On Dec 31, 12:46*pm, "SteveB" <toquerville@zionvistas> wrote:
> How would you define a cook?
>
> I think it is someone who prepares food who:
>
> will try new things.
> will accept failure.
> is adventurous.
> is flexible.
> is creative.
>
> I don't think it's someone who's been to school and can cook a creme brule.
>
The qualities you list are about attitude and personality. You omit
knowledge and desire to learn, skills and desire to develop them,
taste and desire to expand it. -aem

How would you define a cook?

I think it is someone who prepares food who:

will try new things.
will accept failure.
is adventurous.
is flexible.
is creative.

I don't think it's someone who's been to school and can cook a creme brule.

Steve

"SteveB" wrote

> How would you define a cook?

I presume you mean a good one ;-)

> I think it is someone who prepares food who:
>
> will try new things.
> will accept failure.
> is adventurous.
> is flexible.
> is creative.

These do for starters. It's the basic attributes a good cook must have.
Eventually you get a feel for how to adapt things and the failure level goes
down, but even then there will be a few boffs!

> I don't think it's someone who's been to school and can cook a creme
> brule.

No, but that is more the sort of thing for a 'chef' on TV if you ask me.

You can see (if you read the right threads) that I post many unique self
designed recipes of my own. They are based off others, but the others are
used as a guideline and the good ones get in MM format for sharing with
thouse who'd like to try them out.

Here's 3 samples. The Bo-Peeps one got proliferated on a huge number of web
sites (normally with my name filed off, sometimes with my typo's corrected).
2710 hits in google for Bo Peeps Crockpot ;-)

MMMMM----- Recipe via Meal-Master (tm) v8.05

Title: Bo-Peeps-a-Crock
Categories: Crockpot, Veal, Xxcarol, Diabetic
Yield: 8 Servings

1 lb Veal/lamb breast
2 tb Chicken bullion mix (or 1 qt
Water to 1 qt (or broth)
1 ts Nutmeg
1 ts Ginger, powdered
16 ea Cloves, whole
1 ea Medium/large carrot, chopped
1 c Grapes (optional)

Good sale? See that Veal or cut of Lamb? Many things go with it.
This is one varition.

Cut the meat as needed to fit in the crockpot, removing as much fat as
possible. Now toss in the rest. Cook on high for 4 hours, then cool
it and skim off the fat. Reheat and it's good heated for 6 hours at
a shot for 2 days. (refridgerate inbetween times!) Serves well with
an acorn or buttternut squash, cut in half and baked then served in a
bowl with the shell filled with meat and soup. Add rice (Basmati or
Jasmine prefered) and some blue lake green beans for a perfect but
easy meal.

Nutrition: High in fat, even when cooled and skimmed, but sugar free
and low in sodium. Use as a specialty now and again even if dieting.
Sastifies sweet tooth with no sugar added.

From the kitchen of: xxcarol From the kitchen of: xxcarol From: Carol
Shenkenberger Date: 01-16-00 Cooking

MMMMM

MMMMM----- Recipe via Meal-Master (tm) v8.05

Title: Magic Leeks!
Categories: Appetizers, Diabetic, Low-fat, Vegetables, Xxcarol
Yield: 6 Servings

2 ea Whole bunches of leeks
1 tb Soy sauce (shoyu)
1 tb Worstershire sauce
Olive oil, light drizzle
1 ts Black pepper
1 ts Salt

Ok, chop them washed leeks up. Get all the dirt out. Now mix the
seasonings (sans oil) and put that in a reclosable baggie. Shake'em
up and down (or side to side if you prefer). Add a drizzle of olive
oil to a pan and either fry them tender, or bake at 350 degrees for
20 mins. Dont let them get cold or the magic leeks out!

Suitable as a side dish to anything that would be complemented by
onions. Nice little 'knosh' all by themselves on a late night for a
dieter.

