cake decorating questions

Bob (this one) wrote

Not really. They talk about chefs, not whole kitchen staffs. Culinology now has a voice with Culinology magazine that comes out of the Research Chefs organization. You might want to check into it. The magazine looks good, color throughout and lots of industry news.

Pastorio

"so called" is an insult. It sounds like a dismissive sneer in speech and about the same in writing. The simple fact is that R.L.Beranbaum is a bona fide authority and has been one for a good, long time. Her books and articles are all the credentials she or anyone would need.

Wayne Gisslen is probably the most authoritative source about professional, quantity baking and professional cooking writing today.

I assume you mean Maggie Glezer. Good writer, good information. Thorough.

Peter Reinhart in conversation is absolutely one of the most authoritative bread bakers I've ever met. His books are very accessible.

Practical information and a bit of science from a man who works for a flour company. He knows what he's talking about.

When I saw the name, I smiled and thought of this

Add Carol Field, Bernard Dupaigne (great name for a baker), Nick Malgieri, Bernard Clayton...

And who could forget Betty Crocker and Aunt Jemima...

Yes. I suspect so. None of them with their backgrounds would put up with being attacked and demeaned. They don't have to. They have nothing to prove and nothing to defend. They're already known and they've proven that they know how to bake.

They're not food scientists. For that Shirley Corriher or Harold McGee would be good liaisons between the academic understandings and the practical kitchen. Their books are masterworks.

Pastorio

I am sure that Bob can hold his own with Roy.

Insult...? not IMO...maybe for neophytes....in the same way as bible bashers..? For sure Amateurs would be struck with awe as they regard these cookery authors as kitchen demigods ?......but not me... In fact Never I own books from any these people.... ..... Rather I just browse them out of curiosity..in the library.... It jus that I am not a collector of 'coffee table books'....just as many of the books of the authors your mentioned belong...

Regarding Biranbaum....IMO...I don't find any of her books interesting....nor informative...and I had worked in the bakery and food research lab.. for years without a need for them.........much to the surprise of some food technologist in the same line who have a copy of her books in their book shelves........

I agree in that point....Wayne is one of the respectable.... as his writings relates what is really being used in the baking industry.... In fact a lot of other bakers own his book...and I recommend it to many bakery trainee and apprentices . > Glazer,

This Glazier lady is an AIB graduate....but for me she is just a good writer....not a good baker...Being an alumni of the American Institute of Baking...these people are used in making breads with machines.....not with their hands. The focus more in the science of baking and not in the skill of becoming a good craft baker in the same tradition of European trained bakers. If you look closely at the pictures of that book Artisan Baking across America....her dough molding skills is amateurish like that of a bakery trainee .... I was hoping hope its not her doing the dough handling........but somebody else...

But the recipes are interesting but she tends to oversimplify it to the point for the sake of amateur and home bakers...and partly alienating the institutional bakers.

This is a must for home bakers....but practicing bakers in the industry look at his books with ....disinterests...Its not worth owning...unless you are newbie in bakery trade? .Another thing is he try to explain bakery science in an amateurish manner. ... For me he is overrated as a baker.....but just a smart fellow( IIRC his background was photography ) that is why he really know how to present his limited skills in a colorful book at the right time.......

Now this guy I respect.....he is really a qualified baker like Gesslen and he knows what he is talking about.. and at the same time knows how to do it properly.... It is not surprising....I know many practicing bakers have his popular book ...and continuously refer them for some pointers...

When I saw the name, I smiled and thought of this

This lady is just a tourist who visited many Italian bakeries and wrote a book about it...... Nothing spectacular....although many home bakes regard her as an authority in Italian baking LOL....

I had more respect for the author of Il Fornaio as he is really a competent Italian baker... But just like many good bakers....their writing and presentation skills to the reading public is not as good as the other popular authors

I am not familiar with Dupaigne....Heard about Malgiere but was unable to browse his books.....Clayton...IMO bastardized French baking...

I would rather read Bilheux et al......Special and Decorative Bread...its an authoritative book with such competent and detailed presentation........that is treasured by many bakers .

