As if the Food Network wasn't enough of a joke already! - Page 3

Can I just add a caveat that I do not know the FN - we have a couple of satellite/cable 'Food' channels here in the UK, but mostly they are foreign programmes and repeats of programmes broadcast by our terrestrial channels such as the BBC and Channel 4 (with the likes of Ramsay, Smith, Worrall-Thomson, Lawson et al) which is where I watch them....

I believe that there are 'Celebrity' cooks - eg we have St Delia.  She has helped many a non-cook to learn the basics of cooking and baking, but always says 'I am not a chef'. She is, however, a wonderful cook - and I can say that from experience, I have never had a recipe of hers that hasn't done exactly what it says in the text (would that famous chef-writers were so exacting). Others include Nigella Lawson, the Irish cooks from the Ballymaloe cookery school, the 'Hairy Bikers, etc.  All of whom are worth watching and I learn something from every one of them. 

 Then there are celebrity chefs like Gordon Ramsay, Jean-Christoph Novelli, Michel Roux Jr and others.  THEY are chefs, trained and with successful restaurants.

Most of the American 'cooks' I've just about heard of, and have never bothered to watch on TV.  I can't cope with the 'cup' measurements!

Originally Posted by Gunnar 

 

Of course this should be ridiculed. It's the equivalent of a Shakespearean actor coming out and saying "uh..To be or not to...uh... whatever".  and then farting on stage. If you like Paula Dean, fine. Doesn't bother me one bit, but I can see no defense for this "phoned in performance" of a recipe, it's just sad.

 

I can't agree more Gunnar. Paula Dean is all about southern homemade cooking so this recipe is just meaningless filler, just keeping up with her contractual schedule of recipes and is a slap in the face to anybody who likes her show, which includes me! Sandra Lee's show is based on cheating a little to get dinner done fast and easy so you are getting what you are advertised ... I do not like her style or show because it is too simplex for me but her show is very popular and growing which I guess makes sense since no one seems to have the time to do anything anymore!

I like watching Food Network but it is very much a business and most of the cooks/chefs are in it for the money and not the love! Some of them are doing several shows, their own magazine, their own restaurant, their website and now I see some of them on the new Cooking channel ... I think they are just stretching the material kinda of thin sometimes.  

I think y'all are missing something.

Because we are cooks, we sneer at the idea of needing instructions for cooking a can of peas in some butter. But let's keep in mind that we're now into the third generation who confuses microwaving with cooking. Many of these people really do not know any basics, and for them mixing canned veggies with butter is a revelation. I see this all the time with the people I teach.

People like that, don't forget, are precisely FN's audience. So anything even a half-step beyond fast food and take-out is an advance for them. Shows like Semi-Homemade, and 30-minute meals, and Cooking for Real, and all the others based around shortcuts will continue to be popular, because for their intended audiences they are advanced techniques.

The saving grace is when FN makes a mistake in sheduling. When Mellisa DeArabian started her show it was scheduled immediately after Sandra's. Sandra, in that tone of breathless wonder she affects, would say something like ".....and this only costs 18 dollars and 14 cents to feed four people." Then Mellissa would come out, and, using real foods and products, would produce dinner for four for ten bucks or less.

While there's no documentation, I'm convinced a certain percentage of viewers concluded, "hey! For less money, and in about the same time, I can actually cook a wholesome meal," and went on from there to become home cooks. Those are the FN viewers who eventually become Cheftalk members.

I'm reminded about a great line in one of John Gierach's books. He was describing the St. Vrain, a small, middling trout stream where he had a cabin. Nothing at all like the storied trout streams of the west. And his buddy responds, "it's good enough for who it's for."

Same goes for those shortcuts and make-believe cooking shows. They're good enough for who they're for. And some of the viewers are encouraged to go on and fish the Yellowstone.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KYHeirloomer 

I think y'all are missing something.