From the kitchen of xxcarol From: Carol Shenkenberger Date: 05-22-01
Cooking

MMMMM

MMMMM----- Recipe via Meal-Master (tm) v8.05

Title: Xxcarol's Southern Chili
Categories: Chili, Xxcarol, Diabetic, One dish
Yield: 10 Servings

3 lb Beef, inexpensive cut 'steak
1 sm Bag dry kidney or red beans
1 ea Fistful black eye peas (dry)
1 ea Fistful black beans (dry)
24 oz Contadina tomato sauce
24 oz Contadina stewed tomatos
2 c Water
2 c Rough chopped onions (2 lg)
2 ea Green peppers, chopped rough
1 ea Yellow summer squash
1 ea Green zucchini
1/2 c Califlower bits (stems too)
1 ea Fistful fresh green beans
3 tb Chili powder (or more)
1 tb Black pepper
1 ts Cumin or comino seeds
1 ts Hot sweet red pepper

Ok, one of the hardest to type up, is my famous/infamous *Southern*
chili.

Fact is, I have never made it the same twice, and I've never really
measured anything I put in it. I have attempted to list the most
common forms, but any one item you see listed, other than the beef,
beans, and tomato, and spices, is optional. It will *not* taste
right without some of the optional stuff though. Feel free to add
extra things not listed, such as I often toss in some fresh tomatos,
a handful of cooked butter beans, worstershire sauce, olives, a
radish or so, a bit of finely cooked pork (shred first). In fact,
almost anything lands in there!

Ok to start, this was designed for *long time* cooking over the stove
in a cast iron 'big as they make'em' deep frypan. Its best made that
way. Requires frequent addition of water as it cooks.

Take the beef, inexpensive cut works as well or *better* in this dish.
Should be the big 'chunks' probably with bone in, not overly marbled
but with some fat about it. Now slice that to bite sized bits. You
want something simular to a stroganoff beef strip. Cut across the
grain so it cooks more tender.

Chop all the veggies, but dont worry about making them very small
choppings. 'Mincing' not required. I like to be able to tell what I
am eating.

Put the ingredients in, pretty much same order as listed. If you run
out of space, stop. If you have more space, add optional things and
more water.

Now, cook (covered) on LOW for 12 hours at minimum. Tilt the lid if
it is more than barely bubbling.

From the kitchen of: xxcarol From: Carol Shenkenberger Date: 09-20-99
Recipes

MMMMM

"aem" > wrote in message
...
On Dec 31, 12:46 pm, "SteveB" <toquerville@zionvistas> wrote:
> How would you define a cook?
>
> I think it is someone who prepares food who:
>
> will try new things.
> will accept failure.
> is adventurous.
> is flexible.
> is creative.
>
> I don't think it's someone who's been to school and can cook a creme
> brule.
>
The qualities you list are about attitude and personality. You omit
knowledge and desire to learn, skills and desire to develop them,
taste and desire to expand it. -aem

I did not want to provide all the answers, merely start a discussion. I
like your points.

Steve

SteveB wrote:
>
> How would you define a cook?
>
> I think it is someone who prepares food who:
>
> will try new things.
> will accept failure.
> is adventurous.
> is flexible.
> is creative.
>
> I don't think it's someone who's been to school and can cook a creme brule.
>
> Steve

The funny thing is Creme Brulee is very easy to make...

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> "SteveB" <toquerville@zionvistas> wrote in message
> news
> > How would you define a cook?
> >
> > I think it is someone who prepares food who:
> >
> > will try new things.
> > will accept failure.
> > is adventurous.
> > is flexible.
> > is creative.
> >
> > I don't think it's someone who's been to school and can cook a creme
> > brule.
> >
> > Steve
>
> Nice attributes, but I don't think most are needed. I know plenty of people
> that cook out of necessity. I know people that accepted a job as "cook" in
> a restaurant and did the chores but did not give a damn about trying
> anything new, cared not about failure, and were not at all creative or
> adventurous. As for flexibility, only to the point that when the boss asked
> "can you work next Wednesday?" they would say yes. They cooked food for the
> customers, got paid, went home and ordered pizza. They still carried the
> title "cook"
>
> There are people that do have all of the attributes you describe and have a
> genuine interest in learning and expanding the culinary experience. I don't
> know what title to give them, but cook, IMO, is not the right one.

Chef vs. cook perhaps? Chef developing recipes vs. cook following them?

Pete C. wrote:

> Chef vs. cook perhaps? Chef developing recipes vs. cook following them?

