Crash > wrote:

> what is Alfredo sauce? Dams says it dont exist.. fact or fiction?

It is the same thing as Stroganoff sauce. They are identical. Now it
should be easy to decide whether Damsel is right or nor.

Victor

Felice Friese > wrote:

> But she's right, Crash, there is no such animal as Alfredo SAUCE. Fettucini
> Alfredo, or any pasta Alfredo, is simply pasta dressed with butter and
> Parmesan cheese. No sauce, no cream, no eggs, no nothing else.

So verrrry true. Here is what I posted on the matter some years ago:

<http://groups.google.com/group/rec.food.cooking/msg/f26ec13c0a679021?hl=en&>.

Victor

"Victor Sack" in .. .
> Felice Friese > wrote:
>
>> But she's right, Crash, there is no such animal as Alfredo SAUCE.
>> ...
>
> So verrrry true. Here is what I posted on the matter some years ago:
>
> <http://groups.google.com/group/rec.food.cooking/msg/f26ec13c0a679021?hl=en&>.


Thanks.

(Today Alfredo "sauce," tomorrow pesto "sauce.")

-- Max

(Victor Sack) said:

> Crash > wrote:
>
> > what is Alfredo sauce? Dams says it dont exist.. fact or fiction?
>
> It is the same thing as Stroganoff sauce. They are identical. Now it
> should be easy to decide whether Damsel is right or nor.

DAMSEL IS ALWAYS RIGHT!

That being said, we went out to eat this afternoon, and Fettucini Alfredo
was on the menu! I was so excited! I told Crash he should order that for
his lunch. He declined. It seems he doesn't like mixed vegetables and
chicken in his F.A. Go figure!

Carol

On 2005-07-29, Victor Sack > wrote:
> Felice Friese > wrote:
>
>> But she's right, Crash, there is no such animal as Alfredo SAUCE. Fettucini
>> Alfredo, or any pasta Alfredo, is simply pasta dressed with butter and
>> Parmesan cheese. No sauce, no cream, no eggs, no nothing else.
>
> So verrrry true. Here is what I posted on the matter some years ago:

Hogswallop! While I appreciate the history lesson, Victor, I refuse
to buy into Felice's narrow definition of what constitutes a sauce.
Cranberry sauce and apple sauce have none of the above ingredients,
yet so illustrious a chef as Escoffier includes them in his list of
sauces. The same for what we call a vinaigrette, also known as a
ravigote sauce. While I don't find any pure non-flour based reduction
sauces in Escoffier's list (I have only his abbreviated book), I think
we can all agree that a simple wine/butter reduction sauce is still a
sauce. Cooking evolves and so do terms and definitions.

Just for this thread I cooked up this alleged none-sauce dish,
Fettucini Alfredo, using only butter and cheese (and the residual
water on the pasta). Room temp butter, fresh grated pecorino, and hot
fettucini. I'll tell you what ...when done properly the resulting
dish looks and tastes like pasta with a sauce. The way I look at it,
if it looks like a sauce and taste like a sauce, I'm going to call it
a sauce! Time to recarve the tablets.

nb

On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 16:29:14 -0700, Max Hauser wrote:
>
> (Today Alfredo "sauce," tomorrow pesto "sauce.")
>
Why call it "sauce" in the first place?

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 16:29:14 -0700, Max Hauser wrote:
>>
>> (Today Alfredo "sauce," tomorrow pesto "sauce.")
>>
> Why call it "sauce" in the first place?

Indeed, what's in a name? Let us all sit down together and share some
Fettuccini Alfredo, and NB can think his has a sauce while I can think mine
has just butter and cheese. OK, NB?

Felice

"Damsel" > wrote in message
...
> (Victor Sack) said:
>
>> Crash > wrote:
>>
>> > what is Alfredo sauce? Dams says it dont exist.. fact or fiction?
>>
>> It is the same thing as Stroganoff sauce. They are identical. Now it
>> should be easy to decide whether Damsel is right or nor.
>
> DAMSEL IS ALWAYS RIGHT!
>
> That being said, we went out to eat this afternoon, and Fettucini Alfredo
> was on the menu! I was so excited! I told Crash he should order that for
> his lunch. He declined. It seems he doesn't like mixed vegetables and
> chicken in his F.A. Go figure!
>
> Carol

Vegetables and chicken in F.A.? I'm staying out of this thread!

