The 1,600°F Fallacy -- Part II...

Today almost no world-class chef disputes the superiority of low-temperature protein cookery. In spite of their credentials, they were almost entirely ignored by the rest of the population.
 
In this post, I’ll tell you why.

A well-marbled steak can take a lot of abuse before it is inedible, and the customer is not to be blamed since he probably has never tasted a steak prepared in the “two-step” low temperature method.  Moreover, it is easy to get tricked by the appearance of high-temperature cooked meat.  For the very reason that high heat greatly stresses the protein, when you slice it, the juices bead out, sometimes even run out.  The un-stressed low temperature-cooked protein retains the juice within its cellular structure.

Thus the eye is tricked.  The damaging effects of high-heat cooking are substantial on sturdy, well marbled protein like a “Rib eye” steak, but on less marbled, more delicate meats like fish and game, the effects are truly catastrophic.  A steaming-hot piece of fish is a dry piece of fish.  It is no wonder so few Americans truly love to eat fish.

Quality issues aside, high-temperature protein cookery also results in significantly lower yields.  Iironically it was the less-esteemed wing of the culinary industry, the banquet side, that first (and one speculates) accidentally discovered the truth of this. Someone probably forgot one day to “turn up” the ovens in which the Prime Ribs were to cook. Remaining for many hours at pilot light temperature, say 200°F.  The chef must have thrown a fit at the cook for this outrage; but when it was discovered that even at this low temperature, the ribs were cooked-through, that they were more tender, the surface crust was more complex – more delicious, the “mistake” could be forgiven.

But when the Chef discovered that there were actually two additional portions yielded than by high temperature roasting, a breakthrough was discovered: using lower temperature roasting could make you more money!

As long as this heretical technique was confined to the “banquet-side," everyonecould sleep well. In our eighteen years of investigation at The Ryland Inn, our empirical studies in thousands of trials showed an average 12% greater weight in proteins cooked with low temperature compared to high-temperature.  The difference in weight is almost entirely juice. In a world which is rightfully panicked about Global Warming, any technique which could reduce the carbon footprint of livestock by increasing yield should be embraced on moral grounds alone.

One wonders why, for over eighty years. there has been such near universal resistance to the truth--high temperature cooking is the most damaging technique possible to protein. Despite innumerable scientific studies which prove it (I cited one in my last article).  We wholeheartedly agree that high-temperature searing gives us a beautiful, delicious crust through a browning reaction, which we all love.

So far so good.  But this desire to believe that the technique good for desiccating and browning the exterior is somehow ALSO the best technique for preserving the tenderness and juiciness of the interior is where the madness lies. Yet that is the face of convenience.

It should be pointed out that of all the recipes ever invented, only a tiny minority were ever intended to bring out the highest quality in ALL ingredients.

The other ninety-nine percent are a compromise between reasonable quality in exchange for maximum  simplicity.That is the reason almost all recipes are a variant on the “one pot” technique.

This not only applies to the recipes of “finished” dishes, but also to the various “sub recipes”: the “stocks and sauces” as well as “the braises and stews”.  What is the statistical likelihood that a dozen or more ingredients of such differing character as one uses in a beef stock will all be brought to their ideal by simmering together in the same water for eight hours? Unlikely A particularly instructive set of recipes to see the utilitarian triumph over quality is what are referred to as the Sautées.  Here, we do three things poorly for the convenience of using only one pan.

In a sauté, a generally expensive tender and juicy protein is seared in oil, in a Sauté Pan, over very high heat in order to brown the exterior. The cooking of the interior is obtained by continuing this extremely destructive high heat, which causes the juices to run out, coagulating on the cooking surface, where they quickly brown and invariably burn.

Then liquid is added to dissolve the browning reactions on the surface of the pan which cannot help but also dissolve the hard-won browning on the surface of the protein - all to make an easy sauce.

Ultimately, what has this insanity achieved?  We started with a very expensive, tender and juicy protein and made it tough and dry. The delicious crust got dissolved: all to make a little bitter sauce enriched with the condiment of carcinogenic oil burnt and ceramified in the unprotected spaces between the pieces of meat being seared. It does, however, take less time, and time is money.

In the case of most recipes, the greater part of the sapidity, the aromas, and the end up out the exhaust hood, in the mesh strainer, or in the garbage can. This is yet another reason why the culinary school graduate may be more dangerous in a top restaurant kitchen than a novice with no training. He has learned a number of recipes which, while “convenient”, do a great job of destroying food; and he has a head full of absolutely wrong “scientific” theories.

The “Two-Step, Low-Temperature” techniques of are not much more difficult and require only a minimal amount of additional culinary judgment.

 

In their “convenience," they do provide a much greater zone of safety wherein the protein can safely be “left alone” without risk of over-cooking. The theory of low-temperature protein cookery has been tried and proven as superior for hundreds of years, in a slightly different variant, by half the world’s population.

The peoples of Asia and others elsewhere, who perhaps did not have the opportunity to be bullied by scientific credentials, continue to cook the way they have for countless generations, relying on their eyes and palate.

Along the way they developed the Wok (and similar devices) along with a brilliant technique for cooking protein in it.  Although the Wok is kept at extremely high temperature, the protein is only directly exposed to this high heat for a very short time – just long enough to develop a mild browning reaction.

Thereafter the cook keeps the protein from being damaged by continuously tossing it in the air and adding new, cold ingredients.This is how they are able to take even cheap ingredients and obtain laudable results.  Although the “pan” is kept at a constant extremely high temperature, the protein is cooked at two different temperatures by manipulation.

It is universally understood that the ideal way to get a great sun tan is to get long sessions of low-intensity sunlight. Almost anyone who has neglected to observe this has learnt the lesson of painful, damaging sunburn.  Yet every day people buy into the marketing of American steakhouses that claim that the reason their steaks are so good is because of the extraordinarily high temperature of their professional broilers, the kind you cannot get for your home.

But, to the rare person who sees that “the Emperor has no clothes”,  broilers capable of 1,600°F are as illogical as a tanning facility boasting that their unique “Super High Power” tanning units have ten times the burning energy of their competitors.

The only way you can end up with a tender and juicy steak is to start off with a tender and juicy raw piece of meat (which is costly) that you damage in the least degree possible while managing to get a great-looking and great-tasting “crust”. Unfortunately, high-heat cookery is exactly how not to get there.

 

Tools: Share | Ask a question