The Scobleizer, Tech, and Cooking from Scratch

Posted on 20 February 2008 under Convenience Foods, Food History, Food In The News, Food Philosophy, Slow Food, Software, Tech Blogs | 1 Comment

I’ve been “into” computers since late 1976, learning multiple programming languages since then and, for about the past ten years or so, meeting lots of great tech folks around the internet. I’ve previously mentioned tech blogger Robert Scoble, who’s become rather well-known among geeks and techies for various reasons. I haven’t checked Robert’s blog in about a week or so, so it was interesting this morning to find him mentioned on Slashdot (Serious Eats for techies). It seems last week Robert blogged on obselete technical (and other) skills. This blog entry of his has become so popular another individual has now created a Wiki on the subject.

If you go back to Robert’s original post you’ll see in comment 18 Karim included “cooking food from ’scratch’”. In comment 32 Wreck posted a rebuttal:

Cooking from scratch will never die. It’s actually coming back into fashion in a major way. There are more and more cooking shows as a testament to this. Only this generation eats everything out of a microwave-frendly bag. Cooking is a skill.

Commenter 50, Gerald Buckley, then argues against this:

@Wreck (#32)… actually, cooking from scratch is on the decline. A recent “Progressive Grocer” article noted 2007 was the first year better than 50% of all dining was done “out” … Cooking from scratch is on the decline in the US no matter how badly all the cooking shows want it to the contrary. It’s a great way for the consumer packaged goods manufacturers to get their products in front of you …

This is followed up by other arguments beginning at comment 57. Some excerpts:

The vast majority of the world still cooks from scratch … There is no reason families cannot enjoy cooking together and have family time at the table. The lion’s share of the planet’s people remain focused on the family and meals. Tell a Greek to nuke their food and they’ll look at you like you’re nuts. Same goes for the Chinese. Even the richest Chinese and Japanese still largely prepare steamed rice and veggies/meat/fish on a daily basis … The US has become nothing more than a shell of what it once was … Family means less and less to the average person now … Ever been to Europe, especially France, Greece, Spain, Portugal, where they spend copious amounts of time at the table talking, eating, drinking. That’s the ways it’s supposed to be

Robert gets involved shortly after this. It’s all a very interesting read. 

The question then becomes this; Who’s right?

Backing up for a second, let’s go back to Karim’s original suggestion; that “cooking food from ’scratch’” is an obsolete or dying skill.

What do we really mean by “cooking food from ’scratch’”?

Backing up even further, what is meant by “cooking”?

According to the American Heritage dictionary, the word “cook” means:
1. To prepare food for eating by applying heat.
2. To undergo application of heat especially for the purpose of later ingestion.

There are other definitions, for things such as “cooking the books” and “What’s cooking, dude?”, but those definitions certainly don’t work here.

One of the biggest issues to come about recently is the reality that television cooks and chefs don’t always cook from what some feel is ”scratch”. They see a can of mushroom soup, some tomato paste, maybe some store-bought shredded cheese, or even, God forbid, a sauce base, and these viewers instantly believe the folks they’re watching have no business cooking on television whatsoever.

Here’s my answer to those who say some television cooks and, yes, some on-screen chefs, aren’t really cooking:

“So, what wine do you use to cook with? Ummm … what? You don’t press your own grapes?? For shame!!! And what about your butter? No churn in the house, eh? And sour cream? No?? What kind of spice mill you got in there? None?? Sheesh … you’re pathetic … and you do have the mushroom farm in the basement and the milking cows tied to the back porch, right? NO?? And you call yourself a cook?? Ok, lemme ask you a simple question … do you at least make your own macaroni from scratch when the kids want mac ‘n cheese? Excuse me, didn’t catch your answer … what? Quit mumbling … I’m a son of a what?? Your mother … yeah, ok, so you can shut up about [insert TV chef/cook name here] now, can’t you … yeah, I thought so … go back and play in the corner, ya’ wannabe …”

The real problem is that some of those “cooks” are on-camera while all the prep work is done in the back kitchen by an army of sous chefs. While some are actually not only cooks but chefs as well, there can still be a massive difference between what goes on in their own kitchens vs. what they only demonstrate on television.

At the opposite end of the spectrum, our pal Jaden Hair down at Steamy Kitchen presents Asian cooking on WWSB channel 7, the local ABC affiliate in Sarasota, Florida. If you watch some of her videos there you might see various oriental-style wrappers in-use in her recipes. She didn’t make these, even though she probably could have. However, her buying these wrappers at the store and taking them to the station for use on-air does not mean Jaden’s not cooking from scratch.

How many of you, dear readers, make your own BBQ sauce every time you BBQ? Your own mustard for those great hot dogs you grill? And what about those hot dogs? Ever baked your own hot dog bun?

Didn’t think so.

