On 10/11/07, Charles Haynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 10/11/07, Thaths <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > You are describing the difference between those who think cooking is a > > science and those that think cooking is an art. > > I believe this is a false dichotomy. Cooking, especially fine cooking, > is both science and art. > > > I, personally, am of > > the latter persuation. I find that the food I make throwing in pinches > > of salt and hand-fuls of spices tastes much better than if I were to > > measure my ingredients carefully with scales and measuring spoons. It > > seems to be that those that follow the scientific school of cooking > > tend to spend too much time with process and means. > > But who gets to decide how much time is "too much?" > > FWIW I've been to Wylie Dufresne's restaurant (WD-50) in New York, and > that temple of Molecular Gastronomy ""El Bulli" and enjoyed them both. > El Bulli is the first restaurant where I've actually laughed out loud > after eating something. On the other hand, I'm also a fan of Alice > Waters's "one perfect peach" and in the sushi ideal of a perfect piece > of fish, simply presented. > > There's room for both, and room for both together. Neither approach is > more "art" than the other, and there's plenty of science in producing > that one perfect peach. > > -- Charles > >
Well said, Charles. Baking, unlike cooking, needs exact measurements or I get what I call "sit-down" cakes! But...I know someone who does slapdash baking AND gets lovely soft sponges...don't ask me how. Fusion cookery comes from at least some amount of slapdashery...and all too often, I find that following the exact recipe does NOT guarantee the exact same taste. Too many small parameters still differ. I do agree...all science and art ultimately meet...but until they do, the debate can last! Deepa.