Felice

"Felice Friese" > said:

> "Damsel" > wrote in message
> ...
> > (Victor Sack) said:
> >
> >> Crash > wrote:
> >>
> >> > what is Alfredo sauce? Dams says it dont exist.. fact or fiction?
> >>
> >> It is the same thing as Stroganoff sauce. They are identical. Now it
> >> should be easy to decide whether Damsel is right or nor.
> >
> > DAMSEL IS ALWAYS RIGHT!
> >
> > That being said, we went out to eat this afternoon, and Fettucini Alfredo
> > was on the menu! I was so excited! I told Crash he should order that for
> > his lunch. He declined. It seems he doesn't like mixed vegetables and
> > chicken in his F.A. Go figure!
>
> Vegetables and chicken in F.A.? I'm staying out of this thread!

LOL! See for yourself:
http://www.timberlodgesteakhouse.com/menu.htm

"Fettuccini Alfredo
Fettuccini served with our special alfredo sauce and fresh vegetables
($8.99)
--With Broiled Chicken Breast ($10.99) "

I've had the stuff with veggies in restaurants. I like it, but I don't
know any better.

Carol

"sf" in :
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 16:29:14 -0700, Max Hauser wrote:
>>
>> (Today Alfredo "sauce," tomorrow pesto "sauce.")
>>
> Why call it "sauce" in the first place?

Yes, exactly.

"Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri 29 Jul 2005 02:20:38p, wrote in
> rec.food.cooking:
>
>> So hard sauce is not a sauce and should not be called "hard sauce?"
>> Or
>> is it not a sauce, but it's ok to call it "hard sauce?" Or is it a
>> sauce after all?
>>
>> -bwg
>>
>>
>
> It's "hard" to tell. :-)

LOL

Damsel wrote:
> "Felice Friese" > said:
>
>> "Damsel" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> (Victor Sack) said:
>>>
>>>> Crash > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> what is Alfredo sauce? Dams says it dont exist.. fact or fiction?
>>>>
>>>> It is the same thing as Stroganoff sauce. They are identical.
>>>> Now it should be easy to decide whether Damsel is right or nor.
>>>
>>> DAMSEL IS ALWAYS RIGHT!
>>>
>>> That being said, we went out to eat this afternoon, and Fettucini
>>> Alfredo was on the menu! I was so excited! I told Crash he should
>>> order that for his lunch. He declined. It seems he doesn't like
>>> mixed vegetables and chicken in his F.A. Go figure!
>>
>> Vegetables and chicken in F.A.? I'm staying out of this thread!
>
> LOL! See for yourself:
> http://www.timberlodgesteakhouse.com/menu.htm
>
> "Fettuccini Alfredo
> Fettuccini served with our special alfredo sauce and fresh vegetables
> ($8.99)
> --With Broiled Chicken Breast ($10.99) "
>
> I've had the stuff with veggies in restaurants. I like it, but I
> don't
> know any better.
>
> Carol

I'd call that more of a Primavera than an Alfredo. But that's just me

Jill

"Felice Friese" & notbob

<snip>
>>
>> ...add butter to boiling hot pasta, liquid reduces by evaporation.
>>
>> Hmmm.... now that I think about it, I was wrong in the first place.
>> Afredo sauce does, in fact, include a starch (pasta scum) and an oil
>> and a liquid. That, no matter how you look at it, is a sauce.
>>
>> nb
>
> OK, you just made a sauce. But when you pour it onto fettuccine, don't
> call it Fettuccine Alfredo. Call it Fettucine Notbob.
> Sauces POUR. Butter and cheese DO NOT POUR; they stick to the fettuccine
> like library paste but taste a whole lot better.
>
> Felice
>
> Pasta scum? Yuk! ======================

But...but...they do pour - well, until they/it sticks to the pasta. It just
depends upon how much liquid you allow to evaporate.

Cyndi

Rick & Cyndi wrote:
> "Felice Friese" & notbob
>
> <snip>
>
>>>...add butter to boiling hot pasta, liquid reduces by evaporation.
>>>
>>>Hmmm.... now that I think about it, I was wrong in the first place.
>>>Afredo sauce does, in fact, include a starch (pasta scum) and an oil
>>>and a liquid. That, no matter how you look at it, is a sauce.
>>>
>>>nb
>>
>>OK, you just made a sauce. But when you pour it onto fettuccine, don't
>>call it Fettuccine Alfredo. Call it Fettucine Notbob.
>>Sauces POUR. Butter and cheese DO NOT POUR; they stick to the fettuccine
>>like library paste but taste a whole lot better.
>>
>>Felice
>>
>>Pasta scum? Yuk! ======================
>
>
> But...but...they do pour - well, until they/it sticks to the pasta. It just
> depends upon how much liquid you allow to evaporate.