Betty Crocker is just a registered trademark for products from General Mills in the same line as Pillsbury and indeed they have cookbooks that suit best for home bakers ....and cooks Aunt Jemina.../..?...I have not seen if she had some cookery writings .

If these people live up to their reputation....they should not be onion skinned.. . if they know really where they belong.......they have nothing to fear

Its not about having something to prove but any feedbacks from various quarters would be a great help in improving the materials of their cookery books.. I'm certain if they are not hollow people but really live to their name They will certainly appreciate any criticism as that will improve the contents of their future cookery literatures.

Again Shirley Corriher...IMO is just like one of the guys......who is a notch higher than ordinary cookery authors for their technical competence.... I am not familiar with Harold McGee.

When I saw the name, I smiled and thought of this

David?....not this guy but Elizabeth David....I mean...who is another well known cookery author ...that is often qouted by cookery enthusiast.....

the fusion of culinary arts and food technology....that is why I posted earlier that a kitchen personnel must not be only competent with his or her cookery skills but also have the inclination to think like a food scientist.

The term culinology was coined by Winston Riley, former president and a founder of the Research Chefs Association (RCA), to describe and formalize the fusion of two disciplines - culinary art and food technology

IIRC the University of Nebraska was the first to offer this course in their food related curriculum... When I viewed the prospectus....i found it impressive and thought that this should be the way how future chefs should be trained.in the 21st century...but apprenticeship should not be set aside as its useful in gaining valuable craftmanship skills and good kitchen presentations. They should go hand in hand...culinary art and cookery science.

I was even urging some bakers to follow suit and do some cross training ... go to the university and takes some science courses related to food processing. They more you understand the reaction mechanism , ingredient interactions etc that occur in foodprocessing and understand the tools of the food scientists ...the better baker you become ....which I had confirmed already.....

We don't have much to discuss.

Pastorio

You said that about the kitchen staff already and it wasn't true then either.

So you don't know about the magazine?

Pastorio

You act as if you know it all and have no reason to seek the knowledge of others, or no need for books as reference.

Even the most experienced scientist keeps books written by others on their shelf for reference and guidence. James Watson kept a copy of the Maniatus molecular biology "bible" (Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual) above his lab bench for reference.

Let me guess: But YOU don't.

-L.

"-L." Let me guess: But YOU don't...

Look here I am not claiming I know everything...and nobody knows everything ......that is not the ultimate purpose of learning...nor the attainment of wisdom...But... its is the firm grasp of the essentials is what is most important...that is considered the attainment of superior knowledge and the flowering of wisdom. That is why I don't collect books.....it will take a herculean effort,,,, to know all the details of those many books...which the results does not actually lead to the improvement of your knowledge...but rather to bringing you in a confused state....then you will strive to read more in order to sort out the self created confusion....?

Going back to cookery....its not a collection of recipes. and procedures...but the comprehension of the essentials of those formulations and methodologiies that is most important....there are infinite permutation of recipes..but the principles involved in its preparation is simple....

That is why for me.....I consider cookery as 99% commonsense and only

1% recipe.... Its unfortunate that most people think in reverse.....and that is why they kept on collecting books... and these authors are laughing their way to the bank..

I think I have seen a specimen of that magazine...in my past visit to the university library ....but did not get my interest to browse it...Maybe ....as I already understood what culinology means.....What is the need for more details then?....

By the way you said....

If that would be the case I will not need to attend technical conferences and meetings in food chemistry,bakery and confectionery technology etc.... As That is my way of learning new developments in my field....and to network with similar minded people also.... Besides its fun to meet my candy and dough 'playmates' ( or what other people considers as peers) from different parts of the world...

Indeed if you are doing research work there should be lots of reference literature.. if not how can you do your product development work competently and effectively..?..there should be background information as the basis for a particular R&D project....and it will be helpful also when you to make a competent write up of your deeds .. But those materials are safely located in the library. ..

