Why should I?

[Episure]

I start this as a new topic sparked off by the Kheema thread where Vikram writes:

Stir until the oil starts separating (this is the standard instruction given by Indian cooks, and I have never quite understood what it means.

Like Vikram, for years I've tried to figure this one out. A mystery that continues to elude me.

The cynic that I am made me do it one day, I carried out tasting tests with dishes prepared, one version where it was cooked till the oil separates and another where it does not. Needless to say nobody could make out the difference, if at all the latter was more aromatic probably because the spice flavours and volatile oils had not been despatched to the angels.

Since then I never cook food till the oil separates.

Sacrilege? Hardly. Being a self taught culinarian, I am devoid of any academic baggage. And experimenting is what keeps my culinary quest alive.

I would like to think of a scenario where in old Hindoostan, the maharaja/nawab comes back from shooting some game; famished, he visits his cavernous kitchen to see what fare has been conjured by his khansama. The cook hearing him approach instantly tosses the masalas into a tadkaish frenzy and continues to vaporize the room with this heady aroma driving the kingpin into a state of complete gustatory surrender.

So starts this idea of cooking till the "oil separates".

The point that I am trying to make here is that the has dish lost all it's "valuables" before it is served in the dining room. To some degree the diner will have some olfactory hangover from his visit to the kitchen so he may not feel the loss too much.

Decide whether you want to tantalise the kitchen or the dining room. Dont believe me, try it yourself. Cooking should be functional like the Maillard reaction.

Edited September 4, 2003 by Episure (log)

[skchai]

My speculation on this having the "oil start separating" is not really an end in and of itself but a rule of thumb for knowing when the gravy has been sufficiently reduced to serve. Most Northern Indian meat dishes are cooked in a fairly large amount of liquid, and (fortunately) do not use flour thickeners. Hence any body to the gravy has to be provided by vegetable / nut / yogurts, but also by reduction which not only thickens but intensifies the flavor. When oil is incorporated into a relatively large amount of liquid, it tends to remain in suspension, but when the amount reduces the oil globules are more likely to consolidate. Hence, consolidation can be seen as a sign that most of the water content has evaporated and the sauce is ready to serve. It is presumably for this reason that we are told to wait until separation, not because we are thought to enjoy pools of oil on top of our food. Indeed, the separation also provides an opportunity to skim off the roghan and save it for another purpose.

Of course, I could have no idea about what I'm talking about.

[mongo_jones]

i tend to agree with you skchai--when i talk about oil separation i'm not talking about reducing things to some sort of oily jam but as an indicator of when a sauce is cooked through. by the way, looking for oil separation, in the way i understand it and not the way episure describes it, is something that's been taught to me by other self-taught, non-academic (sometimes illiterate), non-pedantic cooks.

i think we're talking about different degrees here.

[Suvir Saran]

My speculation on this having the "oil start separating" is not really an end in and of itself but a rule of thumb for knowing when the gravy has been sufficiently reduced to serve.  Most Northern Indian meat dishes are cooked in a fairly large amount of liquid, and (fortunately) do not use flour thickeners.  Hence any body to the gravy has to be provided by vegetable / nut / yogurts, but also by reduction which not only thickens but intensifies the flavor.  When oil is incorporated into a relatively large amount of liquid, it tends to remain in suspension, but when the amount reduces the oil globules are more likely to consolidate.  Hence, consolidation can be seen as a sign that most of the water content has evaporated and the sauce is ready to serve.  It is presumably for this reason that we are told to wait until separation, not because we are thought to enjoy pools of oil on top of our food.  Indeed, the separation also provides an opportunity to skim off the roghan and save it for another purpose.

Of course, I could have no idea about what I'm talking about.

As is usual with you skchai, your speculations come with experience in the kitchen.

I have pretty much your appreciation for those words on oil separation.

Indian cuisine is not alone in wanting to see that fat does not remain suspended in sauces.

But certainly not all dishes need to have the sauce reduced to that stage of separation either.

Most home chefs in India, like the ones I interviewed for my cookbook, have their own way of dealing with this issue. Some do wait till that stage, many skip and enjoy the dish without having to fuss for long times in front of the stove.

[Episure]

I agree with Skchai to some degree for a dish like Roghan Josh where the name itself suggests a layer of oil on top. A fortifying dish for the nippy climes of Kashmir and the northern winter.

A few more points to consider:

Maybe in old Hindoostan a layer of oil functioned as a preservative as there were no refrigerators.