Defining sauce means more than listing ingredients; the process is
consequential. But in the case of Alfredo, it's ingredients added to hot
pasta individually. There's no separate culinary process. Stuff is added
to hot pasta, separately, not combined in advance and cooked together.

Putting ketchup on fries, in silly example, fulfills the same criteria
as the statement that the dish would: "include a starch (potato starch)
and an oil and a liquid. That, no matter how you look at it, is a
sauce." Nah.

Pastorio

On 2005-07-30, Bob (this one) > wrote:

>
> Putting ketchup on fries, in silly example, fulfills the same criteria

Exactly! Hot sauce, chili sauce, tartar sauce, etc.... is not ketchup
also a sauce? The problem here is you folks insist on narrowing
"sauce" down to some sort of elitist French roux concoction. Nah.

nb

"Crash" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> what is Alfredo sauce? Dams says it dont exist.. fact or fiction?
>
> Crash
I am sure most have answered by now. Dams is 100% correct. The "sauce" as you
call it is created in the bowl of hot noodles by adding some butter (specially
prepared) some of the pasta water and fresh cheese. The whole mess is mixed in
the bowl causing an unbelievable mixture.

She's right on the money.

Dimitri

On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 00:29:08 -0500, Damsel wrote:
>
> LOL! See for yourself:
> http://www.timberlodgesteakhouse.com/menu.htm
>
> "Fettuccini Alfredo
> Fettuccini served with our special alfredo sauce and fresh vegetables
> ($8.99)
> --With Broiled Chicken Breast ($10.99) "
>
> I've had the stuff with veggies in restaurants. I like it, but I don't
> know any better.
>
The vegetables are really IN it? I would have expected those
vegetables on the side.

sf > said:

> On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 00:29:08 -0500, Damsel wrote:
> >
> > LOL! See for yourself:
> > http://www.timberlodgesteakhouse.com/menu.htm
> >
> > "Fettuccini Alfredo
> > Fettuccini served with our special alfredo sauce and fresh vegetables
> > ($8.99)
> > --With Broiled Chicken Breast ($10.99) "
> >
> > I've had the stuff with veggies in restaurants. I like it, but I don't
> > know any better.
> >
> The vegetables are really IN it? I would have expected those
> vegetables on the side.

Nope, they're mixed right in. I first had this particular dish about 15
years ago. There are frozen veggie mixtures available with little "chips"
that melt to become ..... alfredo sauce. You just heat the stuff up and
mix it into your own pasta.

Carol

On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 14:07:56 -0500, Damsel wrote:

> There are frozen veggie mixtures available with little "chips"
> that melt to become ..... alfredo sauce. You just heat the stuff up and
> mix it into your own pasta.

No kidding? Where have I been?

sf > said:

> On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 14:07:56 -0500, Damsel wrote:
>
> > There are frozen veggie mixtures available with little "chips"
> > that melt to become ..... alfredo sauce. You just heat the stuff up and
> > mix it into your own pasta.
>
> No kidding? Where have I been?

Apparently, not in the frozen food aisle. LOL!

Carol, who unashamedly uses this stuff

sf wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 14:07:56 -0500, Damsel wrote:
<snip>

> No kidding? Where have I been?

Probably collecting Sandra Lee memorabilia.

On 30 Jul 2005 14:03:54 -0700, Kevin_Sheehy wrote:

>
> sf wrote:
> > On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 14:07:56 -0500, Damsel wrote:
> <snip>
>
> > No kidding? Where have I been?
>
> Probably collecting Sandra Lee memorabilia.

LOL... your reading comprehension needs a tune up.

notbob wrote:

> On 2005-07-30, Bob (this one) > wrote:
>
>>Putting ketchup on fries, in silly example, fulfills the same criteria
>
> Exactly! Hot sauce, chili sauce, tartar sauce, etc.... is not ketchup
> also a sauce?

None is really a sauce in the classic senses; tartar sauce the possible
exception as an augmentation of an emulsified sauce. Sauces are
thickened and seasoned, well-flavored liquids, by definition.

All are sauces to the marketing department. The map is not the territory.

> The problem here is you folks insist on narrowing
> "sauce" down to some sort of elitist French roux concoction. Nah.

You did miss the point. The spuds provide starch and moisture to make
the whole thing a "sauce" by your definition. But the obverse of your
point is that there are no definitions of what a sauce is, and anything
you point to and say "sauce" is now a sauce. Nah.

Sauces don't have to have roux to be sauces, but they can't be assembled
as Alfredo by adding a few ingredients to the food at the last minute.
That's "seasoning."

Pastorio

"Bob (this one)" in :
>
> ... But the obverse of your point

Reverse.

3rd pph of http://tinyurl.com/ckkb3 .



