Inconsistencies between cooking show and cookbook
I hate when there is a huge inconsistency between a show I've watched and the recipe in the corresponding cookbook. Take "Lidia's Italy in America" for instance. On the show she made a cauliflower soup that she added simmering water to stating that the water should be hot as you do not want the cooking process to slow down waiting for the water to come up to the boil after adding it. She has said this repeatedly on the show. In the corresponding recipe in the cook book though, the recipe call for "4 quarts of cold water." I hate this kind of thing. Maybe I'm just picky because I worked in the publishing industry for many years or because I am a copywriter by trade; I tend to focus in on inaccuracies, mistakes, conflicting facts, etc. Does this sort of thing bother you?
Sometimes you spot inconsistencies in the same show!
Do y'all know Mag Rack? It's an online magazine show. They offer it on my cable's On Demand menu. First they do the cooking demonstration part of the recipe followed by the exact ingredient amounts. Eg, they'll write 1/2 cup of oil in the recipe but it looked like a lot more in the demo!
Many tv chefs -- especially those who are also busy restaurateurs -- do not write their own cookbooks. Hence, perhaps Lidia DOES always add simmering water to her soup, but the cookbook writer doesn't.
Not saying it's okay, because it's NOT. someone should be checking to make sure the instructions in the book are in sync with what's on the show.
Maximilien: not all cookbook authors/recipe writers test their recipes with people who are accomplished cooks. I find my best "testers" are my cooking classes. The students often ask questions I hadn't thought of. And that leads to recipe rewriting/clarification. ;)
Here are two of fond memory, because I spotted the disconnect before using.
The Joy of Cooking on how to cook rice. Something like 1 quart of water per quart of rice?
Stars and Stripes newspaper, Europe. My friend followed the recipe for Hungarian goulasch perfectly as she had never had it before. To include the 2 cups of smoked paprika powder. There was a correction to up to 2 teaspoons the next day.
editors may not catch errors or omissions in technical directions, including cooking recipes. this is more likely if they do not cook much themselves, or are otherwise unfamiliar w the material. it's a problem with all sorts of niche publishing-- actually, with the boom in cooking/cookbook popularity, there are very good editors specializing in cookbooks these days, and as a result cookbooks as a whole probably have better editing than other instructional/craft method works. of course, there are better and more thorough editing procedures in various publishing houses, with many "celebrity" cookbooks cranked out by pulp publishers, and more scholarly or specialist cookbooks through publishers with more prestige.
Last year there was a brew-ha about the Paltrow cover on Bon Appetit. But when I looked up her cookbook I found a lot of positive reviews (often more so than for Batali books). I got the impression that a lot of that was due her collaboration with Julia Turshen, who carefully tested the recipes.
How much of Julia Child's success can be attributed to her editor, Judith Jones? And isn't the mother of the FN celebrities a noted cookbook editor ( Maria Guarnaschelli)?
There was an unscientific study on a local TV show (*) testing recipes in cookbooks.
They went to a cooking school and asked the student to try a few recipes in the book by following the recipe to the word (no second guess what the author meant).
The result is that in most recipes, there are always things missing (bad quantity, not cooking temperature or missing timing, ... )
The conclusion is that cooking books are more a guide and an obsolute collection of instructions, and in some instances, if don't cook often you will miss out of some obvious things (pre-heating the oven).
As to why it happens ? simple, recipes are tested/proofes by people who know how to cook and have a basic understanding of those things and will not make basic mistakes and will "fill-in" the blanks without thinking about it.
(in french) http://www.radio-canada.ca/emissions/...