The oil separation stage is not necessarily the sauce cooked stage, rather onion browning is a definite marker.

Oil plays a functional role in roasting the onions and spices. Therefore one uses only that much oil as is necessary. On an average a recipe calls for approx 1 tbsp oil per person. I just skimmed through Camelia Panjabi's 50 great Curries of India to arrive at this figure. Jiggs' Prashad recipes call for about twice that quantity of oil and he advocates the oil separation stage which Camellia doesn't.

I have not come across many people who find the oil slick appetizing. I'd rather my Gravy stay as a Liasion and not as curdled mayonnaise.

[BBhasin]

Bhunoo is an integral part of North Indian cooking.

You add the onions in oil and saute. they soften up become pasty and become a homogenised mass with the oil.

then the oil seperates indicating that the water in the onions has dried up and the frying process is beggening. the onions beggin to caramalize and color. the degree you cook them too will have an effect on the final color AND flavor of your stew. The same applies to ground ginger and garlic, which has been ground with a little water,

if you dont wait till the oil seperates and move to the next step you have only boiled your ginger and garlic.A lot of people when they add their masallas, dissolve them in a liitle water to prevent burning. Now if you dont wait again for the oil seperation the bhunooing process is not going to start.

Maybe I am from the old school and babbling like a fool but to me this oil seperation bussiness is an indicator of numourous stages of perperation. The process/method has been handed down generations so it must be tested by time.

Unlike you Episure, I DO carry the baggage of formal training but while I am not averse to new ideas and experimentation, I strongly belive that in most dishes there definiltly SHOULD be a difference if different processes are used.

I would be greatly interested in the dishes that you prepared and experimented with because if that works it is time to move to the next level.

Please do not take it the wrong way, as I do not mean it it any negative way.

The aroma does escape from long cooked dishes. You are right. That is why the spices are usually added twice. Traditionally whole in the begening, for flavor and then at the end,usually powdered, for aroma.

Strange that you draw the senario of the maharaja/nwab. I thought that it were these aristrocrats who had these intricate and time consuming 'nawabi' processes and techniques that had to be followed.

[Suvir Saran]

The aroma does escape from long cooked dishes. You are right. That is why the spices are usually added twice. Traditionally whole in the begening, for flavor and then at the end,usually powdered, for aroma.

Great post BBhasin.

Also the addition of spices at two times is not only a part of Indian cuisine, but a part of most multilayered cuisines. In cooking around the world, when preparing dishes that are meant to have a depth of flavoring that is uniquely different from other dishes that are made only to heighten the natural flavors of a meat or produce, spicing is done in at least two stages, maybe even more.

As you point out, it is tested by time and not all that frivolous an act. It certainly makes the flavor profile elevate into levels you could hardly achieve without cooking to the desired consistency and time. Whilst I have great respect for the Bhunao method and stick to it in totality when making dishes that are derived if not completely authentic to its traditions, I do add way less fat today than what was used in the past. And the result ends up having little if any fat separation. With lower fat addition in the begining, one has to be very careful during bhunao (since spices can burn easily for there is nothing greasing the pan) and the cheetas of water (drops) become essential. In my Bhunao cooking, I am never waiting for the oil to seperate, but only for the spices, onions, tomatoes, yogurt or whatever else I am cooking together to cook into a thick consistency with most of the water evaporated. It is not different from what one does in many other styles of cooking where you are cooking stuff for longer periods of time.

What is beautiful in fact is the act of the addition of spices in two if not more stages. Whilst we Indians can take it for granted (not you BBhasin, since you point it out beautifully), or at least not give it as much credit as it deserves, I have been amazed at the reactions I get from professional chefs in their admiration for the complexity of flavoring that one can achieve by doing this. There is a back and front flavor and heat. And that cannot be achieved at this heightened level unless the spices are added in more than one stage.

In my own kitchen, in my classes and at restaurants where chefs create some of the dishes I share recipes for, I most often do not rely on Bhunao in the classic sense of oil seperation. In fact I often draw from recipes that hardly have much need for long duration of cooking. But when we do need a flavor complexity that can impress and linger beyond some moments alone, I do go back into the traditions of Bhunao, and I find myself finding great winners time after time.

[Suvir Saran]

I just skimmed through Camelia Panjabi's 50 great Curries of India to arrive at this figure. Jiggs' Prashad recipes call for about twice that quantity of oil and he advocates the oil separation stage which Camellia doesn't.

