, the biggest impact the book Modernist Cuisine has had on my cooking is what you allude to in your first graph: I'm thinking a lot more in the kitchen. The history might be fun; whether there's time for it as a separate lecture subject, or if it's just stuff that comes out in the course of preparation, is something we'll have to work out.

. . . the chef should choose the technique and ingredients that allow the food to reflect the goal as closely as possible . . . By teaching this way of thinking, you don't even have to teach someone that sous vide or carrageenan even exists. They'll probably discover it on their own! Of course, when teaching this part, there are plenty of excuses for breaking out the fancy techniques and fun equipment.

Exactly. Teaching a philosophy is more effective when you can put your hands on stuff and play with it.

[jmolinari]

The concept of food safety being related to time AND temperature, not just temperature alone is critical.

[Peter the eater]

So, should we teach? What are the principles, and what are the principal techniques we should teach?

My local library system has been very reliable at acquiring books that I suggest. Just chat with the people and fill out the forms. I'm currently pitching Modernist Cuisine for the Reference Section and frankly, it's not going very well. The issues are #1 cost and #2 what the hell is modernist cuisine? and #3 who's going to use it?

So I guess I'm asking some similar questions.

(I wish I could take your course)

[jmolinari]

Dave, where do you teach in ATL? I might be interested!

[Mjx]

My local library system has been very reliable at acquiring books that I suggest. Just chat with the people and fill out the forms. I'm currently pitching Modernist Cuisine for the Reference Section and frankly, it's not going very well. The issues are #1 cost and #2 what the hell is modernist cuisine? and #3 who's going to use it?

So I guess I'm asking some similar questions.

(I wish I could take your course)

It's pretty expensive, but since MC is basically about what is possible in the kitchen, now, you could argue that it is for everybody.

MC is really just about paying attention and thinking about what happens in the kitchen, so cooking doesn't just 'happen', but is the outcome of conscious decisions; the cook acquires active control over the outcome. A little historical context makes MC more accessible: Many of the things that are done in MC are not new, but rethink very traditional ideas.

Anyone can use the underlying thinking and approach to MC, and from a practical standpoint, there has to be at least one recipe in the set that is accessible to any given person.

[enthusiast]

from somebody at the bottom of the slope - it would be great to get an overview of what its all about and what you could see from the summit but, importantly, what is relatively easy to incorporate into more "everyday" cooking. Hint at the great heights but concentrate on the practical, achievable stuff. Everyone might admire the convertible on the forecourt but most of us need the station wagon to move the family around.

[Dave the Cook]

My local library system has been very reliable at acquiring books that I suggest. Just chat with the people and fill out the forms. I'm currently pitching Modernist Cuisine for the Reference Section and frankly, it's not going very well. The issues are #1 cost and #2 what the hell is modernist cuisine? and #3 who's going to use it?

So I guess I'm asking some similar questions.

(I wish I could take your course)

It's pretty expensive, but since MC is basically about what is possible in the kitchen, now, you could argue that it is for everybody.

MC is really just about paying attention and thinking about what happens in the kitchen, so cooking doesn't just 'happen', but is the outcome of conscious decisions; the cook acquires active control over the outcome. A little historical context makes MC more accessible: Many of the things that are done in MC are not new, but rethink very traditional ideas.

Anyone can use the underlying thinking and approach to MC, and from a practical standpoint, there has to be at least one recipe in the set that is accessible to any given person.

The book offers an empirical description of what culinary modernism is; you can read it in the wikiGullet Project article. But as time goes on, I've come to think that Myhrvold et al erred in choosing their title, which makes the set sound like a manifesto. It is, but it's much more than that, to wit:

The concept of food safety being related to time AND temperature, not just temperature alone is critical.

Ostensibly, they included this information to ensure proper application of low-temperature techniques that are part of the modernist oeuvre, but it's not inherently modernist; it's what should be taught in as part of the essential cooking curriculum, along with most of the entire first volume. As a chef friend of mine said while he looked though my copy of MC, "It's not just foams and spheres, it's practically a culinary school in a book!" He's not that far off -- it will probably take most of us a couple of years to digest the wealth of information that's in there. The title "Modernist Cuisine" belies that treasure -- and creates the problem that Peter is having.

from somebody at the bottom of the slope - it would be great to get an overview of what its all about and what you could see from the summit but, importantly, what is relatively easy to incorporate into more "everyday" cooking. Hint at the great heights but concentrate on the practical, achievable stuff. Everyone might admire the convertible on the forecourt but most of us need the station wagon to move the family around.

Good point. For most classes, we set out cheese and crackers or fruit and pastries, depending on the time of day. For this class, maybe we pass out something -- made ahead of time -- overtly modernist instead. In the hands-on part of the class, we'd concentrate on practical techniques that could be applied in the typical kitchen of an enthusiastic cook.

Dave, where do you teach in ATL? I might be interested!

For the most part, we teach at The Cook's Warehouse in their midtown Atlanta location.

[Edward Dekker]

A basic part of Sous Vide cooking is the different effects of different temperatures.

A good example of this for your students is eggs. With a few degrees of temperature change one can go from a raw (but pasteurized) egg to a soft egg to a custard-like egg, to a hardboiled egg.

For something the students can do at home there is the simple Sous Vide technique for a tender steak. This technique is called "Hot Tubbing" on the Big Green Egg forum. Fill a cooler with hot water a few degrees above the target temperature and add the steaks (in ziplock or foodsaver bags). Maintain temperature for one to three hours by periodically adding hot water to return the temperature to the target temperature. Remove and sear the steak on a grill or cast iron pan. (This technique on the Big Green Egg forum was my introduction to Sous Vide.) This technique is a good one for the course since the tools and equipment are things your students have.

[John Hammond]

What I find most interesting about MC is that most of the techniques have been well known to food chemists for years. In the early 1960s one major food company even had a large decompression chamber/pressure vessel fitted with a stove and could evaluate the properties and practices of cooking food at reduced or increased atmospheric pressure with the chemist actually working in the chamber. The little beads that are so interesting were the subject of a long expired patent. This does not detract from MC, rather, I am glad to see the techniques emerging from the food technology lab and into the kitchen.