.... Freundlichen Grüßen! -- Max

Max Hauser wrote:

> "Bob (this one)" in :
>
>>... But the obverse of your point
>
> Reverse.

No, I said what I meant.

Webster's Unabridged:
Obverse, n.
in logic, the negative counterpart of an affirmative proposition, or the
affirmative counterpart of a negative; as "no one is infallible" is the
obverse of "everyone is fallible."

obvert, v.t.
in logic, to state the obverse of (a proposition)

> 3rd pph of http://tinyurl.com/ckkb3 .

Nice piece. Happy labels.

Pastorio

"Bob (this one)" in :
> Max Hauser wrote:
>
>> "Bob (this one)" in :
>>
>>>... But the obverse of your point
>>
>> Reverse.
>
> No, I said what I meant. [philos. def.]

Sorry, I mis-read the sense of it.

(Numbed by encounters lately with the "obverse" side of a question,
document, coin, ...)

Max Hauser wrote:
> "Bob (this one)" in :
>
>>Max Hauser wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Bob (this one)" in :
>>>
>>>
>>>>... But the obverse of your point
>>>
>>>Reverse.
>>
>>No, I said what I meant. [philos. def.]
>
>
> Sorry, I mis-read the sense of it.
>
> (Numbed by encounters lately with the "obverse" side of a question,
> document, coin, ...)

I understand that sort of numbness.

Some of my faves are "very unique" as though something that is
one-of-a-kind-can be compared to anything else. I also like "proactive"
because it means to, um, be active, first... sometimes. And the other
day, a woman call my program and asked what kid of "infrastructure" I
had in my kitchen. I'm afraid I offended the poor dear with sustained
laughter. Nobody has yet found an actual meaning for that word.

Pastorio

On 2005-07-31, Bob (this one) > wrote:


> None is really a sauce in the classic senses; tartar sauce the possible
> exception as an augmentation of an emulsified sauce. Sauces are
> thickened and seasoned, well-flavored liquids, by definition.

References, please. Who's definition determines the "classic senses"?
Why would tartar sauce qualify just because it's an emulsion, but not
ketchup?

> All are sauces to the marketing department. The map is not the territory.

Clever wordage signifying nothing. A-1 is a "thickened and seasoned,
well flavored liquid".

> point is that there are no definitions of what a sauce is, and anything
> you point to and say "sauce" is now a sauce. Nah.

Well, I must admit as we discuss this, the definition does seem to be
expanding.

> Sauces don't have to have roux to be sauces, but they can't be assembled
> as Alfredo by adding a few ingredients to the food at the last minute.
> That's "seasoning."

Then what do would you call the "thickened and seasoned, well flavored
liquid" that surrounds most Chinese food? It's not assembled
separately and "poured" (another dubious criteria) onto the dish.

It's been an interesting discussion, but my monitor is starting to
die. Keeps going unreadably fuzzy after it's been on for awhile.
Now, where'd I put that old 17 incher........ :\

nb

notbob wrote:

> On 2005-07-31, Bob (this one) > wrote:
>
>>None is really a sauce in the classic senses; tartar sauce the possible
>>exception as an augmentation of an emulsified sauce. Sauces are
>>thickened and seasoned, well-flavored liquids, by definition.
>
> References, please. Who's definition determines the "classic senses"?

Um, the classic definitions. Ingredients and techniques as agreed upon
by knowledgeable professional cooks. It's all a construct when you come
down to it. The practitioners agree on nomenclature and process and
ingredients and...

Over time, that changes as new technologies emerge. New ingredients.
Incompetent cooks on TV, boneheads who write cookbooks without knowing
any history or anything beyond their small worlds... Stuff like that
changes the definitions. Like "Alfredo sauce."

> Why would tartar sauce qualify just because it's an emulsion, but not
> ketchup?

Tartar sauce starts with mayonnaise, an emulsified sauce; things are
added for texture and flavor. Mayonnaise is something one can duplicate
at home because the techniques and ingredients are easily available.
Ketchup starts with high fructose corn syrup and takes it from there as
a product of the industrial revolution rather than the kitchen.
Commercial ketchups are virtually induplicable outside a lab or factory.

>>All are sauces to the marketing department. The map is not the territory.
>
> Clever wordage signifying nothing.

It signifies that the name isn't the reality. Hot "sauce" isn't a sauce
irrespective of what the label says.

> A-1 is a "thickened and seasoned, well flavored liquid".

Exactly; it is. But it, too, like ketchup, is induplicable in a kitchen
outside of a laboratory or factory. I'd say that if it takes a village
to build it, it's more a matter of physics and chemistry than cuisine.