Episure has already mentioned the fact about lesser fat in a post before mine.

I really believe that makes all the difference.

[Suvir Saran]

Onions play a very important role in Indian cookery, and certainly in that of the Northern genre.

Onions are chopped (large/medium/small dice), sliced (thick/thin) or ground into coarse, medium coarse or fine pastes.

At times onions are browned before the addition of the tomato or yogurt. Sometimes they are barely cooked. Some times you only cook until the edges brown, at other times you brown as much as you can. Sometimes you brown the sliced or diced onions to quite a dark color and then you gring these onions into a paste and brown that paste.

Recipes dictate what one does to the onions. The end result dictates what kind of onions one should begin with and how much one ought to brown.

The way you treat the onions leaves a lasting impact on the finished sauce. Onions as we all know get sweeter as they caramelize. And so, the natural sweetness of sauces can be changed by the browning. It is all about finding the balance between spices, souring agents and the sweetness of onions and then taking the desired texture into account.

The separation of the oil is important, but ultimately, Indian cooking is more about mastering the art of bringing out a medley of flavors that each are in harmony with the other and yet able to keep some of thier own identity.

[Episure]

Bhasinji,

I was hoping you would respond and this promises to become a very interesting thread. We will not take this debate in any way save that this is how evolution continues.

Let me clarify:

Baggage

Not being formally trained, I find it easier to question cooking processes and systems, which doesnt come easy. But this by no means is a slur on formally trained professionals. I must admit I could have used more elegant phraseology in my earlier post, I apologise.

Six degrees of separation

I agree that oil separation phenomenon is traditional and part of Northern cuisine. I easily manage to brown onions and add ginger/garlic pastes till fried and the oil doesnt separate. Maybe I use just the right quantity of oil, but I have been doing this for over 25 years now and nobody's complained. Maybe I have evolved like an isolated species in the Galapagos.

More taste less Fat.

I feel that we are using twice the quantity of oil than is functionally required. For those that prefer extra oil as a contributing taste enhancer, try using less oil and add a dollop of Ghee or Butter just before serving. The flavour and aroma is truly awesome. The total fat medium used will be less than only oil. It's not that we use oil that doubles as a flavour as in the case of olive oil.

Nawab Lajawab

No doubt they contributed a lot to cuisine for without them we would never have had Dum Pukht, Kakoris and Galoutis. I used them in my caricature as they were also prone to excesses.

Dum Pukht

The USP of this low heat cooking method is that all the flavours and aromas are released under the diner's nose and not the cook's. This is the opposite of frying masalas into oblivion.

I carry out blind tests( as part of taste and sensory analysis) for some F & B companies and mostly for my own curiosity. One of these experiments has led me to use butter from coimbatore( Again, more taste less fat! ) exclusively for all my South Indian cooking. Like in wine, terroir has a role to play in Butter also.

Food does not benefit by the addition of too much oil, it's not even a visual treat. North Indian food is the ambassador of Indian cuisine, It's about time we tweaked it and made it more acceptable to the world. The french had to do it. Now we need a NAYA ZAIKA (Copyright- Episure )

Maybe I am generalizing or as skchai said :Of course, I could have no idea about what I'm talking about.

Edited September 11, 2003 by Episure (log)

[Suvir Saran]

Six degrees of separation

I agree that oil separation phenomenon is traditional and part of Northern cuisine. I easily manage to brown onions and add ginger/garlic pastes till fried and the oil doesnt separate. Maybe I use just the right quantity of oil, but I have been doing this for over 25 years now and nobody's complained. Maybe I have evolved like an isolated species in the Galapagos.   

More taste less Fat.

I feel that we are using twice the quantity of oil than is functionally required. For those that prefer extra oil as a contributing taste enhancer, try using less oil and add a dollop of Ghee or Butter just before serving. The flavour and aroma is truly awesome. The total fat medium used will be less than only oil. It's not that we use oil that doubles as a flavour as in the case of olive oil.

Nawab Lajawab

No doubt they contributed a lot to cuisine for without them we would never have had Dum Pukht, Kakoris and Galoutis. I used them in my caricature as they were also prone to excesses.

Dum Pukht

The USP of this low heat cooking  method is that all the flavours and aromas are released under the diner's nose and not the cook's. This is the opposite of frying masalas into oblivion.

