TDG: A Passion for Desserts

[Chad]

Like eGullet's own Diogenes, Suzanne Fass is always on the lookout for an honest cookbook, one that delivers what it promises -- a rare find indeed. But she's found one in A Passion for Desserts. What do you think?

+++

Be sure to check The Daily Gullet home page daily for new articles (most every weekday), hot topics, site announcements, and more.

[Pan]

Another beautiful article, Suzanne. You sell this book very effectively.

[Chad]

The best part of this review, for me, is that Suzanne is not known for being kind or gentle to cookbooks. She picks them apart like Perry Mason dismantling a shaky alibi. This must be one extraordinary cookbook to have recieved such high praise from her. I'm not much of a dessert maker, but I'm thinking of picking this book up.

Do any of you pastry types have this one? What do you think?

Chad

[bloviatrix]

I've been wanting to check out this book for awhile and I can't find it in any of the stores. What's up with that?

[alacarte]

A sharp review and a good read.

When I was choosing a recipe to test, I thought: I dare not make this one; if I do, I will just want to wallow in it; I will want to Karen Finley it;

I agree that the best cookbooks are the ones that make us hungry. This is taking it to the next level of the senses.

Extra points for using "Karen Finley" as a verb!

[kitwilliams]

My latest pet peeve is cookbooks which only state the ingredients by cup and no mention of either ounces or grams. Sherry Yard's book is this way (with the single exception of butter) and it drives me crazy.

So my question is, does Emily provide more than one form of measurement in her book? Not that it'll stop me from buying it if she doesn't!

[cjsadler]

This book really is great and really makes you feel like you can make all these amazing desserts. My girlfriend is the owner of it, but I personally have used the recipes for streusel-baked pears and macaroon napoleons. They were both amazing (and I'm not much of a pastry chef, so that's a big credit to the book).

[Suzanne F]

bloviatrix: maybe you can "page through it" on Amazon?? I'm not sure about its disappearance from stores, unless that means it has sold out. I dare not go into bookstores any more.

kit: Here's a quick rundown. Remember, this book is for the standard home cook who is not yet enlightened to the Way of the Scale. What weights there are, are ounces; volumes are cups, teaspoons, tablespoons.

Both volume and weight: butter, nuts (which I find especially helpful ), sometimes fruit

Volume only: liquids; sugar; salt; cornstarch; flour ; ground spices

Weight only: chocolate

Count only: eggs; sometimes fruit; cinnamon sticks

alacarte: We were a little concerned about the Karen Finley reference; glad you like it.

[bloviatrix]

I'm glad to see the nuts are given by weight. I was just commenting to Blovie that giving nuts by volume is a particular peeve of mine.

I have yet to use the page through mechanism on Amazon but I'll try it.

[Suzanne F]

I would love to hear what other home cooks who have used this book think of it. Anybody else?

[Wendy DeBord]

I own this one, but haven't made anything from it yet. I have other books written by her and have made many items from those books. They typically, are above average compared to similar level baking books.

I like her clean writing and not overly complicated approach to baking. In fact if I think about it she's not heavy on "baking" like a Debbie Fields book where every item is a cake or cookie to be "baked". Instead I think it should appeal to alot of homemakers that they can create a great dessert with-out alot of baking technique.

I noticed that some of the qoutes you chose were tidbits that stood out to me also, when I thumbed thru her book. I like her unpretentous style. I do wish though....(which is a common complaint) that she had more photos (I think that's important to the people this book is geared to appeal to) or better photos. The ones she had could have been styled better. For instance her caramel chocolate tart. She notes that it's beautiful to have an all cocoa colored plate/dessert (like a fashion designer uses neutals) but the photo didn't have enough ump to make her point....

[challah-baker]

If she doesn't provide weights for flour, etc. does she at least provide what she sees as the equivalent in weight so that those of us who try to bake correctly can use them?

Challah-baker

[Suzanne F]

If she doesn't provide weights for flour, etc.  does she at least provide what she sees as the equivalent in weight so that those of us who try to bake correctly can use them?

Challah-baker

No, she does not. Although in her discussion of equipment, in her "committed" list she suggests getting a scale to "[w]eigh chocolate and nuts for more accurate baking." And at the "happily over the top" level (beyond "getting started" and "committed"), she recommends:

Balance (old-fashioned) and digital (high-tech) scales are accurate and easy to use. Invest in one, and your baking will be more precise.

Having talked with her in person quite a few times, I doubt she would say that those who do not weigh all ingredients are not baking "correctly." She's a bit more tolerant than that: if you want to bake, and try, that's good enough for her.

[challah-baker]

Sorry, I was not trying to be intolerant. Sometimes though, cookbooks that list ingredients in volume have an index, so lets say we can tell whether she measures a cup of flour it is 4oz 5oz or 5 1/2 oz or whatever. I guess I should have said "accurate". Many cookbooks or perhaps I should say "bakebooks" give both which is very useful. Some even give three, with volume, ounces and grams. That way you can choose. Like many folks, when I used to bake in my pre-scale days when recipes came out inconsistenly I never knew why. The first time I tried measuring a cup of flour by the spoon method, the dip and scoop method, the dip and shake method, etc. and then weighed them and saw how different they were I was shocked! Even stuff like brown sugar which until recently I packed and measured figuring that well packed is packed I was amazed when I weighed. I forget who it was on this list who asked the question but I was just about to post the same query. I am much more likely to buy bakebooks that have weight as well as volume because it is much more likely to get it right.