>>point is that there are no definitions of what a sauce is, and anything
>>you point to and say "sauce" is now a sauce. Nah.
>
> Well, I must admit as we discuss this, the definition does seem to be
> expanding.
>
>>Sauces don't have to have roux to be sauces, but they can't be assembled
>>as Alfredo by adding a few ingredients to the food at the last minute.
>>That's "seasoning."
>
> Then what do would you call the "thickened and seasoned, well flavored
> liquid" that surrounds most Chinese food? It's not assembled
> separately and "poured" (another dubious criteria) onto the dish.

It sure is. It's cornstarch-based and added at the last minute to
thicken and coat. It's not even a gravy which is a thickened pan juice.
Condiments are added during cooking and it's all thickened at the last.
just before being taken off the heat.

Pastorio

On 2005-07-31, Bob (this one) > wrote:

> Over time, that changes as new technologies emerge. New ingredients.
> Incompetent cooks on TV, boneheads who write cookbooks without knowing
> any history or anything beyond their small worlds... Stuff like that
> changes the definitions. Like "Alfredo sauce."

That's what I said. Things change. Just because Alfredo is not
considered a sauce by traditionalists now doesn't mean it won't in the
future.

> Ketchup starts with high fructose corn syrup and takes it from there as

Now your just being silly to win an arguement. Anyone can make
homemade ketchup or hot sauce or bbq sauce.

> It signifies that the name isn't the reality. Hot "sauce" isn't a sauce
> irrespective of what the label says.

Again, you insist on taking a narrow European view. What is salsa
but a sauce in another language.

> > A-1 is a "thickened and seasoned, well flavored liquid".

> Exactly; it is. But it, too, like ketchup, is induplicable in a kitchen
> outside of a laboratory or factory. I'd say that if it takes a village
> to build it, it's more a matter of physics and chemistry than cuisine.

Fortunately for home cooks, you are not the sole arbiter of all things
edible.

> It sure is. It's cornstarch-based and added at the last minute to
> thicken and coat. It's not even a gravy which is a thickened pan juice.

Now you're just making stuff up. There is no thickened sauce added in
wok cooking. It's assembled in stages during the cooking process. Oil
first. Often the food, say meat, is dusted with corn starch prior to
adding. Later, a liquid is added or sweated from veggies. And to say
there is no meat juices is just wrong. Basic cooking physics is not
suspended just because Asian are flogging the fire. The sauce is
created during preparation ....WOW!.... just like Alfredo!!

That's ok, bob. I know I'm not going to convince you. You have that
old world view of what a sauce is and anything that doesn't fit is not
a sauce. Fine. Let's just agree we disagree.

nb

notbob > said:

> There is no thickened sauce added in
> wok cooking. It's assembled in stages during the cooking process. Oil
> first. Often the food, say meat, is dusted with corn starch prior to
> adding. Later, a liquid is added or sweated from veggies. And to say
> there is no meat juices is just wrong. Basic cooking physics is not
> suspended just because Asian are flogging the fire. The sauce is
> created during preparation ....WOW!.... just like Alfredo!!

That's it! I'm making beef and broccoli alfredo for dinner tomorrow night!
<EG>

Carol

On 2005-07-31, Damsel > wrote:

> That's it! I'm making beef and broccoli alfredo for dinner tomorrow night!
><EG>

Yeah! ....and what's the deal with the Chinese and cheese? What, they
never figured out how to milk anything?

nb

Dimitri wrote:
(snip)> I am sure most have answered by now. Dams is 100% correct. The
"sauce" as you
> call it is created in the bowl of hot noodles by adding some butter (specially
> prepared) some of the pasta water and fresh cheese. The whole mess is mixed in
> the bowl causing an unbelievable mixture.
>
> She's right on the money.
>
> Dimitri

Unbelievable is right! I simply can't stand the stuff - any of it
jarred, frozen, scratch . . . blech. Always tastes "pre-digested to me.
Lynn from Fargo
(coming back after a bout with a gastro bleed)

"Lynn from Fargo" > said:

> Unbelievable is right! I simply can't stand the stuff - any of it
> jarred, frozen, scratch . . . blech. Always tastes "pre-digested to me.

I don't like the jarred stuff - won't even attempt to eat it. But I like
the other variations I've tried.

> Lynn from Fargo
> (coming back after a bout with a gastro bleed)

You poor kid.
Were you still able to participate in the production?

Carol

Damsel wrote:

> That's it! I'm making beef and broccoli alfredo for dinner tomorrow
> night! <EG>

Come to think of it, sautéed broccoli and sirloin strips with butter and
Parmesan *does* sound pretty good. Maybe even with some cream added.

