HOW DETAILED SHOULD A RECIPE BE?

[Steve Klc]

And now for something completely different...I sense, Suzanne, if you were to write your recipe piece I'd play the bad cop to your good cop--or good cop to your bad cop. I think too many people expect too much of recipes and of recipe writers.

Recipes aren't that important.

(And I think what turns most people off about cooking is that good cooking takes time and effort and appreciation--it takes more than assembling a few killer recipes which "work"--it takes repeating your efforts time and time again and tasting, tasting each time--all things increasingly in shorter supply. But that's another thread.)

Ask yourself this--do you think the best home cooks, our mothers and our mother's mothers had better recipes? Hardly. Do you think the best chefs and restaurants are such because they cook from great recipes? Again, hardly.

I think that Thorne quote goes one step in the right direction with recipes--recognizing that we all taste dishes with different palates. But I'm not sure that goes far enough to debunk this recipe myth, what I see as a false promise the recipe concept continues to hold over so many American cooks--as if recipes are the key to understanding food and cooking. I wonder if all those who lament if only recipes were written better, if only authors tested their recipes better, were more specific but not too tedious, more clear but not too simplistic, etc.--would actually cook better and more consistently if you all got what you asked for. It's a familiar refrain. How valid, I'm not sure.

Mamster is the closest to capturing how I think I feel on this. Anna N. said "But a poorly written recipe sets me up for failure and that's where I want to see improvements." I say, gently, you might be setting yourself up for failure. Learn to cook first--learn that cooking is not clear and unambiguous--come to understand the basic principles and techniques and ingredients of cooking first, and lessen your reliance on recipes, approach cooking from the perspective that recipes aren't what is really important--what is important is what you know--then you won't care how poorly or professionally recipes are written. You'll be so empowered you won't feel you need the precision and won't care about supposedly poorly written recipes. A recipe is not your instructor and is not a quick substitute for wisdom--it's not inherently a large life lesson--it's not meant to convey what you need to understand about the hows and whys and differences of ingredients--or time or temperature or flavor or palate or on and on. How realistic is it to expect recipes to fill in all the possible gaps of your knowledge and experience--which you bring to the table along with said recipe--and also those gaps or weaknesses of all other cooks?

Recipes are a necessary evil--but like all evils need to be kept in check. How?

You do need to spend time with good books--yes, which include recipes, with good cooks and chefs, and with good food writers who have more to offer you than another recipe--so you understand process, form, technique, concepts, tradition and science. You'll also find them chatting on eGullet, writing in the pages of magazines like Vogue and Elle, writing for newspaper food sections--though newspapers are certainly big culprits in promulgating the recipe myth. I think outside of actual errors or mistakes in recipes, and following along msp's excellent outline, most recipes are fairly acceptably well-written. They're recipes. Just recipes. And by faulting recipes, what you're really doing is finding fault with the way you approach food and cooking--you're placing too much emphasis on them and not enough on yourself and your culpability in this.

What we need is more clarity in the value of instruction, of acquiring and sharing valuable information BEFORE you approach the recipe--any recipe--and more cooks taking the time to read and study and learn and embrace wholly apart from engaging recipes. In short, we need to become more recipe-averse.

[Sandra Levine]

A little detective work, a little browsing and I was able to come up with a number of your recipes.

Curious minds want to know...

[Jinmyo]

I agree with mamster and SpecialK.

I'll read a recipe to get a sense of proportions. But I would never try to follow more than the outlines indicated. The ingredients, the equipment, the occasion will show me what else needs to happen. Fortunately I don't have to reproduce a dish with the kind of consistency most restaurant situations require day after day after day. But I can if need be.

When instructing others I have found long ago that people who think in terms of recipes tend to narrow their skills.

[cakewalk]

Learn to cook first, come to understand principles and techniques of cooking first, and lessen your reliance on recipes, approach cooking from the perspective that recipes aren't what is really important--what is important is what you know--then you won't care how poorly or professionally recipes are written.