I do apologize though if I came across as arrogant and to imply there was only one way. My favorite chocolate cake recipe, which we got from a neighbor. when I was growing up called for a yarzheit glass of sugar. It wasn't until many cakes later that my mom discovered it was 1 1/2 cups...

This cookbook looks so I nice I may buy it anyway and hope for the best....

[bloviatrix]

My favorite chocolate cake recipe, which we got from a neighbor. when I was growing up called for a yarzheit glass of sugar. It wasn't until many cakes later that my mom discovered it was 1 1/2 cups...

Oh how funny. I'm used to yerzheit glasses being used for orange juice, not as a measuring cup.

But I understand your frustration. Volume for nuts drives me nuts. As does volume for brown sugar and flour. I use Rose Levy Bernbaum's charts for converting volume to weight. I find that works fairly consistently for me. Unfortunately, most American-published baking books use volume only. Maybe the publishers will eventually get a clue.

[Suzanne F]

Edited to add: everyone should check out The Kitchen Scale Manifesto on RecipeGullet.

Oh, how I wish the publishers would learn! But it's more a case of people just not being used to using scales. After all, we are now the only country in the world that still uses pounds and ounces, because somebody decided we were too entrenched to change to metric

In Understanding Baking there are great charts for converting between weight and volume, with explanations of how they got the numbers. Even so, as long as we have to go back and forth, it's all still approximation.

And I drank my milk out of yahrzeit glasses. (Creepy!!!) The ones I see now seem to be much smaller than when I was growing up. Some African recipes I've seen call for "1 Prince Albert" of something -- meaning the can that the tobacco comes in. At work at one restaurant, we measured something by "crabs," meaning the containers that our crab meat came in (actually, either 1 cup or 1 pint, I forget now).

But ultimately, as a home baker, I don't worry too much about precision to the last decimal point. If it works pretty well, and tastes good, that's good enough for me. It's kind of the way I cook on the hot side: rarely measuring precisely at home even when following a recipe, because I know more or less how it will come out. Oh, when I cooked and baked in restaurants, I measured very precisely, because the customers expected absolute consistency. At home, though, that's not an issue. As long as it works, I'm happy. And He Who Only Eats is happy. And my guests are happy. What more could I want?

Edited February 2, 2004 by Suzanne F (log)

[marlena spieler]

emily lucchetti is a star baker. when i first met her and tasted the little titbits she had prepared i think i proposed marriage never mind that i am totally straight and married, and i believe she is too. but could you imagine having someone in your very own home just rustle up these delicacies.......

come to think of it that is exactly what i do, rustle up delicacies, but mine are savoury. very savoury. and sometimes. sour. and increasingly lately, alas, very very bitter. not my food, just my mood.

anyhow back to the star of the show. the book. whilst i haven't worked from this book her first one when she was the pastry chef at stars was a long-lived fave on my bookshelf, and i am not a sweets-maker. emily lucchetti has a very good attitude and it rubs off on the reader. suddenly you start thinking: yeah, a layer of chocolate ganache and well, maybe a little bit of.........passion fruit sorbet? in my kitchen, right now, that sort of thing........

[cjsadler]

Tried another recipe out of this yesterday-- the chocolate-chunk caramel tart. It was delicious (though I didn't feel very manly bringing a tart to a Super Bowl Party). However, using her rich-tart crust dough recipe, my tart shrank big-time after blind baking it. I understand this is from over-handling, but I barely touched the dough (just molded it enough to come together in a disc... and it did come out pretty tender and flaky). Only had time to chill it for 10 minutes, so I'm thinking this is the culprit (?). As good as it was, I think next time I'd use all milk chocolate, as the dark chocolate tends to overpower the caramel flavor.

[Chad]

Dunno if y'all are aware, but Chef Luchetti has a bio and portfolio here at SanFranciscoChefs.com. There are some gorgeous shots of her desserts.

Chad

[bloviatrix]

I walked over the Barnes and Noble this afternoon and actually found a copy sitting on the shelf. So, I spent some time perusing. It looks like a nice book. What I like is how she takes different components and puts them together. I think it encourages home bakers to think out of the box and to try to make combinations out of desserts they have in their repetoire.

My only complaint is that I would have liked more pictures. But I realize that would have pushed the cover price beyond $35.

[heyjude]

Check out the prices on Stars Desserts and Four Star Desserts, Luchetti's two earlier books, now out of print. Bookfinder shows them selling for as much as $300.

[Rhea_S]

Check out the prices on Stars Desserts and Four Star Desserts, Luchetti's two earlier books, now out of print. Bookfinder shows them selling for as much as $300.

I should pass this info to my local library. They have at least two copies of Four Star Desserts and I'm the most frequent borrower of this title. They could auction one off and buy a few more new cookbooks!