Bob

notbob wrote:
> On 2005-07-31, Bob (this one) > wrote:
>
>> Over time, that changes as new technologies emerge. New
>> ingredients. Incompetent cooks on TV, boneheads who write cookbooks
>> without knowing any history or anything beyond their small
>> worlds... Stuff like that changes the definitions. Like "Alfredo
>> sauce."
>
> That's what I said. Things change. Just because Alfredo is not
> considered a sauce by traditionalists now doesn't mean it won't in
> the future.

Alfredo, as has been recounted here many times, is the addition of
butter and parmesan cheese to cooked pasta. That's Alfredo. If people
want to make stuff in a pan and dump it on pasta, that still doesn't
necessarily make it a sauce. Does putting butter on steamed broccoli
qualify it as "butter sauce?"

>> Ketchup starts with high fructose corn syrup and takes it from
>> there as
>
> Now your just being silly to win an arguement. Anyone can make
> homemade ketchup or hot sauce or bbq sauce.
>
>
>> It signifies that the name isn't the reality. Hot "sauce" isn't a
>> sauce irrespective of what the label says.
>
> Again, you insist on taking a narrow European view. What is salsa
> but a sauce in another language.

And would you call the chunky tomato-based raw vegetable "salsa" a sauce?

>>> A-1 is a "thickened and seasoned, well flavored liquid".
>
>> Exactly; it is. But it, too, like ketchup, is induplicable in a
>> kitchen outside of a laboratory or factory. I'd say that if it
>> takes a village to build it, it's more a matter of physics and
>> chemistry than cuisine.
>
> Fortunately for home cooks, you are not the sole arbiter of all
> things edible.

non sequitur.

>> It sure is. It's cornstarch-based and added at the last minute to
>> thicken and coat. It's not even a gravy which is a thickened pan
>> juice.
>
> Now you're just making stuff up.

Please don't pull that condescending bullshit with me. I'm making
nothing up.

> There is no thickened sauce added in wok cooking.

Really? There can be and often is. But what I said was that typically,
the thickened liquid happens at the very end with a slurry added. A
slurry is a liquid and a starch.

> It's assembled in stages during the cooking process.

Sometimes it is. Mostly it isn't. We're still talking about thickened
liquids in lots of Chinese foods.

> Oil first. Often the food, say
> meat, is dusted with corn starch prior to adding.

But usually, it's not.

> Later, a liquid is added or sweated from veggies. And to say there
> is no meat juices is just wrong.

I didn't say any such thing. And woks are frying very hot. Any liquid
released from veggies will be steam pretty quickly. Likewise meat
juices. Stir frying happens at upwards of 400°F surface temp in a wok.
Not much juice can survive that.

> Basic cooking physics is not
> suspended just because Asian are flogging the fire. The sauce is
> created during preparation ....WOW!.... just like Alfredo!!

The point is that doing that isn't making a sauce. Cornstarch slurries
are *routinely* added at the end of cooking in a wok. The best you can
call that is a gravy. As for it being done in stages, that defines pan
preparation, not a sauce.

I'm coming to the sense that any liquid in a finished dish is what you
mean by a sauce. Or anything that anyone calls "sauce" is a sauce.
Correct me if that's not what you're saying. If it is, I can't accept
that because it's so open as to foreclose nothing. A tablespoon of
yogurt dumped into a saute comprises a sauce by the terms you seem to be
offering.

