Alan wrote:

> Seriously. I am I so weird to like simple, perfect french
> toast with a pat of butter on it, floating in maple syrup?
>
> Those are all FINE things, and putting them together without
> a bunch of "improvements" seems a little sacrilegious to me!
>
> Seriously.
>
> (Not that I think people shouldn't be able to do what they
> want, but I just wonder why they take that one good,
> wonderful thing, and pile more "stuff" into/on it?
>
> Seriously!


(Warning: Here comes some thread drift.)


I've thought about this. I do like gussying up french toast with a
teaspoon of liquor in the batter and strawberries and bananas on top,
but for other items, I agree with you. For example, I don't think you
can improve on the standard recipes for pumpkin pie (the Libby's can)
and key lime pie (graham cracker crust, whipped cream, no coconut).
Every time Thanksgiving rolls around and I see restaurants pulling out
pumpkin pie with pecans or ginger or praline additions, I want to go
back to the kitchen and give the chef a good talking to.


So here's the question/challenge: Give one example of a standard,
well-known, recipe that you don't think should be messed with. Then
give an example of a recipe that's improved with a little tinkering.


--Lia

Dave Smith wrote:

> I agree. Some things aren't supposed to be messed with. What you can do
> with various ingredients is not restricted by law, but if French Toast is
> stale bread dipped in egg and milk, fried and served with a bit of butter
> and maple syrup, then that is what French Toast is. Some variation is
> allowed, but if people what to start reconstructing the dish by adding all
> sorts of things that are not part of the basic process, go ahead, but call
> it something else.


We'll need a whole new dictionary for drinks formerly known as martini.


--Lia

Lou Decruss said...

> On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 10:20:49 -0600, Andy <q> wrote:
>
>
>>Buy a tiny airplane size bottle (about 1 oz.) at the liquor store for a
>>couple dollars instead of the large expensive one.
>
> Good Idea.
>>
>>Here's a recipe I worked from. If you try it, DO READ the reviews for
>>suggestions on improving this incredibly rich dish. Not diabetic
friendly.
>>
>>Creme Brulee French Toast
>>http://tinyurl.com/2yfrp2
>
> Thank you Andy.
>
> Lou


Welcome!

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:49:47 -0500, Julia Altshuler
> wrote:

>So here's the question/challenge: Give one example of a standard,
>well-known, recipe that you don't think should be messed with

Creme brulee -- when I want creme brulee, I want the classic version.
You can't improve upon good cream, eggs, sugar, vanilla. Added
flavors -- lemon, chocolate, spices, coconut, whatever -- do not
improve it. They change and possibly detract from a good creme
brulee, but they do not improve it. A good creme brulee is so elegant
and perfect; additions just make it fussy.

Tara

Julia Altshuler wrote:
>
> Dave Smith wrote:
>
> > I agree. Some things aren't supposed to be messed with. What you can do
> > with various ingredients is not restricted by law, but if French Toast is
> > stale bread dipped in egg and milk, fried and served with a bit of butter
> > and maple syrup, then that is what French Toast is. Some variation is
> > allowed, but if people what to start reconstructing the dish by adding all
> > sorts of things that are not part of the basic process, go ahead, but call
> > it something else.
>
> We'll need a whole new dictionary for drinks formerly known as martini.
>
>

In my book, a Martini is gin with a touch of dry Vermouth, but I can extend
that to a Vodka Martini, but the word Vodka has to be there to distinguish
it from a true Martini. The others are just sweet foofoo drinks served in
martini glasses.

Maybe we should start a trend of mixing whiskey with beer and call it
wine. :-)

In article >,
Lou Decruss > wrote:

> On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 13:52:41 -0500, Julia Altshuler
> > wrote:
>
> >Alan wrote:
> >
> >> Ordinary french toast is pretty wonderful just as it is!
> >>
> >> I always wonder why people have to add extra stuff?
> >
> >
> >If we didn't add extra and try to improve on wonderful, we'd all be
> >eating the same 20 recipes with no variation for our whole lives.
>
> Well said.
>
> >And then where would this usenet group be?
>
> Discussing our pans.
>
> Lou

<lol>
And other kitchen gadgets...

Gee, we never talk about kitchen gadgets do we? :-)
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson

Tara wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:49:47 -0500, Julia Altshuler
> > wrote:
>
>
>>So here's the question/challenge: Give one example of a standard,
>>well-known, recipe that you don't think should be messed with
>
>
> Creme brulee -- when I want creme brulee, I want the classic version.
> You can't improve upon good cream, eggs, sugar, vanilla. Added
> flavors -- lemon, chocolate, spices, coconut, whatever -- do not
> improve it. They change and possibly detract from a good creme
> brulee, but they do not improve it. A good creme brulee is so elegant
> and perfect; additions just make it fussy.


Perfect example. The last time we visited my mother-in-law, we took her
out to a restaurant that was really too fancy for her tastes (Jim's
idea). Then we ordered the creme brulee for dessert, and she wasn't
sure she wanted to try it. I explained that it was just custard with a
thin layer of candylike sugar on top. She pronounced it "vanilla
custard" and said it wasn't bad. From her, that's high praise. I was
deeply satisfied.


--Lia

Dave Smith wrote:

> In my book, a Martini is gin with a touch of dry Vermouth, but I can extend
> that to a Vodka Martini, but the word Vodka has to be there to distinguish
> it from a true Martini. The others are just sweet foofoo drinks served in
> martini glasses.
>
> Maybe we should start a trend of mixing whiskey with beer and call it
> wine. :-)


Don't be ridiculous. We could, however, start a trend of mixing concord
grape juice with vodka and calling THAT wine.


As for martinis, the trend has gotten worse than that. It doesn't even
have to be a foo-foo DRINK anymore. (I rather love foo-foo drinks but
prefer them in tall glasses served with a straw and a little paper
umbrella.) I've seen a peanut butter and jelly sandwich layered in a
martini glass and called a "martini."


--Lia

Julia Altshuler wrote:
>
> Dave Smith wrote:
>
> > In my book, a Martini is gin with a touch of dry Vermouth, but I can extend
> > that to a Vodka Martini, but the word Vodka has to be there to distinguish
> > it from a true Martini. The others are just sweet foofoo drinks served in
> > martini glasses.
> >
> > Maybe we should start a trend of mixing whiskey with beer and call it
> > wine. :-)
>
> Don't be ridiculous. We could, however, start a trend of mixing concord
> grape juice with vodka and calling THAT wine.

No no. That is a Grape Tequila Sunrise :-)

>
> As for martinis, the trend has gotten worse than that. It doesn't even
> have to be a foo-foo DRINK anymore. (I rather love foo-foo drinks but
> prefer them in tall glasses served with a straw and a little paper
> umbrella.) I've seen a peanut butter and jelly sandwich layered in a
> martini glass and called a "martini."

Yech.