Here’s another question: When you plunk down $20 - $30 or more for a high-end meal, do you really believe for a moment it’s all made from scratch?

If you respond with, “It’d better be!”, then you’re definitely not as up-to-speed as you think.

Did you ever have one of those great Creme Brulées on a cruise ship, with that extra-crunchy torched caramelizing sugar? Maybe you wanted to grab the steward and pass to the chef how cool that was? Well, sorry to tell you but you can use that same sugar at home. Oh, and grab some of that company’s Chocolate Mousse mix as well for that “We-Just-Ate-At-A-Restaurant” feeling.

There are obviously various levels of cooking from what might be called “scratch”. These are decidedly related to culture, where you live, what’s available, what local laws and regulations are, etc. I’ve lamented previously about the fact that there are 130,000 street food vendors in Calcutta, India … but I’m not allowed to cook you up a real Michigan corn dog at the Luna Pier City Wide Yard Sale without jumping through serious hoops with the Monroe County health department.

In India the street food is made from ingredients available for millenia. My corn dogs are made from Viennas in natural casings, dipped in a modified Jiffy corn muffin mix with extra milk and some ground mustard added. Meanwhile, the one year I bucked the system and sold them anyway, there were folks coming back for more who informed me mine were considerably better than those corn dogs from the food trailer by the beach, where the dipping batter was made from corn meal and other individual ingredients.

Was I wrong in how I made mine? Were mine lesser quality? No. And it wasn’t me who made that determination.

It was the customers.

It dosn’t matter if your food is made from whatever it is you consider to be “from scratch”. “From scratch” will never mean what it once did anyway, more than 100 years ago.

What matters is whether or not that food tastes good, has a nice texture, is pleasant to the eyes, mouth, nose …

Now, pardon me while I go make up a PB&J and some chips for lunch. Let’s see, I’ll need peanuts … some grapes … potatoes and a mandolin … some oil for deep frying … where’s that pressure cooker so I can make the jam … darn, I’m out of bread flour … the yeast should be in the fridge door …

French Cooking: ‘Oui, Oui’ or ‘Wii, Wii’?

Posted on 17 April 2007 under Software | 2 Comments

I’ll take the former for 200, Alex …

A Wii-based version of a cookoff doesn’t sound like a good idea whatsoever. As reported in this article on MSNBC.com:

In the case of “Cook Off,” this title takes the original “Cooking Mama” — released last year for the Nintendo DS — and brings it to Nintendo’s new Wii console. And in many ways (though not all), the move is a good fit … Certainly the game is easy enough to jump into, and it gets solid marks for its creative concept and for its attempts to use the Remote in unique ways. And with the move to the Wii, “Cook Off” has added a much-needed new element to the original game — a multiplayer option … Still though, there’s something missing from this recipe … even with the addition of the multi-player option the content here feels a bit thin for a console title and the challenges end up becoming rather repetitive (one can only slice and chop so much before growing weary of it) …

Ok, back the Wii truck up. Let’s take a good hard look at one particular sentence here:

Still though, there’s something missing from this recipe …

Well, gee, what might that be? Golly, I don’t know … not really sure … oh, wait, I think it’s the complete and utter inability to taste the final results!

Isn’t that what a cookoff is all about? When you go to a chili cookoff, do the judges watch the contestants make the chili, look at the completed chili in the bowl, and then judge without tasting?

Ludicrous, simply ludicrous.

They did this in the first season of the Food Network’s Next Food Network Star. It bothered the bejeepers out of me that the judges didn’t taste anything from the contestants until the third episode, and had already eliminated someone.

Software-based cooking competitions? No thanks, I’ll just phone in my entry.

Continuing The Software Discussion

Posted on 12 January 2007 under Software | No Comments

Even though I’ve already posted a new entry this morning, I wanted to point out that the lengthy discussion on recipe software is continuing. An unexpected comment has showed up from Chef Tad of the Frog Leg Inn in Erie that anyone involved in that discussion should probably take a look at.

‘Holding’ on Software

Posted on 30 December 2006 under Software | No Comments

I think that, as the below discussion continues with Ms. Megan Drayton, CEO of eChef, I’ll hold of with new entries for a few days. And because she’s being so acommodating (accommodating? accomodating?? My blog for a spill-chucker …), I think I’ll head over to the Ann Arbor Food email list and give a holler to let them know Megan’s asking for input. Oh yeah, she’s done it now! [Yes, Megan, you high-jacked my blog!! Oh, wait, that’s a good thing … isn’t it? :-D ]

Back to Recipe & Cookbook Software

Posted on 29 December 2006 under Software | 27 Comments

Dear readers, here’s proof you never know who’s reading these things … I’m bringing this issue to a new blog entry in an effort to encourage more discussion on this, particularly from the following commenter. This showed up today and … well, here it is:

=====

Greetings! I was really enjoying this blog until *gasp* I saw my very own software company get slammed on it! Okay, so I still enjoy this blog.