I carry out blind tests( as part of taste and sensory analysis) for some F & B companies and mostly for my own curiosity. One of these experiments has led me to use  butter from coimbatore( Again, more taste less fat! ) exclusively for all my South Indian cooking. Like in wine, terroir has a role to play in Butter also.

Food does not benefit by the addition of too much oil, it's not even a visual treat. North Indian food is the ambassador of Indian cuisine, It's about time we tweaked it and made it more acceptable to the world. The french had to do it. Now we need a NAYA ZAIKA (Copyright- Episure )

Maybe I am generalizing or as skchai said :Of course, I could have no idea about what I'm talking about.

All excellent points.

And certainly you have not been alone.

You in Galapagos, Panditji (our Oudhi chef in Delhi), my maternal grandmother in San Francisco (passed away earlier this year) and countless and nameless others have done exactly the same.

Cuisines evolve and both India and its cuisines, North and South, East and West have all evolved and changed.

Dum Pukht had evolved way early and certainly shares the idea that oil is not necessary for taste or final texture.

I cannot agree more about taking some extra time and cooking with half or even lesser oil than some use in the cooking of the North. It is the key I believe to bring a fresh, contemporary and delicious Indian cuisine to a world that does not have episures, Nanis and Dadis and Panditjis and Maharaj's to rely on.

Thanks episure for a great detailed post.

[Suvir Saran]

Now we need a NAYA ZAIKA (Copyright- Episure )

Maybe I am generalizing or as skchai said :Of course, I could have no idea about what I'm talking about.

Episure, I learned only after filing that this name is already taken. By someone in NYC no less.

And I feel you are being very modest. You know what you are talking about. You just had not shared as much in your first post here.

As I wrote in my own post earlier, OIL is the key. At least to me, and I understand from your post you feel the same way, oil is not attractive. That film that once upon a time meant so much to so many Northeners, is enough of a factor for me to not eat.

[Episure]

Now we need a NAYA ZAIKA (Copyright- Episure )

Episure, I learned only after filing that this name is already taken. By someone in NYC no less.

Groan

[Episure]

Deep frying vs Shallow frying.

Swati in her recent post on peanuts mentions

The original recipe calls for deep frying ( and lots of oil). I shallow fry them.... same results and same taste.

Swati I hope you have chosen to shallow fry for practical reasons i.e., not having to reserve a large quantity of oil for frying purposes.

I for one always have a deep frying kadhai in use.

The reason is that shallow frying results in oilier fries than deep frying.

Contrary to popular opinion deep frying allows you to control temperature and cooking at low and removing at high heat results in a fried product that doesnt have oil dripping from it. It's a matter of heat/viscosity.

Yes you do use lots of oil but it remains in the kadhai and doesnt come on to your plate and palate.

Edited May 28, 2004 by Episure (log)

[Swati]

As i have said, deep frying or shallow frying has the same effect on taste. But u r right. with shallow frying, I have to reserve lesser amounts of oil. The vadas are fried at high heat. Moreover sabudana tends to absorb oil.... so in case of deep frying, results in larger amounts of oil being absorbed

Hence the shallow frying

[Episure]

No Swati,

Deep frying makes the sabudanas or anything else less oily as the entire surface seals up on immersion.

When you shallow fry, one side gets sealed and the other absorbs oil.

Please ask me again for clarifications if I havent been clear.

[Rushina]

Okie so here is my question,

Funnily enough this is a debate that has been on for a while at our table.

How do you deep fry? I cant do it! It's a disaster every time I try! Could someone go thru a step - by step process?

Rushina

[Episure]

Deep fry as in you would be making batata vadas, bhajias/pakoras or wafers/chips i.e, in a kadhai full of oil and not upto say.. an inch deep.

For example if you want to make crisp finger chips, you deep fry them in medium hot oil and finish/remove at very high temperature. I let them fry for at least 10-15 minutes without letting them brown and then another 5 minutes at full.

This is an inexact timing as it depends on your burner, size of kadhai/pan, qty of oil and amount of stuff to be fried, but I'm sure you get the idea.

Try and shallow fry and you will land up with soggy chips.

[Episure]

I am coming across too many people/chefs/cooks/dosa wallahs who are making the mistake of cooking dosas on both side thinking that it will become crisper.

This is not true at all. Quite the contrary cooking a dosa on the second side steams up the already crisped/browned side, rendering it soggy. Nobody wants to listen.

Then again there are so many people who cant adjust their TV Sets for an optimum/realistic image. Who am I to disagree.