Doesn't "Chef" denote the one that runs the entire kitchen?

"SteveB" <toquerville@zionvistas> wrote in message
news
> How would you define a cook?
>
> I think it is someone who prepares food who:

Prepares food as an expression of LOVE for the enjoyment of themselves and
more importantly, the enjoyment of OTHERS.


Dimitri

On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 16:44:56 -0600, "Pete C." >
wrote:

>The funny thing is Creme Brulee is very easy to make...

You would think...and I have seen many watery brulee's.....cooking too
quickly will produce that results.

SteveB wrote:
>
> How would you define a cook?
>
> I think it is someone who prepares food who:
>
> will try new things.
> will accept failure.
> is adventurous.
> is flexible.
> is creative.

Those are personality traits that haven't a whit to do with cooking
ability per se... those apply equally to any endeaver.

Any pinhead can follow a recipe step by step, but that's not cooking,
that's mimicry.

To be considered a cook one must be born with the innate culinary
talent the same as one is born with the innate musical talent to be a
concert pianist... no number of lessons over any period of time will
help either one iota were they not born with the innate ability.

Cooking ability is not something one can learn... in fact most of the
world's great cooks are totally illiterate, and in fact any attempt to
make them literate enough to read recipes can only interfere with and
subtract from their culinary talents.

Pete C. wrote:


>> There are people that do have all of the attributes you describe and have a
>> genuine interest in learning and expanding the culinary experience. I don't
>> know what title to give them, but cook, IMO, is not the right one.
>
> Chef vs. cook perhaps? Chef developing recipes vs. cook following them?

I certainly do not consider myself a chef, but I rarely follow recipes,
except when baking. Even when I use a recipe I don't always follow it
exactly.

On Dec 31, 5:46�pm, "Pete C." > wrote:
> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> > "SteveB" <toquerville@zionvistas> wrote in message
> >news
> > > How would you define a cook?
>
> > > I think it is someone who prepares food who:
>
> > > will try new things.
> > > will accept failure.
> > > is adventurous.
> > > is flexible.
> > > is creative.
>
> > > I don't think it's someone who's been to school and can cook a creme
> > > brule.
>
> > > Steve
>
> > Nice attributes, but I don't think most are needed. �I know plenty of people
> > that cook out of necessity. �I know people that accepted a job as "cook" in
> > a restaurant and did the chores but did not give a damn about trying
> > anything new, cared not about failure, and were not at all creative or
> > adventurous. �As for flexibility, only to the point that when the boss asked
> > "can you work next Wednesday?" they would say yes. �They cooked food for the
> > customers, got paid, went home and ordered pizza. �They still carried the
> > title "cook"
>
> > There are people that do have all of the attributes you describe and have a
> > genuine interest in learning and expanding the culinary experience. �I don't
> > know what title to give them, but cook, IMO, is not the right one.
>
> Chef vs. cook perhaps? Chef developing recipes vs. cook following them?- Hide quoted text -

Chefs are more involved with the economics and management of a
kitchen, chefs are typically not very cood cooks.

"Dimitri" > wrote in message
...
>
> "SteveB" <toquerville@zionvistas> wrote in message
> news
>> How would you define a cook?
>>
>> I think it is someone who prepares food who:
>
> Prepares food as an expression of LOVE for the enjoyment of themselves and
> more importantly, the enjoyment of OTHERS.
>
>
> Dimitri
>

Yes, that would be the cook Pete was talking about; may be a pro in a
restaurant or an amateur at home. . A genuine foodie and good host, etc.
Unlike the drone cook that is just holding a job because he needs to earn a
living.

"Pete C." > wrote in message
ster.com...
>
> SteveB wrote:
>>
>> How would you define a cook?
>>
>> I think it is someone who prepares food who:
>>
>> will try new things.
>> will accept failure.
>> is adventurous.
>> is flexible.
>> is creative.
>>
>> I don't think it's someone who's been to school and can cook a creme
>> brule.
>>
>> Steve
>
> The funny thing is Creme Brulee is very easy to make...

Shows how much I know.