I don't think that "learning to cook" is done by first learning theory and principles and then, after one has "all that" under one's belt, tackling recipes with a greater understanding. It's more of a step-by-step process. Read a little about cooking, about where particular ingredients come from, how they've been used over the years, what they do, etc. But that's a never-ending process, so while I'm reading about food I'm also trying out various recipes. (Slowly. Few and far between. I don't want to give the wrong impression here.) And I think I prefer more information rather than less. It's simply more helpful. It doesn't mean I (or others) view the recipe as a foolproof method of learning to cook, or even of producing a particular dish. It's a guide. I do want to know if something "should be" the consistency of heavy cream. I might decide on my own that I like it better if it's not quite that thick, but that doesn't mean I don't want to know what the author had in mind.

Most people read recipes through before they begin cooking. The more we know about food and cooking, the more innovative we can be with the recipe that is before us. Just because there is a lot of information in a recipe doesn't mean we are beholden to do everything that is written. I don't think most people approach recipes in this way. I guess I don't see them as a necessary evil because I need them. They are important. I guess it depends, as has been said before, on the audience. Beginners? Professionals? Realistically, experience is a great teacher. Learning to cook a dish by following a recipe is instructional. It's only afterwards that you look at it and think, next time I'll try it without so much pepper, and maybe I'll add a bit more garlic, too.

[Anna N]

Steve Klc and Jinmyo,

I'm both glad and sorry to have started this thread. Glad because it has led to some very interesting points of view, sorry because it seems again to have become an opportunity to take sides, as it were.

Were we all together and able to see one another's face and detect in them the kindness that is meant, it would be fun to have a rip-roaring exchange of view points. Via this vehicle, it's too easy to make assumptions that are baseless.

Some of us were raised in homes where much cooking was done, even if it was not much more than meatloaf or hamburgers but not all of us. Not all of us had a mother to watch and from whom we could learn at least the basics. Some things totally mystified me until very recently and I am already a grandmother twice over!

I have read fairly widely both cookbooks and some science of cooking but I'm not confident and not comfortable combining this with that and adjusting until I get something edible. Eating out is a once in a blue moon thing for us so I don't see the possibilities that others might see in a restaurant meal. My only guide to food preparation is recipes.

Yes, as I move along I am becoming more confident but I certainly don't have any innate abilities to produce gourmet meals. Nor do I want to. I want to put an interesting and tasty meal on the table with enough variety to keep me and The Dane nourished not only with the food but with the experience of trying something new.

Certainly without a recipe I wouldn't have a clue what to do with lemongrass or mango - new discoveries to me.

So you see, a great deal depends on who you are, what your background is and what it is you hope to accomplish. For me the "map" is a recipe. Once I've found the main road, then I can make my own side-trips and change things but I want that map there to begin with and I want it as accurate and detailed as possible.

[Jinmyo]

Anna, I never said that you think in terms of recipes. Or that recipes have no place. Of course they do. For all of the reasons you've stated and more.

But when people think in terms of recipes, there is the tendency to regard a dish as one unit accumulated by working through a certain number of steps. This leaves little room to dance or run with the act of cooking.

I also think that recipes should be as descriptive as is possible. And that it is much more useful to say, "after twenty minutes or so you should begin to catch the aroma. This means that..." instead of "3 1/8s of a teaspoon".

We can agree and disagree in many ways without it being merely a matter of taking sides.

This is a good thread and, should it lead to an article, I'm sure that much more interesting discussion will take place.

[Matt Seeber]

i am not a big fan of "overly specific" recipes. certainly with regards to pastry (not my forte) they are necessary as things are much more specific.

for the purposes of this topic i believe we are mostly referring to savory cooking. i did not learn how to cook by following a recipe. i learned by doing - over and over again and by making every mistake in the book. consequently when a cook comes to me and asks why things are done a certain way, i'll say i know because i tried it the other way... and it doesn't work.

easy for me to say right? ya'll got full time jobs aside from cooking and can't spend as much time futzing around in the kitchen as i can... i'll give you that.....so, what's the point?

to a certain extent, (and arguably) a recipe will not teach you how to cook! it will walk you through step 1, step 2, step 3 and so on and you'll end up with a half decent dish when you’re done - it will take you from point A to point B and that's about it. the recipe will not teach you the inherent properties of those ingredients with which you are working. nor will it teach you how to work with those ingredients in a context outside of that specific recipe. to REALLY learn how to cook you must taste and test and taste and experiment and taste (did i mention you have to taste it?)

i think it's a mistake to have a recipe so specific that there is no room for interpretation - a recipe should never be gospel. much like music, there is always room for interpretation. just because you know the words to "can't buy me love" doesn't mean you can sing it!