Pastorio

"Bob (this one)" > wrote in message
...
> notbob wrote:
>> On 2005-07-31, Bob (this one) > wrote:
>>
>>> Over time, that changes as new technologies emerge. New ingredients.
>>> Incompetent cooks on TV, boneheads who write cookbooks
>>> without knowing any history or anything beyond their small worlds...
>>> Stuff like that changes the definitions. Like "Alfredo sauce."
>>
>> That's what I said. Things change. Just because Alfredo is not
>> considered a sauce by traditionalists now doesn't mean it won't in the
>> future.
>
> Alfredo, as has been recounted here many times, is the addition of
> butter and parmesan cheese to cooked pasta. That's Alfredo. If people
> want to make stuff in a pan and dump it on pasta, that still doesn't
> necessarily make it a sauce. Does putting butter on steamed broccoli
> qualify it as "butter sauce?"
>
>>> Ketchup starts with high fructose corn syrup and takes it from there as
>>
>> Now your just being silly to win an arguement. Anyone can make homemade
>> ketchup or hot sauce or bbq sauce.
>>
>>
>>> It signifies that the name isn't the reality. Hot "sauce" isn't a sauce
>>> irrespective of what the label says.
>>
>> Again, you insist on taking a narrow European view. What is salsa but a
>> sauce in another language.
>
> And would you call the chunky tomato-based raw vegetable "salsa" a sauce?
>
>>>> A-1 is a "thickened and seasoned, well flavored liquid".
>>
>>> Exactly; it is. But it, too, like ketchup, is induplicable in a kitchen
>>> outside of a laboratory or factory. I'd say that if it takes a village
>>> to build it, it's more a matter of physics and chemistry than cuisine.
>>
>> Fortunately for home cooks, you are not the sole arbiter of all things
>> edible.
>
> non sequitur.
>
>>> It sure is. It's cornstarch-based and added at the last minute to
>>> thicken and coat. It's not even a gravy which is a thickened pan juice.
>>
>> Now you're just making stuff up.
>
> Please don't pull that condescending bullshit with me. I'm making
> nothing up.
>
>> There is no thickened sauce added in wok cooking.
>
> Really? There can be and often is. But what I said was that typically,
> the thickened liquid happens at the very end with a slurry added. A slurry
> is a liquid and a starch.
>
>> It's assembled in stages during the cooking process.
>
> Sometimes it is. Mostly it isn't. We're still talking about thickened
> liquids in lots of Chinese foods.
>
> > Oil first. Often the food, say
>> meat, is dusted with corn starch prior to adding.
>
> But usually, it's not.
>
>> Later, a liquid is added or sweated from veggies. And to say there
>> is no meat juices is just wrong.
>
> I didn't say any such thing. And woks are frying very hot. Any liquid
> released from veggies will be steam pretty quickly. Likewise meat juices.
> Stir frying happens at upwards of 400°F surface temp in a wok. Not much
> juice can survive that.
>
> > Basic cooking physics is not
>> suspended just because Asian are flogging the fire. The sauce is
>> created during preparation ....WOW!.... just like Alfredo!!
>
> The point is that doing that isn't making a sauce. Cornstarch slurries
> are *routinely* added at the end of cooking in a wok. The best you can
> call that is a gravy. As for it being done in stages, that defines pan
> preparation, not a sauce.
>
> I'm coming to the sense that any liquid in a finished dish is what you
> mean by a sauce. Or anything that anyone calls "sauce" is a sauce. Correct
> me if that's not what you're saying. If it is, I can't accept that because
> it's so open as to foreclose nothing. A tablespoon of yogurt dumped into a
> saute comprises a sauce by the terms you seem to be offering.
>
> Pastorio

I've not been reading this thread diligently, but now that it seems to be
coming to a close and your definition well-defined by the last paragraph, I
want to ask, if you were writing a recipe that included a tablespoon of
yogurt at the end, would you say, spoon the 'liquid' over the ..." or would
you say spoon the 'sauce' over the ...
In my mind it is little more than semantics, that we sometimes use the word
'sauce' for liquid; and everyone reading the recipe would know what the
writer means.
However, if there were a separate part of the recipe that indicated you were
assembling ingredients to make a sauce; that indeed would be a sauce.
I see no real problem with using the word sauce to indicate 'liquid
ingredient.' Hopefully I would not be confused that there were no followup
recipe for a particular sauce to pour over the dish.
Dee Dee

Dee Randall wrote:

> I've not been reading this thread diligently, but now that it seems to be
> coming to a close and your definition well-defined by the last paragraph, I
> want to ask, if you were writing a recipe that included a tablespoon of
> yogurt at the end, would you say, spoon the 'liquid' over the ..." or would
> you say spoon the 'sauce' over the ...

I'd say "add the yogurt..."

What most people don't realize is that culinary terms are technical
terms. They have meanings already and playing fast and loose with them,
using them to try to mean something else, devalues them for their real
application.

> In my mind it is little more than semantics, that we sometimes use the word
> 'sauce' for liquid; and everyone reading the recipe would know what the
> writer means.

And if the computer manual said to plug it in to get "juice" from the
wall, most people would know what's meant. But what's wrong with using
the actual name or term to begin with?

> However, if there were a separate part of the recipe that indicated you were
> assembling ingredients to make a sauce; that indeed would be a sauce.
> I see no real problem with using the word sauce to indicate 'liquid
> ingredient.'

Therein, of course, is the crux of the discussion. What's wrong with
using the name of the ingredient? Why make it less accurate? Why
introduce a needless term?

> Hopefully I would not be confused

And to forestall that, just use the name of the ingredient and there
won;'t be confusion.

A guy told me long ago, don't write it so they *can* understand it;
write it so they *can't* misunderstand it. Makes life easier and more
accurate. Reduces guesswork and error potential.