 

Because we are cooks, we sneer at the idea of needing instructions for cooking a can of peas in some butter. But let's keep in mind that we're now into the third generation who confuses microwaving with cooking. Many of these people really do not know any basics, and for them mixing canned veggies with butter is a revelation. I see this all the time with the people I teach.

 

People like that, don't forget, are precisely FN's audience. So anything even a half-step beyond fast food and take-out is an advance for them. Shows like Semi-Homemade, and 30-minute meals, and Cooking for Real, and all the others based around shortcuts will continue to be popular, because for their intended audiences they are advanced techniques.

 

The saving grace is when FN makes a mistake in sheduling. When Mellisa DeArabian started her show it was scheduled immediately after Sandra's. Sandra, in that tone of breathless wonder she affects, would say something like ".....and this only costs 18 dollars and 14 cents to feed four people." Then Mellissa would come out, and, using real foods and products, would produce dinner for four for ten bucks or less.

 

While there's no documentation, I'm convinced a certain percentage of viewers concluded, "hey! For less money, and in about the same time, I can actually cook a wholesome meal," and went on from there to become home cooks. Those are the FN viewers who eventually become Cheftalk members.

 

I'm reminded about a great line in one of John Gierach's books. He was describing the St. Vrain, a small, middling trout stream where he had a cabin. Nothing at all like the storied trout streams of the west. And his buddy responds, "it's good enough for who it's for."

 

Same goes for those shortcuts and make-believe cooking shows. They're good enough for who they're for. And some of the viewers are encouraged to go on and fish the Yellowstone.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeteMcCracken 

Quote:

Originally Posted by mommamae 

...I've never seen a group of people get that rabid over a simple how-to recipe before. But that's what the internet is for, right? Haha!

You're right, that recipe belongs on a can of English Peas.

 

But I would not put my name on such a recipe, nor would offer it on a video, TV program, or anything more than a passing comment or answer to a simple question.
 

KYH,  I get what you are saying but Pete still said it best.  Butter on vegetables has been around since butter was made.

To my mind, KYH gets at the heart of the issue -- although, as often happens, we don't quite agree.

By way of clarification, consider, not peas, but "edamame beans" (i.e. soybeans). When these started to hit the larger markets, they were touted -- with some justice -- as a superfood in all kinds of ways. But what can you do with them? People heard, "oh, you boil or nuke them or something, and put salt on them." And that's fine, but it's kind of limited. People needed instructions. Alton Brown -- not one of my favorite people but good with this one -- did an episode about soybeans, and he had a number of suggestions, most very simple and basically solid, straightforward ways to prepare and present the beans. Good for him, sez I.

Okay, so let's suppose, as KYH rightly points out, that a huge percentage of Americans have no idea what to do with a can of peas. They honestly do not know: do you just nuke them? In the can or out of it? (Serious question!) Do you put salt on, and how much, precisely? Or what? Do you dump the water? So by this logic, Food Network puts this recipe forth to make sure people have a clue what to do with a can of peas -- Can'o'peas 101. So far, I'm with KYH.

Problem is, that's not how the thing is presented. Nothing says "this is a basic how-to if you don't know what to do." It's presented exactly the same way as Ms. Lee's recipe, which is emphatically not a question of, "gee, I have some frosting, but I have no idea what you're supposed to do with it."

That recipe, in fact, is in my opinion quite disgusting. What boggles my mind is that most recipes for actual truffles -- the ones made from actual chocolate, cream, eggs, and so forth -- are so ridiculously simple. If you use something like Toll-House chips, you can make scads of decent truffles for very little money. So why would you want to use premade frosting, full of all kinds of anti-drying preservatives and artificial flavorings? This I do not understand. It seems basically stupid, and since Ms. Lee actually attended the Cordon Bleu, if memory serves, it's also dishonest: she knows better.