[Jinmyo]

/me hums

"Tell me that you want the kind of thing, that money just can't buy.

I don't care too much for money, money can't buy me love."

[Nick]

I've just started reading Judy Rodger's, Zuni Cafe cookbook. Two things struck me in the first section, "What to think about before you start."

One is, "Cookbooks will give you ideas, but the market will give you dinner - study your market at least as avidly as your library."

The other, "Recipes do not make food taste good; people do."

Most of us know this, but it's nice to be reminded of these basics once in awhile. I'm enjoying reading her book.

Rachel - if you want to put the 15% link in here, go for it.

[Bux]

Nickn, here's the eGullet Amazon.com Zuni Cafe cookbook link.

------------------------------------------------------------------

i did not learn how to cook by following a recipe.  i learned by doing  - over and over again and by making every mistake in the book.  consequently when a cook comes to me and asks why things are done a certain way, i'll say i know because i tried it the other way...  and it doesn't work.

I think you stretch a point, but the point is valid nonetheless. One can learn something by reading and by example, but ultimately one can't expect to learn everything from books. I sense a premise in this thread that every recipe should be able to be read by anyone and than anyone should be able to cook anything from a recipe if the recipe is properly written. I just don't agree. I remember some disasters from following recipes that were written for someone with more experience in the kitchen than I had at the time. I didn't know enough to know what I had done wrong, or even enough to be sure if it turned our as wrong as it seemed. I also learned I had a responsibility to educate myself about food one way or another and to pick the recipes that I could handle as well as those that would teach me something.

By the way, I don't find fault with a thread if members line up on different sides as long as they can discuss the issue intelligently and with respect for those with whom they disagree. There are usually at least two sides to any issue and we're all better off for the chance to hear the other side.

futzing

Is that akin to "fizzle," "blitz," and "winkling." I rather like Nigella and think I could learn something from her, but even when I can't, I think she's making a nice contribution to the education of home cooks.

[Suvir Saran]

I'm both glad and sorry to have started this thread.  Glad because it has led to some very interesting points of view, sorry because it seems again to have become an opportunity to take sides, as it were. 

Were we all together and able to see one another's face and detect in them the kindness that is meant, it would be fun to have a rip-roaring exchange of view points.  Via this vehicle, it's too easy to make assumptions that are baseless.

Some of us were raised in homes where much cooking was done, even if it was not much more than meatloaf or hamburgers but not all of us.  Not all of us had a mother to watch and from whom we could learn at least the basics.  Some things totally mystified me until very recently and I am already a grandmother twice over!

I have read fairly widely both cookbooks and some science of cooking but I'm not confident and not comfortable combining this with that and adjusting until I get something edible.  Eating out is a once in a blue moon thing for us so I don't see the possibilities that others might see in a restaurant meal.  My only guide to food preparation is recipes. 

Yes, as I move along I am becoming more confident but I certainly don't have any innate abilities to produce gourmet meals.  Nor do I want to.  I want to put an interesting and tasty meal on the table with enough variety to keep me and The Dane nourished not only with the food but with the experience of trying something new. 

Certainly without a recipe I wouldn't have a clue what to do with lemongrass or mango - new discoveries to me. 

So you see, a great deal depends on who you are, what your background is and what it is you hope to accomplish.  For me the "map" is a recipe.  Once I've found the main road, then I can make my own side-trips and change things but I want that map there to begin with and I want it as accurate and detailed as possible.

Anna N, thanks for starting this thread.

It is a great thread. And the different positions that members have taken only strengthen us and our ability to cook and understand food.

Differences of opinion and thought should be exciting.. They make us scratch under surfaces we had forgotten existed and taken for granted. This has been an exciting thread.

Also, your thread is responsible for the great post that msp posted. That one post has taught me more than any other in a very long time. It shares clearly what a recipe ought to be. And shares the essence of recipe writing in the context of a cookbook.

For those that do not care for details, they could just as well stay at home and make their own notes following chefs and mothers and grandmas (as I do since I have little interest in recipe books) or train in a kitchen or take private lessons. Buying a cookbook is an option they may exercise (I buy many, and never to cook with, they are eye candy) but they have to realize they are not ones to judge the style of writing. They are using it for an experience that may not be the purpose behind a cookbook.