Steve

"Dimitri" > wrote in message
...
>
> "SteveB" <toquerville@zionvistas> wrote in message
> news
>> How would you define a cook?
>>
>> I think it is someone who prepares food who:
>
> Prepares food as an expression of LOVE for the enjoyment of themselves and
> more importantly, the enjoyment of OTHERS.
>
>
> Dimitri

Reminds me of the lines in Bucket List where it says it's not important to
get joy in your life, but to give it.

Steve

"Sheldon"
"Pete C." > wrote:
> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> > > How would you define a cook?
>
> > > I think it is someone who prepares food who:
> > > Steve
>
> > Nice attributes, but I don't think most are needed.
>
> > There are people that do have all of the attributes you describe and
> > have a> > genuine interest in learning and expanding the culinary
> > experience. ?I don't> > know what title to give them, but cook, IMO, is
> > not the right one.
>
> Chef vs. cook perhaps? Chef developing recipes vs. cook following them?-
> Hide quoted text -

>Chefs are more involved with the >economics and management of a
>kitchen, chefs are typically not >very cood cooks.

Since a chef must have come up successfully through all the stages of the
kitchen, your comment reflects your prejudice. Chefs are not elected. They
are the "chief" because they earned their ways to the top. Or do you think
Thomas Keller, Greg Achatz, etc. were born with a toque and a whisk?

On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 15:45:29 -0500, Goomba wrote:

> SteveB wrote:
>> How would you define a cook?
>>
>> I think it is someone who prepares food who:
>>
>> will try new things.
>> will accept failure.
>> is adventurous.
>> is flexible.
>> is creative.
>>
>> I don't think it's someone who's been to school and can cook a creme brule.
>>
>> Steve
>
> Many open cans and call that cooking.
> Who am I to dispute that?
> That's preparing food, per your statement.

maybe 'how would you define a good cook' would be a better question.

your pal,
blake

On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 15:48:59 -0800 (PST), Sheldon wrote:

> SteveB wrote:
>>
>> How would you define a cook?
>>
>> I think it is someone who prepares food who:
>>
>> will try new things.
>> will accept failure.
>> is adventurous.
>> is flexible.
>> is creative.
>
> Those are personality traits that haven't a whit to do with cooking
> ability per se... those apply equally to any endeaver.
>
> Any pinhead can follow a recipe step by step, but that's not cooking,
> that's mimicry.
>
> To be considered a cook one must be born with the innate culinary
> talent the same as one is born with the innate musical talent to be a
> concert pianist... no number of lessons over any period of time will
> help either one iota were they not born with the innate ability.
>
> Cooking ability is not something one can learn... in fact most of the
> world's great cooks are totally illiterate, and in fact any attempt to
> make them literate enough to read recipes can only interfere with and
> subtract from their culinary talents.

what horseshit. no one is born with the ability to do anything besides
suck a teat. talent might be necessary, but you still have to learn
something to develop it.

blake

On Jan 1, 12:16�pm, blake murphy > wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 15:48:59 -0800 (PST), Sheldon wrote:
> > SteveB wrote:
>
> >> How would you define a cook?
>
> >> I think it is someone who prepares food who:
>
> >> will try new things.
> >> will accept failure.
> >> is adventurous.
> >> is flexible.
> >> is creative.
>
> > Those are personality traits that haven't a whit to do with cooking
> > ability per se... those apply equally to any endeaver.
>
> > Any pinhead can follow a recipe step by step, but that's not cooking,
> > that's mimicry.
>
> > To be considered a cook one must be born with the innate culinary
> > talent the same as one is born with the innate musical talent to be a
> > concert pianist... no number of lessons over any period of time will
> > help either one iota were they not born with the innate ability.
>
> > Cooking ability is not something one can learn... in fact most of the
> > world's great cooks are totally illiterate, and in fact any attempt to
> > make them literate enough to read recipes can only interfere with and
> > subtract from their culinary talents.
>
> what horseshit. �no one is born with the ability to do anything besides
> suck a teat. �talent might be necessary, but you still have to learn
> something to develop it.

Self proof why you're an imbecile.