Anyway, I’m the Founder and CEO of eChef. I left my banking software job and built the company after being very frustrated with the quality and lack of functionality in the other (Windows 95 era) programs’ “bells and whistles”. eChef is built using the newest technologies (.NET 2.0 Framework) and will function in the new Windows Vista world. Hate to say it, but most of your other favorites will die a horrible death when Vista rolls around.

I understand your frustrations about scalability and nutritional info. So, I just wanted to point out why we did not include these. First… scalability. While it is quite easy to update the ingredients listing, serious problems occur in the directions… too many people reference those amount in the directions themselves, and doubling these amounts in the directions, too (while ignoring other amounts such as times) would be programmatically impossible. So, to save our users from disaster, I decided that this is a “bells and whistles” feature that just plain doesn’t work.

As far as nutritional information, I suggest going to the grocery store and picking up two different brands of wheat bread. The nutritional facts can vary dramatically. Thus, the nutritional information when you have ingredients such as “wheat bread”, “tomato soup”, etc. would be horribly incorrect. Another “bells and whistles” feature that proves to be of little use.

Instead, we built customizable categories, with the ability to have Recipe Collections, so that users could decide which recipes might fit under their “low fat” or “low carb” category. We have lots of other cool things, too. We’re working to get our file format available on a large scale, though since we just launched the product in August it is a bit too early to get this done.

I am flattered that we were included in this discussion, and hope that you’ll swing by our site and try the free download. Thanks, and happy cooking.

=====

 … Oy vey. You have no idea how this made my heart skip about 8 beats. How to best pull my head out of my … collar? [sigh!] Ok, here goes …

=====

Hi Megan, I’m glad you enjoy the blog … the “slamming” notwithstanding! BTW, way out in Lincoln, Nebraska, I’m just curious; How did you know I’d mentioned eChef?

I’ve been a programmer myself on-and-off for almost three decades now, and have Visual Studio 2005 installed on this machine. My 17-year-old Aaron is also a developer, so we know some of the things you mention. I’m not so sure the others will die that horrible death once Vista comes up to speed (One year? Two?) I believe Vista is such a drastic change folks aren’t going to be as willing to upgrade as they have been since the Win 95-to-98 upgrade. It also depends on the language the applications have been written in, especially if they’re outside the VS development environment.

Beyond all that though, as to scalability, if the amounts are written within the instructions themselves then I understand your point. However, this is actually a throwback to old-style recipes. If you look at Escoffier’s cookbook from the late 1800s, which is considered the reference for “classic” French cuisine, there is no list of ingredients. Everything, including the amounts, is in the instructions, which is all there is. If you look at my recipes, either at http://frogleg.mvps.org/mi_cuisine/recipes/index.html or here on this blog, in actual recipes I do my best not to do so. Sure, if I’m just witing for fun I might do it in Escoffier style … or worse! But for the Boneyard Coney Sauce and many others, either those amounts aren’t there or I’ll pull them later.

I’m of the opinion that those of us who write recipes need to stop including those amounts in the descriptive instructions, and I would encourage you to have this as a “tip”. Recipes shouldn’t be so rugged that people are afraid to change them. They should be presented as a starting point only, with encouragement to modify it as the cook sees fit. This can’t be done too well if the amounts show up in more than one location. Then, the recipe is too rigid and cooks will be leary of modifying them. Where’s the fun in that? ;-)

Scalability is a necessary evil. I have one recipe, my grandmother’s recipe for ginger snap cookies, that specifically says “Do not double this recipe!” It falls down if you double it. But people multiply and divide recipes constantly, for either smaller amounts or larger groups. In the new Mainstreet Ventures cookbook that I discussed at http://www.blogsmonroe.com/food/?p=27 the Introduction contains the following: “‘It’s not easy to condense a recipe’, says Chef Simon. ‘First of all, I’m normally cooking for more people. Everything we might automatically do as professional chefs has to be described. I didn’t give this to an assistant to do. I’ve tested everything in this book.’” Why not give such a person a starting point? So my question is this; Why expect users to break out a calculator or a pencil and paper whenever they want to scale something? The computer definitely has the capability. And if there’s extreme scaling, and the measurement unit has to change (i.e., fluid ounces to cups or quarts, or even the other direction), if software is capable of it, you’ll have happier users. Yup, it’s a lot of work for a developer, but anymore, this is the kind of thing that’s expected of software. And honestly, and I know you don’t want to hear this, it’s a good selling point for other programs when yours doesn’t have it.