For those that buy cookbooks, I respect what you ask for and what msp suggests as being good basics. If those cannot be taken into account, one might as well not bother writing a book. One could simply scribble notes for oneself and share with those around them. But to reach an audience far removed from oneself, a recipe must be detailed enough to educate the least familiar cook amongst its targeted audience. If it cannot achieve that, it has failed in a very important and critical element of its main purpose. What a shame. Hence, I would rather have a cookbook with recipes that have no fuss, but all important details.

And again, thanks for your thread. It has taught me so very much as I begin my own journey in the world of cookbooks.

[mamster]

Anna, I don't know what I can add beyond what I've already said, but along with Suvir and Jinmyo and Steve K and everyone else, I'm very glad you started this thread--it was an opportunity to reflect on my relationship with cookbooks and get valuable tips; I'm certainly going to use msp's advice next time I write a recipe for an article.

[Anna N]

Sorry, everyone. I didn't mean to sound mardy (sulky) - it's been a rough Christmas.

But I lay in bed last night and thought through all the things everyone has said about the limitations of following recipes and wondered if I could challenge myself to cook without a recipe. I mean of course, something new and different.

I made an imaginery walk through my 'fridge, freezer, pantry and then out into the supermarket (not too many specialty stores here and the Farmer's Market is closed until May). Then I thought of Malawry's Market Basket reports from school. Could I put together an interesting meal, without a recipe, just by looking at ingredients and deciding what went with what and how flavours would live together.

I answered myself with a qualified "maybe". It would be a little like taking the training wheels off my two-wheeler - I'd be pretty unsteady at first, but eventually I'd find my balance. And if there were only me to please, I'd accept the challenge willingly. But then there's The Dane ....

But we have a saying in this house when we try something new - "Oh well, if it doesn't work, we can always send out for pizza." So far, we have never had to send out for pizza! So, perhaps it's a level of confidence I need more than anything else. And I think all of you have done wonders for boosting that confidence level.

That doesn't change my mind in any way that if you are going to write recipes, write them well and in detail.

Wouldn't it be fun to have a weekly egulleteer challenge - a market basket and see what members come up with? It would have to be very accessible ingredients so that we weren't stumped by an inability to put together a market basket but damn, wouldn't that be inspiring!

So, you see, I'm back in the saddle again and up for more discussion.

So many thanks.

[mamster]

Wouldn't it be fun to have a weekly egulleteer challenge - a market basket and see what members come up with?  It would have to be very accessible ingredients so that we weren't stumped by an inability to put together a market basket but damn, wouldn't that be inspiring!

This is a totally cool idea. Want to plan it, set the ground rules, and make an announcement?

[Jinmyo]

Wouldn't it be fun to have a weekly egulleteer challenge - a market basket and see what members come up with?  It would have to be very accessible ingredients so that we weren't stumped by an inability to put together a market basket but damn, wouldn't that be inspiring!

This is a totally cool idea. Want to plan it, set the ground rules, and make an announcement?

Lazy mods.

[mamster]

Okay, Jinmyo, since you twisted my arm:

Your market basket items are ground beef, hamburger buns, ketchup and iceberg lettuce. GO!

Seriously, we could have a thread to hash out details, but I don't want to steal Anna's thunder on this great idea. Let's see what she thinks and go from there.

Also, I'm a bum.

[Bux]

Not to give this thread any direction, but to add some personal experiences, I cooked for myself during much of my college days and thereafter. My wife remembers her father as a great cook and sometimes still gives him credit for teaching her how to cook. The truth is we both learned the basis, of what we now draw on when cooking, from Julia Child's books and TV shows. The incredible thing of Mastering the Art of French Cooking was that the recipes were so detailed. Almost every recipe contained a thorough lesson in the technique(s) involved. The details were so well covered that the recipes were almost infallible. The recipes were also so long that many novice cooks we knew couldn't be convinced the recipes weren't too hard to follow. They prefered the shorter recipes that left out important steps.