On Dec 31 2008, 3:46*pm, "SteveB" <toquerville@zionvistas> wrote:
> How would you define a cook?
>
> I think it is someone who prepares food who:
>
> will try new things.
> will accept failure.
> is adventurous.
> is flexible.
> is creative.
>
> I don't think it's someone who's been to school and can cook a creme brule.
>
> Steve

A cook is someone who has completed a cook's apprenticeship. A cook
can also be someone who knows how to cook and makes whatever he/she
makes tasty.

On Dec 31 2008, 5:49�pm, Goomba > wrote:
> Pete C. wrote:
> > Chef vs. cook perhaps? Chef developing recipes vs. cook following them?
>
> Doesn't "Chef" denote the one that runs the entire kitchen?

Not necessarily... in large kitchens there is typically a chef in
charge of each individual area. In smaller kitchens there would be a
head chef that manages the entire operation. With very small kithens,
such as a neighborhood restaurant there would be a head cook who cooks
and manages the entire operation. A chef is the one primarilly in
charge of the economic/financial and management aspects of running a
kitchen, which includes procuring supplies/ingredients, making up
menus, hiring/firing, and directing personel. Most chefs are capable
cooks but few are expert... they don't need to be a skilled cook to
run the establishment. Typically chefs obtain a college degree in
culinary management... the duties of a chef are more like those of a
comptroller than a line cook. In lager kitchens the chef (chief)
rarely if ever does any cooking. Many in small kitchens, especially
restaurant owners, call themselves chefs, not. Anyone can own a
restaurant, most restaurants are owned by someone who can't cook a
lick, and in fact rarely if ever is present... they hire a degreed
chef to run the show... someone needs to know how to price out a menu,
they don't need to know how to cook. Tyically the best cooks are
uneducated... cooking is an artform, something one can perfect but not
something one can learn.

On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 17:16:01 GMT, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 15:48:59 -0800 (PST), Sheldon wrote:
>
>> SteveB wrote:
>>>
>>> How would you define a cook?
>>>
>>> I think it is someone who prepares food who:
>>>
>>> will try new things.
>>> will accept failure.
>>> is adventurous.
>>> is flexible.
>>> is creative.
>>
>> Those are personality traits that haven't a whit to do with cooking
>> ability per se... those apply equally to any endeaver.
>>
>> Any pinhead can follow a recipe step by step, but that's not cooking,
>> that's mimicry.
>>
>> To be considered a cook one must be born with the innate culinary
>> talent the same as one is born with the innate musical talent to be a
>> concert pianist... no number of lessons over any period of time will
>> help either one iota were they not born with the innate ability.
>>
>> Cooking ability is not something one can learn... in fact most of the
>> world's great cooks are totally illiterate, and in fact any attempt to
>> make them literate enough to read recipes can only interfere with and
>> subtract from their culinary talents.
>
>what horseshit. no one is born with the ability to do anything besides
>suck a teat. talent might be necessary, but you still have to learn
>something to develop it.

Thanks for quoting, Blake. Some of these gems are priceless. ROFL!

Carol

--
Change JamesBond to his agent number to reply.

"Pete C." wrote:
> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
> > "SteveB" <toquerville@zionvistas> wrote in message
> >news
> > > How would you define a cook?
>
> > > I think it is someone who prepares food who:
>
> > > will try new things.
> > > will accept failure.
> > > is adventurous.
> > > is flexible.
> > > is creative.
>
> > > I don't think it's someone who's been to school and can cook a creme
> > > brule.
>
> > > Steve
>
> > Nice attributes, but I don't think most are needed. �I know plenty of people
> > that cook out of necessity. �I know people that accepted a job as "cook" in
> > a restaurant and did the chores but did not give a damn about trying
> > anything new, cared not about failure, and were not at all creative or
> > adventurous. �As for flexibility, only to the point that when the boss asked
> > "can you work next Wednesday?" they would say yes. �They cooked food for the
> > customers, got paid, went home and ordered pizza. �They still carried the
> > title "cook"
>
> > There are people that do have all of the attributes you describe and have a
> > genuine interest in learning and expanding the culinary experience. �I don't
> > know what title to give them, but cook, IMO, is not the right one.
>
> Chef vs. cook perhaps? Chef developing recipes vs. cook following them?

