Help! Bolognese issues
I am making the Lighter Contemporary Ragu Bolognese from page 46 of The Splendid Table. I've made plenty of pasta sauce before, but I usually go for quick-cooking stuff and work without a recipe, and I wanted to give this a go just to see how it turned out. So far... well, hmm.
It's not reducing at all; after almost an hour, the level of liquid has only increased due to the milk I've been adding. Now, I've turned the heat up a bit (almost to medium, actually) in order to get things working, but is she serious when she says to keep the heat very low? The sauce isn't reducing at all, and I'm quite confident that I could have left it out for days and there would be the same amount of liquid in the pot.
Also, the tomato paste? There's basically no tomato flavor to the sauce with only 2T of paste to 1.25 lbs meat plus mirepoix, etc. Really?
Further / finally, I was surprised by the lack of both garlic and herbs of any sort. I'm basically planning on scrapping the recipe and adding in some crushed red pepper and fresh parsley, just so the sauce has, you know, flavor.
I guess my real question is: I've never been to Italy, nor have I experienced much of what I would call authentic Italian food, so is the sauce supposed to be basically nothing but ground beef and mirepoix? Because, frankly, it sounds kind of boring, and it's not very tasty.
I am at a point where I wish I had considered the recipe before I started cooking, because if I had, I would have just made the standard pasta sauce I always make (mirepoix, garlic, 2 cans crushed fire roasted tomatoes, ground beef, basil, crushed red pepper, done in like 20 minutes).
Thanks for any advice!
is this a 4 hour simmer recipe? i tried hazans which, like your recipe, uses a mirepoix, tomatoes, milk and beef...and that's it...after 4 hours, this sauce was, quite literally, THE BOMB...best bolognaise i've ever had...give it the full simmer, let it reduce, and i'm sure you'll be pleased...
BTW: this is not yer mama's red meat sauce and if you go into it thinking it is, you might be disheartened by the results
It's a 2-hour simmer recipe (I'd be fine to give it more time, though; only make it better). My primary issue with the recipe its that the only tomato in it is 2T of tomato paste, thus meaning that the result is extremely unappealing to the eye and it's lacking a significant depth of flavor.
I've decided to just add tomatoes and some parsley and to heck the recipe so that dinner won't be gross, but I would love to hear any further suggestions. :D
I think it was a good idea to add the tomatoes, but it is going to require more time to break then down. Could there be a typo 2 Tbsp tomato paste sounds like too little? I also use Hazan's Essential of Classic Italian Cooking, and there is considerably more tomatoes. It's a lovely ragu, not too tomato-ee at all. The description of the slow simmer process from Hazan is "the laziest of simmers with just an intermittent bubble breaking to the surface." (and this is after bubbling away the milk and the wine, before adding the tomatoes) One thing about the recipe that Chow friends clarified for me was the question of all that fat, (especially if you more than triple the recipe as I routinely do) from the whole milk, ground beef and olive oil. They suggested it really needs to be removed once the ragu has finished simmering and the fat has completely seperated.
So: I made the sauce perfectly edible, and dinner was fine enough. Anyway:
Jfood, the recipe called for 1 1/2 cups of milk - a lot, indeed - and the whole thing was way too fatty, almost greasy. And (prior to my fixing it, anyway) it tasted awful. Since I am apparently allowed to post the ingredients list, I will do so - how to cook it is, I think, pretty obvious:
3 T olive oil
1 oz pancetta
1 large carrot
2 small stalks celery
1/2 medium onion
1 1/4 lbs ground beef
1/2 c dry white wine
2 T tomato paste, diluted with 10 T stock
Salt & pepper to taste
1 1/2 c milk
Now, looking at this recipe, it was clearly doomed to fail - I've cooked enough, I have no clue why I didn't realize that in the first place.
Anyway, the main confusion for me isn't why the recipe failed (that much is plain), but as to why this cookbook comes so highly recommended. Other recipes in it seem fine, but all of the ragus listed on pages 40-ish to 60-ish would suffer from this same issue - pretty much all of them call for 1.5-2 T of tomato paste, or perhaps 3 lonely canned plum tomatoes. The later sauces (such as the Winter Tomato Sauce on 62) all appear to be in order and would, I believe, cook up just fine. Do I have a bad version of The Splendid Table? (I'm glad I got it from the library either way...)
Donali: regarding the fat content, for future reference: is it okay to drain the fat before adding the simmering liquid? I suspect that would be dumping a lot of flavor out, but it'd be so much easier than waiting and skimming. I'll have to check out the Hazan book and give that recipe a try - thanks for the recommendation!
Check out the April 2008 issue of Saveur, which has a big article on "Ragu' alla Bolognese". They discuss the origins of the sauce and why there is so much variation. And they provide at least six different recipes, which vary widely in things like texture and color. The ones that seem the most "classic" have very little in the way of spices beyond salt and pepper.
Look no further than this:
If you saw his shape it would be obvious that this man KNOWS about pasta!
Less ingredients and rather simpler than many recipes, which is truer to native Italian practice. Using all beef is fine, and I add garlic in with the meat.
The recipe calls for
'2 tablespoons double- or triple-concentrated Italian tomato paste'
Without digging further, I suspect this means something more concentrated than stuff that comes in small cans in the USA. Squeeze tubes from Italy may be sufficiently concentrated. (Lookup 'passata'.) Note also the first line in description: 'Tasting like a hearty beef and wine stew with lots of browned onion...'. Also on p34 "What a ragu is NOT is a tomato sauce with meat." (her emphasis)
Regarding the milk, the instructions say to add it 2T at a time, allowing it to 'absorb'. The 1 1/2 c of milk may be more of guideline than a requirement.
Final consistency is supposed to be 'a thick soup'.
Regarding the fat, that may depend on how much gets rendered from the meat. I haven't made this, but often when fat accumulates on top of a stew, I will spoon off some of it.
p39 "skim milk does an admirable job'
Regarding the reduction rate, that will depend on the heat, the free surface (a wide shallow pan will reduce more than a deep sauce pan), and how you interpret the 'partially covered' instruction. There will be some thickening due to the breakdown of the vegetables.
I have not made a lot of use of this (bought used several months ago), but I suspect it is more useful for its cultural and historical descriptions than for its recipes.
The 'Bologna-Style Ragu' in '1000 Italian Recipes' *(Scicolone), only uses 3T of tomato paste for 1.5lb of meat, 1 cup milk (added at the last 15 minutes), 2-3hrs cooking (until the sauce is thick). It starts with 2c of stock. The only added seasoning is 1/4 tsp nutmeg, salt and black pepper. No garlic. Overall, not too different.
Ahh, I was using imported/concentrated squeeze tube tomato paste - and still, not sure what exactly the deal is, there.
That said: I looked at pictures around the net and it seems like perhaps I didn't have my veggies chopped finely enough. I'm not exactly sure how that would have affected the taste, but I am guessing they would have broken down more and integrated into the sauce more (which I didn't realize they were supposed to do), and that would have had to at least make it look a lot better.
I'll have to try this again now that I know more what I'm looking for, but I'm still skeptical of the wine-meat ratio. Perhaps it's due to my lack of experience with braising and other slow/low cooking methods, but I still have trouble imagining this being palatable - and obviously, it is.