As we graduated to other recipe sources, we found ourselves matching the new recipes with the techincal instruction from the Mastering the Art of French Cooking books. Some thirty years later, we don't find ourselves needing those instructions as often, but every now and then when we have a question in our minds, we take a peek to see how Julia did it. Her techniques don't always rule, but I'm surprised at how much of her basic instruction is still valid even when the recipes themselves now seem old fashioned. As much as I valued all that detail when learning how to cook, I'd find it a hinderance in reading a recipe now and the desire to skim the page might well lead me to miss something important.

Learning the technique is far more important than learning any single recipe. In Suzanne's review of Glorious French Food, which I'm a bit suprised hasn't already been mentioned here, she says "Most of all, I love Peterson’s philosophy of cooking and eating" and quotes him as saying

But if you understand what a cassoulet really is, that it’s the culmination of many techniques, traditions, and ways of using ingredients that have long been available in a particular region, you have access to something far more valuable that a recipe for cassoulet. Instead you have its logic and context and you understand the techniques needed to prepare it, and so you are able to invent your own variations or to simplify the recipe to suit your schedule or energy level.

As Klc said "Recipes aren't that important."

[Jinmyo]

Your market basket items are ground beef, hamburger buns, ketchup and iceberg lettuce.  GO!

Egad. When was the beef ground? Who made the ketchup? You mean "ketchup" ketchup?

All right, I apologize, Matthew.

Really though, Anna. It's a good idea.

[Suvir Saran]

Bux, you contradict you own self, or rather, you show how you have grown as a cook.

Not everyone has the luxury of having 30 years of experience behind them.

Not everyone has read Julia Child, and not everyone can afford buying every book that can teach one those basics.

A good cookbook does not need to have pages of instruction. Precision can be reached without overwhelming text.

Many cookbook writers simply do not get it, or rather, poor editors let them get by without making any more of a contribution than sharing a recipe that works for a chef. That is where the fault lies.

Why do I deserve the advance given me by my publishing house if I simply were to write a book that Bux, Klc, Hemant Mathur and Julie Sahni could cook with and enjoy but no other home chef in India or the US could ever use for I take for granted that my audience has the same knowledge base? What a shame that is. And what a waste of the money given me to translate my recipes into something that can be used by those far removed from me and in a very different place in life. Different in terms of expertise, experience and geographical. A good writer will take into account all these aspects and then some. A cookbook is not successful as a cookbook only by having great photographs or great recipes. It needs to strike a balance between all the many aspects necessary for translating what a chef does in their professional world into that which can be understood by one who has never cooked before.

If a cookbook cannot do that, even I, who never cooks with them, would hardly call them a success as a cookbook. Yes, I would buy them for I look at them not as a means to learn cooking, but only to flip through and most times never to open again. But those that cook from them, need something that works.

A few extra sentences of wise words from a writer trained in recipe writing could hardly be a distraction for anyone. And the loss of those few sentences can be that critical element that elevates a cookbook from being just one of many mediocre cookbooks into being a classic that would be called upon by generations of home chefs.

Edited December 27, 2002 by Suvir Saran (log)

[Anna N]

Okay, Jinmyo, since you twisted my arm:

Your market basket items are ground beef, hamburger buns, ketchup and iceberg lettuce.  GO!

Seriously, we could have a thread to hash out details, but I don't want to steal Anna's thunder on this great idea.  Let's see what she thinks and go from there.

Also, I'm a bum.

Please, please feel free to steal my idea!

I relinquish all patents, royalties, liabilities, tortes, tarts, and whatever other chattels might possibly accrue to me as a result of my insomnia.

To whomsoever feels up to the task- please, please take it.

Signed and dated this 27th day of December in the County of Halton ( just a minute - do I live in Peel or Halton Counties) never mind, one of the above.

[Anna N]

Bux, you contradict you own self, or rather, you show how you have grown as a cook.

Not everyone has the luxury of having 30 years of experience behind them.

Not everyone has read Julia Child, and not everyone can afford buying every book that can teach one those basics.

A good cookbook does not need to have pages of instruction.  Precision can be reached without overwhelming text.

Many cookbook writers simply do not get it, or rather, poor editors let them get by without making any more of a contribution than sharing a recipe that works for a chef.  That is where the fault lies.