Cooks develop recipes, chefs have nothing to do with recipes other
than pricing out ingredients and curtailing the use of particular
pricey items... the chef's responsiblity is to develop a list of
suppliers, to negotiate prices, to dictate portion size, and to make
substitutions such as powdered milk and eggs for fresh... in reality
the chef is the scrooge of the kitchen, a chef's main responsibility
is to manage the operation so that the establishment turns a profit.
A chef needs to have a good head for business, not cooking... cooking
doesn't require a lot of thinking, it's a talent, like a
cabinetmaker... any pinhead can be taught to frame houses but to be a
cabinetmaker one needs to be born with the innate ability... it's like
no one taught Micheal Angelo how to paint.. a cook is like Micheal
Angelo, a chef is like the Pope.

On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 10:09:09 +0100, "Giusi" >
wrote:

>"Sheldon"
>"Pete C." > wrote:
>> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>> > > How would you define a cook?
>>
>> > > I think it is someone who prepares food who:
>> > > Steve
>>
>> > Nice attributes, but I don't think most are needed.
>>
>> > There are people that do have all of the attributes you describe and
>> > have a> > genuine interest in learning and expanding the culinary
>> > experience. ?I don't> > know what title to give them, but cook, IMO, is
>> > not the right one.
>>
>> Chef vs. cook perhaps? Chef developing recipes vs. cook following them?-
>> Hide quoted text -
>
>>Chefs are more involved with the >economics and management of a
>>kitchen, chefs are typically not >very cood cooks.
>
>Since a chef must have come up successfully through all the stages of the
>kitchen, your comment reflects your prejudice. Chefs are not elected. They
>are the "chief" because they earned their ways to the top. Or do you think
>Thomas Keller, Greg Achatz, etc. were born with a toque and a whisk?
>
It was a difficult delivery in both cases, I'd hazard.
--

modom

On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:13:25 -0500, Dave Smith
> fired up random neurons and
synapses to opine:

>Pete C. wrote:
>
>
>>> There are people that do have all of the attributes you describe and have a
>>> genuine interest in learning and expanding the culinary experience. I don't
>>> know what title to give them, but cook, IMO, is not the right one.
>>
>> Chef vs. cook perhaps? Chef developing recipes vs. cook following them?
>
>I certainly do not consider myself a chef, but I rarely follow recipes,
>except when baking. Even when I use a recipe I don't always follow it
>exactly.

I like to call myself a "cook hobbyist." I'm certainly not a
professional, but I like to think I cook a few notches above what most
folks attempt.

Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd

--

"If the soup had been as hot as the claret, if the claret had been as
old as the bird, and if the bird's breasts had been as full as the
waitress's, it would have been a very good dinner."

- Duncan Hines

To reply, replace "meatloaf" with "cox"

On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 09:31:22 -0800 (PST), Sheldon wrote:

> On Jan 1, 12:16�pm, blake murphy > wrote:
>> On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 15:48:59 -0800 (PST), Sheldon wrote:
>>> SteveB wrote:
>>
>>>> How would you define a cook?
>>
>>>> I think it is someone who prepares food who:
>>
>>>> will try new things.
>>>> will accept failure.
>>>> is adventurous.
>>>> is flexible.
>>>> is creative.
>>
>>> Those are personality traits that haven't a whit to do with cooking
>>> ability per se... those apply equally to any endeaver.
>>
>>> Any pinhead can follow a recipe step by step, but that's not cooking,
>>> that's mimicry.
>>
>>> To be considered a cook one must be born with the innate culinary
>>> talent the same as one is born with the innate musical talent to be a
>>> concert pianist... no number of lessons over any period of time will
>>> help either one iota were they not born with the innate ability.
>>
>>> Cooking ability is not something one can learn... in fact most of the
>>> world's great cooks are totally illiterate, and in fact any attempt to
>>> make them literate enough to read recipes can only interfere with and
>>> subtract from their culinary talents.
>>
>> what horseshit. �no one is born with the ability to do anything besides
>> suck a teat. �talent might be necessary, but you still have to learn
>> something to develop it.
>
> Self proof why you're an imbecile.

keep telling yourself that. no one else will believe it, though.

blake