Cookaholics Bulletin Board

Paul,
Yes--in my roundabout way that was my point. CI/Pam's chicken stock sent me sliding down an Edna Lewis slant for a bit. I want to know where it came from; if the liftee is that good, I have yet another source to investigate; give credit when credit is due. Everything is a riff on someones work/recipe/method.


Method 3. Chicken backs, wings, and legs.
4 lbs of chicken backs, wings, and or legs that have been hacked with a cleaver into 2-inch pieces. You can ask your butcher to prepare the chicken pieces this way.
1 large yellow onion, chopped.
Olive oil
2 quarts of boiling water
2 teaspoons of salt
2 bay leaves
1 Heat 1 Tbsp of olive oil in a large stock pot. Add one chopped onion. Sauté until softened and slightly colored - 2 to 3 minutes. Transfer to a large bowl.
2 Add half of the chicken pieces to the pot. Sauté until no longer pink, about 4 to 5 minutes. Transfer cooked chicken to bowl with onions. Sauté the rest of the chicken the same way. Return onion and chicken pieces to the pot. Reduce heat to low, cover, and cook until chicken releases its juices, about 20 minutes
3 While the chicken pieces are cooking, fill a large tea kettle with 2 quarts of water, bring to a boil.
4 After the chicken pieces have been cooking for 20 minutes, raise the heat level to high, add the 2 quarts of boiling water, 2 teaspoons of salt, 2 bay leaves. Return to a low simmer, then cover and barely simmer for about 20 minutes.
5 Strain broth and discard solids. Broth can be covered and refrigerated for up to 2 days or frozen for several months.

This third method comes from The Best Recipe cookbook by Cook's Illustrated. They got it from In Pursuit of Flavor, by Edna Lewis. This makes a truly flavorful stock. With chicken backs at about $1 lb, a good value

Paul,

In my mind Julia never stole anything. I also do not think she ever claimed to innovate cooking techniques. Julia took well known French cooking techniques and translated them in a way that was accessible to Americans. This was a gift that was discussed by Jacques Pepin in his biography. Jacques Pepin writes about reading the manuscript for "Mastering..." and wishing that he could write that way.

Stealing is appropriating without right. Stealing is taking from an identifiable source without attribution.

BCP steals by taking recipes from identifiable sources without attribution. The Zuni dry-brining technique is one example. They compound their ethical breach by claiming to discover the specific technique by exhaustive testing and experimentation.

BCP also claims to innovate techniques that any experienced cooks knows. Their July, 2010 Memphis-Style Rib recipe included a totally disingenuous claim about combining charcoal grill and oven cooking to simplify the recipe.

"The only question was the order of operations: grill to oven or oven to grill?

Since a crust bark was on of the main goals, I figured it made sense to start the ribs in the oven and finish them in the grill..."

BCP also uses purposely flawed/incorrect recipes and claims to develop the best recipe; in fact, they end with the recipe that everyone has always used. In their claimed development of Caldo Verde, kale soup, they went through turnip greens, collard greens and chard before magically discovering Kale.

BCP also dumbs down recipes to provide an excuse for development. Their gnudi recipe omitted semolina, giving them an excuse to test all sorts of bread crumbs.

Finally, BCP actually threatened to sue an innocent blogger who had the temerity to provide an attribution by stating her recipe was adapted from Cook's Illustrated.

Not that I have strong feelings on this subject.

CC

ps: What's this have to do with dry aging. Shall we start a new discussion?

ps: What's this have to do with dry aging. Shall we start a new discussion?


Cashmere,
You know, I have two mentors, one of which has the temerity to suggest that I tend to switch gears when talking Can you believe that?

Maybe Josh will assign a crystal moderator, and golly, that'd be a job.

True, though I sure she could have attributed some of her work. I don't mean to impinge on her in any way, I'm just saying we often attribute things to Julia that she largely just rewrote or adapted. So it isn't so different.

CI sometimes reminds me of infomercials. "When you try to cut your own hair, you can cut an ear off! <blood flies> With our suck and cut, you'll never cut an ear off again!". They definitely manufacture some of the problems trying to sex up the success of the recipe. I'm also curious as to what goes into the labels "best", "good" ,etc.

I think they do go over the line on attribution sometimes, though that seems to be practically a tradition in cooking. That doesn't really excuse them, though.

Paul,

I do not consider BCP's lack of attribution to be a problem. Their shame is dishonestly claiming to discover or develop new innovative techniques and methods. They compound their guilt with unrealistic descriptions of testing regimens.

The honest thing would be to discuss the problem with traditional recipes and to discuss new methods and innovations. Then, test those methods. If the method is from a specific source, provide attribution. If the best method combines various new techniques, then explain that situation. I just isn't right to claim every idea as your own.

Attribution provides recognition to a specific source or originator. I am not aware of Julia ever borrowing a recipe concept from a specific originator.

Tim