> that there were no followup
> recipe for a particular sauce to pour over the dish.

My way reduces the "hopefully" part. Fewer mistakes.

Pastorio

"Bob (this one)" > wrote in message
...
> Dee Randall wrote:
>
>> I've not been reading this thread diligently, but now that it seems to be
>> coming to a close and your definition well-defined by the last paragraph,
>> I want to ask, if you were writing a recipe that included a tablespoon of
>> yogurt at the end, would you say, spoon the 'liquid' over the ..." or
>> would you say spoon the 'sauce' over the ...
>
> I'd say "add the yogurt..."
>
> What most people don't realize is that culinary terms are technical terms.
> They have meanings already and playing fast and loose with them, using
> them to try to mean something else, devalues them for their real
> application.
>
>> In my mind it is little more than semantics, that we sometimes use the
>> word 'sauce' for liquid; and everyone reading the recipe would know what
>> the writer means.
>
> And if the computer manual said to plug it in to get "juice" from the
> wall, most people would know what's meant. But what's wrong with using the
> actual name or term to begin with?
>
>> However, if there were a separate part of the recipe that indicated you
>> were assembling ingredients to make a sauce; that indeed would be a
>> sauce.
>> I see no real problem with using the word sauce to indicate 'liquid
>> ingredient.'
>
> Therein, of course, is the crux of the discussion. What's wrong with using
> the name of the ingredient? Why make it less accurate? Why introduce a
> needless term?
>
> > Hopefully I would not be confused
>
> And to forestall that, just use the name of the ingredient and there
> won;'t be confusion.
>
> A guy told me long ago, don't write it so they *can* understand it; write
> it so they *can't* misunderstand it. Makes life easier and more accurate.
> Reduces guesswork and error potential.
>
>> that there were no followup recipe for a particular sauce to pour over
>> the dish.
>
> My way reduces the "hopefully" part. Fewer mistakes.
>
> Pastorio

****

Oh, my, my question was confusing.
I wrote:
I
>> ".... want to ask, if you were writing a recipe that included a
>> tablespoon of yogurt at the end, would you say, spoon the 'liquid' over
>> the ..." or would you say spoon the 'sauce' over the ...
and your answer was:
> I'd say "add the yogurt..."

I should've included one more word: chicken (I was leaving that up to one's
own finished product)

So my question is:
If you were writing a recipe that included a tablespoon of yogurt at the
end, and there was a liquid+the yogurt still in the pan and when the chicken
was plated, would you say, 'spoon the liquid over the chicken" or would you
say, 'spoon the sauce' over the chicken'?

And your answer IS????
You would say, spoon the liquid over the chicken? Right? Or perhaps, spoon
the broth over the chicken? But never, spoon the sauce over the chicken?

If this is the case, and you are being technical in culinary terms, I would
agree that you wouldn't use, 'spoon the sauce' over the chicken. I suppose
I WOULD/MIGHT be looking for the 'sauce' as an integral part of this dish.
Dee Dee

On 2005-08-01, Bob (this one) > wrote:
>
> I'm coming to the sense that any liquid in a finished dish is what you
> mean by a sauce. Or anything that anyone calls "sauce" is a sauce.
> Correct me if that's not what you're saying. If it is, I can't accept
> that because it's so open as to foreclose nothing. A tablespoon of
> yogurt dumped into a saute comprises a sauce by the terms you seem to be
> offering.

And so wine in a saute IS a sauce, but yogurt, NO. Hear that, South
East Asia!? You've screwed-the-pooch, too!

To state the obverse, anything the French don't accept as a sauce you
also don't accept. A sauce must be a fat/starch roux and a well
seasoned liquid and must be prepared in a saucier pan, be pourable,
and made only by a single person located away from a bottling plant.
Nothing else can be a sauce. Oh, except an emulsion. We'll let that
one in. Oh, and don't forget a wine reduction with butter. We'll
allow that one, too. BUT! ...nothing else. No one can use the term
sauce for anything else. Not even gravy. (Well, yes, we know it's
the exact same thing, but, sacre bleu!, you can't call it a sauce! We
have spoken.) Yep, screw the Chinese and the Mexicans and the Italians
and the Indians, the term sauce is taken! Neener, neener.

So, you are correct. I take an improper generic world view of sauces
and you take the proper French view. So be it. From now on I will
endeavor to use the correct non-French "term", such as salsa and curry
and Alfredo and "icky commercial stuff in a bottle" and we'll all be
happy again. BTW, what's the correct term for the incorrectly named,
"dipping sauce"? Dipping juice? Dipping liquid?.....

notsauced