Bobo Bonobo® wrote:
> On Jun 7, 10:08 pm, Janet Wilder > wrote:
>> Omelet wrote:
>>> In article >,
>>> blake murphy > wrote:
>>>>> According to the mom's blog (she critiques food network shows) he can
>>>>> make steak and green beans. I don't think she trained him in the
>>>>> culinary arts.
>>>> well, maybe he can pick up something from you. i'm sure he could do a lot
>>>> worse.
>>>> your pal,
>>>> blake
>>> I think sometimes "chef's" may tend to make things too complicated.
>>> Cooking imho is a simple art, and more a matter of instinct than book
>>> learning.
>
> Knowing certain things like how to develop a fond aren't mere
> instinct, but cooking should, IMO, be pretty simple.
>>> Experience counts too...
>
> Experience guides the decision to use one pinch of fresh, chopped
> rosemary leaves rather than three.
>> I was chatting with a girlfriend today and we were wondering what the
>> difference between a "chef" and a "cook" is. We came to the conclusion
>> that a chef doesn't have to clean up after him/herself and a cook does.
>
> A chef doesn't have to do his/her own prep work either. A chef
> supervises cooks, right. Isn't chef just a word for *chief* cook?
> I've told people numerous times that I'm not a chef, I just cook.
> Even if I won the lottery, I wouldn't aspire to be a chef, but just a
> person who cooks and who is able to afford more pricey ingredients.
>> --
>> Janet Wilder
>> Way-the-heck-south Texas
>> Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.
>
> --Bryan

Don't know about you, but if I won the lottery, I'd start a great
restaurant, show major appreciation to it's great chef, and then eat
there daily. I don't care who's the chief as long as he/she turns out
great food. Even young line cooks have skills.