For me while in the lab... its most important literatures to be within reach are the Chemist Handbook and the Merck Index.. The other relevant details needed are stored in the electronic database....to be accessible with my fingertips...in the computer keyuboard... That may change soon as the most of the handbooks and indexes can now be accessed by computers ....via CD-ROM or by remote access.....

Your opinion. Most people would equate deep knowledge and the capacity to use it on very sophisticated applications to be "superior knowledge."

Wisdom is to know what you don't know.

And that's the reason to read books? "To know all the details of those many books?" One has to *memorize* books for them to be useful? There are no ideas you haven't already thought of in them? None?

So because you think books are for remembering all the details, you read none so that isn't a problem. Can the illogic of that escape you?

And if you don't read them, how can you know whether it will result in increased knowledge?

This is plain idiotic logic. Reading will bring you to a confused state, you say, so don't read. Keep your knowledge at its current state forever, as though human thought and technology should be so static.

This is more nonsense. There's no understanding of principles without ongoing study of the field. New technologies, new tools, new instrumentation. New research findings in food science.

Utterly absurd. Biology isn't common sense. Nor is chemistry. Physics. Technique isn't common sense. All these things are based on many, many principles extracted over time from the efforts of many people. Common sense offers nothing without detailed knowledge. Common sense is the capacity to make good judgements - which presupposes knowledge of successful experience, unsuccessful experience and the experience of others. That's information - necessary to good judgement - and the best place to find it is in books.

indeed. The truly sad part of your anti-knowledge, anti-study, anti-information viewpoint is that you get, as you have, the false idea that you're knowledgeable. You're perhaps knowledgeable for 1985 or

1990. The world has moved beyond that and will continue to.

And for as long as you persist in ridiculing books, the people who write them and progress in getting more knowledge, that's how far behind the current state of understanding of food science, food technology and food quality you will always be.

Being a professional means acting like one. A professional keeps up with his field through books, publications, seminars, organizations and constant experimentation. It means performing the daily processes of the field in a scholarly way, always looking for new information. Always looking. You've stopped that if you ever did it. You think that meetings are the way to keep up with what's going on in the field. Nope.

Pastorio

What a profoundly ridiculous thing to say.

Pastorio

LOL! lick your wounds Bob!

Bob, I just realize now that your are shallow person......Its a waste of time explaining the essence of my message to a person consumed by egotism... I leave it to you to digest its meaning....and how to interpret it according according to the finite level of your understanding..

Sure. Let's see...

So when I said you were insulting and you denied it and then insulted more, that was an example of your sincerity and honesty, right? Or maybe an attempt to wound, but sneakily, as I pointed out...

You talk like a Luddite, showing your deep unprofessionalism and your proud ignorance, and I'm wounded? You don't know much food science beyond water activity, but think you do and try to peddle the flawed understanding here, and I'm wounded? You proudly exclaim that you don't read books or professional publications, and I'm wounded? Your logic is even worse than your phony, out-dated professionalism.

Could you be more of a clownish moron?

That's a rhetorical question. Don't bother your pretty little head about it.

Pastorio

Oh, the essence of your message was very clear. And very tiny. AND very self-serving.

Your minuscule message requires not so much digestion as knee slapping laughter. The sheer, ignorant superficiality of what you've posted here in the past few days explains all that anyone needs to know about you. Unfortunately.

It's terribly sad that you have so little going for yourself that this is what you end up doing. First, you demean pretty much everybody who doesn't march lockstep with you. Then you demean books, the ongoing progress in what you say is your professional field. Then you talk crap food science oversimplifying a complex issue by attributing it all to water activity.

Your nastiness punctuated by your is still nastiness. You're not interested in dialogue; you only want to read your words. Pity...

Pastorio

LOL! shallow bob don't cry....okay...

LOL! Bobby boy you are entitled to your opinion...but it does not diminish my capabilities either.. besides ... dialogues, are are not for shallow individuals...when I see your replies going in different directions.. and becoming petty .....I realize that further discussion with you is of no use.......

Better stick with your pots and pans and stick also and your traditional cookery...forget about science...,culinology ..its not for you.either.........its beyond your grasp.......