The same goes for nutrition info. A lot of folks use that info. No, there’s no way you can guarantee accuracy in this area as you’re not performing a real analysis that’s necessary for a product label. But people want it. And if you look around, a lot of cookbooks present it. Another food writer on the other side of Michigan, Laura Kurella, is currently working on her first cookbook. One of the things she’s told me her readers want is that nutrition info. There’s no way she’ll ever be able to afford to have all those recipes analyzed for this purpose. So, I imagine she’ll pull out a program like (gasp!) MasterCook, plug in her recipe, print what comes out, and say something like, “These are in the ballpark but they’re far from a guaranteed analysis. Still, at least you have some idea of what you’re looking at!” You give it your best shot, with as many options as you can, make sure people know it’s an “educated guess” … and then, encourage them to modify the recipe anyway, which screws up the whole analysis anyway!

Yes, customizable categories are a great thing. Mary and I gave away a write-in cookbook I’d designed for Christams this year. Selecting names for the sections was a royal pain, and I wonder if I should have left those space blank after all! But I did include a section named “Miscellaneous”. I do hope I left enough space in there … ;-)

I do know that software design can be a royal pain, and I commend anyone who has a produst out there. Anymore, users can be so fickle. Am I one of those? Maybe. Really, though, I tried to be gentle. I mean, you never know who might read these things. You’ve proved that in spades, haven’t you?? :-D

Frankly, I’m looking forward to your reply. You told me in that email that you’re headed back in here at some point. Just reply to this if you have the time.

Dave

Recipe & Cookbook Software

Posted on 23 December 2006 under Software | 8 Comments

How many of you have computers? Raise your hand … one, two … three … oh, that’s right, you all probably do if you’re reading this blog, right?

So, you have a computer. Is it in the kitchen? Nearby? Blog-reader Ms. Squires has one in the dining area by the kitchen, next to the sliding glass doors, near the deck … and the pool …

A modern-day geek,
with one of the family’s computers,
and her cell phone in-hand

Oh yeah, now there’s a computer that would be an excellent candidate for recipe or cookbook software.

There are some seriously high-end software packages out there for use by professional chefs and caterers alike. But it’s not necessary to use such things. MasterCook is a decent package for about $20 that does a lot more than many other packages that are available. Chef Tad of the Frog Leg Inn in Erie likes it because it allows recipes to be “scaled”. For example, say you have a recipe in MasterCook that you know serves 6 people. You’ve invited 14 people over for dinner, you want to serve that dish but don’t want to deal with leftovers. Tell MasterCook the new serving number, and the recipe itself gets re-calculated using the correct amounts for the new serving number. Adding people at the last minute before starting to cook? No problem … just recalculate again. It takes no time at all.

One thing MasterCook does that other packages have trouble with or don’t do at all is detailed nutritional analysis of what is made with a recipe. No, this isn’t exactly the same as having a serving analyzed to fulfill labeling requirements, and at this point it still doesn’t calculate the new trans-fat listing requirement anyway. But if you’re someone who wants to know these kinds of numbers, MasterCook does a fairly decent job at it.

If you look to the right side of the page (scroll down a bit if you have to) you’ll see ads in a frame titled “ads by Google”. Ok, first of all, be sure to click those. If you purchase something through those links, you’re financially supporting blogsmonroe.com. The links in that frame should change almost every time you come here.

On occasion, ads for cookbook and recipe software will show up in the “ads by Google” frame. For example, I’ve seen an ad there for something called eChef Recipe Software. I followed the ad … and really wasn’t too impressed at what I saw. The site says the software is the “next revolution in recipe software” simply because sites that offer recipes, such as my Michigan Cuisine web site, can have eChef-compatible recipes available for download. However, there’s no nutritional analysis available with eChef (it says “You can easily include notes on the nutritional value”), and it doesn’t mention scalablility at all.

Another ad I saw was for MealMaster. I followed this one as well, and felt a bit more comfortable with what I found. MealMaster’s Cookbook Wizard Recipe Software allows you to dig through your fridge, plug in what leftovers you have available, and the software will suggest a recipe out of the recipes in its database. That in itself is pretty darn cool! MealMaster’s software also allows for import/export in the MasterCook format, making it easy to exchange recipes with people who have that software. If you’d like to start your own cooking web site, or contribute to one, the software will export the recipe in the format, creating complete web pages if you’d like. And finally, exporting recipes and cookbooks to Microsoft Word is something even MasterCook doesn’t do.

Let’s see … MasterCook for the scalability and nutrition info … plus the 10s of thousands of recipes it comes with … add MealMaster’s package for the ability to use MasterCook files, plus the feature about the leftovers, and the ability to talk to Word …

Yup, that right there is the setup to have, along with a decent printer, and friends who like to cook alongside you and share recipes with you.

I wonder if we’ll ever see this kind of software on the computer in the dining area by the kitchen, next to the glass sliding doors … and the deck … and the pool … I guess time will tell, won’t it?