Why do I deserve the advance given me by my publishing house if I simply were to write a book that Bux, Klc, Hemant Mathur and Julie Sahni could cook with and enjoy but no other home chef in India or the US could ever use for I take for granted that my audience has the same knowledge base?  What a shame that is.  And what a waste of the money given me to translate my recipes into something that can be used by those far removed from me and in a very different place in life.  Different in terms of expertise, experience and geographical.  A good writer will take into account all these aspects and then some.  A cookbook is not successful as a cookbook only by having great photographs or great recipes.  It needs to strike a balance between all the many aspects necessary for translating what a chef does in their professional world into that which can be understood by one who has never cooked before.

If a cookbook cannot do that, even I, who never cooks with them, would hardly call them a success as a cookbook. Yes, I would buy them for I look at them not as a means to learn cooking, but only to flip through and most times never to open again.  But those that cook from them, need something that works.

A few extra sentences of  wise words from a writer trained in recipe writing could hardly be a distraction for anyone.    And the loss of those few sentences can be that critical element that elevates a cookbook from being just one of many mediocre cookbooks into being a classic that would be called upon by generations of home chefs.

You have said it far better than I could hope to. Thanks, Suvir.

[cakewalk]

A cookbook is not successful as a cookbook only by having great photographs or great recipes.  It needs to strike a balance between all the many aspects necessary for translating what a chef does in their professional world into that which can be understood by one who has never cooked before.

[mamster]

When was the beef ground?

1995.

[nightscotsman]

When was the beef ground?

1995.

Oooh - vintage beef. Might be a little hard to find/pricey for those of us playing along at home.

[Bux]

Bux, you contradict you own self, or rather, you show how you have grown as a cook.

I probably contradict myself more than anything else. But I assure you that I am correct on both sides of the issue.

Not everyone has the luxury of having 30 years of experience behind them.

More easily I can assure you that having thrity years in front of you is probably the greater luxury. You have much more time left to grow as a cook and it should be less important that what you do now is correct.

Not everyone has read Julia Child, and not everyone can afford buying every book that can teach one those basics.

I have bought very few books on cooking, all things considered. One doesn't need many books, which is quite different than saying one can ever have too many books. Books are good, but one can learn to cook on a budget and some books are better references than others. If every cook book were required to teach the basics, cook books would be larger and more expensive, yet each would have less to add to your knowledge. Sometimes one needs to go to the reference books to prepare a recipe from the cook book at hand. At that moment, it may seem like an inefficient thing to do, but in the overall picture I think it works better. The multipurpose tool or item always seems good in theory, but when it comes time to use it the unnecessary functions often get in the way of using that item for the purpose at hand.

A good cookbook does not need to have pages of instruction.  Precision can be reached without overwhelming text.

Many cookbook writers simply do not get it, or rather, poor editors let them get by without making any more of a contribution than sharing a recipe that works for a chef.  That is where the fault lies.

Why do I deserve the advance given me by my publishing house if I simply were to write a book that Bux, Klc, Hemant Mathur and Julie Sahni could cook with and enjoy but no other home chef in India or the US could ever use for I take for granted that my audience has the same knowledge base?  What a shame that is.  And what a waste of the money given me to translate my recipes into something that can be used by those far removed from me and in a very different place in life.  Different in terms of expertise, experience and geographical.   A good writer will take into account all these aspects and then some.  A cookbook is not successful as a cookbook only by having great photographs or great recipes.  It needs to strike a balance between all the many aspects necessary for translating what a chef does in their professional world into that which can be understood by one who has never cooked before.

If a cookbook cannot do that, even I, who never cooks with them, would hardly call them a success as a cookbook. Yes, I would buy them for I look at them not as a means to learn cooking, but only to flip through and most times never to open again.  But those that cook from them, need something that works.

A few extra sentences of  wise words from a writer trained in recipe writing could hardly be a distraction for anyone.    And the loss of those few sentences can be that critical element that elevates a cookbook from being just one of many mediocre cookbooks into being a classic that would be called upon by generations of home chefs.

All true, but I think different cookbooks should, and will, be written for different audiences. Of course a cook book writer should aim to serve the greatest number of potential readers, but he, or she, must also aim to please a certain market or risk pleasing no one. I'm not arguing for sloppy writing or incomplete recipes or even for any sort of elitism, but for diversity.