Something I think Emeril Lagasse tried to do -- and I know Julia Child and Jacques Pepin tried to do -- was to present extremely simple, basic recipes in a context. You'd say, "okay, here's something, look how ridiculously simple that is, right? Now here's another really simple thing -- you can do that blindfolded, right? Easy. Okay, so let's put those two things together, and add this very simple bit of technique, and lo and behold, you've got real serious cooking going on here, folks! Bam!" What they were all trying to show -- Martin Yan, too, for that matter -- was what we all know here at ChefTalk: serious cooking is not different in kind from basic cooking, it just requires a little more knowledge and attention. And once you have that knowledge passably deeply, the attention lessens, and what used to seem like big-deal cooking now seems like ultra-basics, and you're starting to get in arguments with Escoffier about the best way to poelė a chicken. And so on.

What ticks me off about Sandra Lee and most of these folks on FN -- which I no longer watch, actually, except once in a long while Iron Chef -- is that they present what they're doing as instructional, but then they basically lie. Honestly, Sandra Lee knows better, but she refuses to show anyone how to do solid basics that everyone needs to know; instead she tells everyone that knowing how to cook isn't necessary because you can just reheat garbage and make it look as though you cooked it. It'd be quicker, simpler, and tastier to make it yourself, but she doesn't tell you that. She seems to me a pure symptom of several of the worst things about how Americans eat today -- which is not to say that she is all that much of a cause of them, let it be said.

KYH,  I get what you are saying but Pete still said it best.  Butter on vegetables has been around since butter was made.

So, Gunnar, your argument isn't with the recipe, per se, but where it appears? Pete said the recipe belongs on a can of English peas. And perhaps he's right. But if it's good enough to go there, it's good enough for Paula Deen to tell her viewers and readers about. Why? Because they are, by and large, the same people, folks who have minimal cooking knowledge at best. Sure, peas and butter have been around since Lazerous was a corporal. But if you don't know about the combo, does it matter where you first learn about it?

Let me ask you this. If Paula had said to add some chopped mint as well as the butter, would you still feel so strongly about it? What if she'd started with frozen peas instead of canned, and walked her readers through turning them into buttered peas with mint? Is that more of a "real" recipe?

Chris, I don't know where we're disagreeing, other than you've set up your usual straw man and expect me to tilt with it.

My comments were specific to the peas & butter recipe. You turn that around and make it sound as if I'm defending Sandra Lee---when anyone whose been a member here more than ten minutes knows how I feel about her. Here's a woman who turned her back on her expensive training in order to promote and encourage the use of crap, and to convince people who, unfortunately do not know any better, that quality and cost are not part of the food equation. I'm convinced this is why they moved Mellisa's show. She was, by the very nature of what she does, showing Sandra up for the phony that she is.

The sad thing is that most popular cooking "education" follows her path. As you know, I'm on a semi-soft diet. Today I saw a BH&G special publication on winter soups. Without taking the time to browse through it I bought a copy, figuring I might pick up a few ideas. There are ideas aplenty. All of which need serious adapting because they're all based on canned and premade ingredients. F'rinstance, there's a recipe for Chicken-Pasta Soup with Pesto. Sounds like a possibility, right? Here's the ingredients list: 2 14-ounce cans reduced sodium chicken broth, 1 pound skinless, boneless chicken breast halves or thighs, cubed, 1 14.5-ounce can diced tomatoes with basil, garlic, and oregano, undrained, 1/2 cup dried orzo pasta, 1 cup chopped zucchini, 1 tsp finely shredded lemon peel, 1 tablespoon lemon juice, 4-6 tablespoons purchased basil pesto.

In short, it could have come directly out of Sandra's playbook. And it is not, unfortunately, all that uncommon.

Reading the last few posts--from KYH and Chris L, I think I've had a paradigim shift: 

There are people there who don't know how to feed themselves.  They eat 3 meals a day, are over 30 years old, and would never in a million years figure out to buy a whole chicken, use the bones for stock, leg meat for soup, and brsts for dinner the next day.

I dunno, I'm still gobstruck.....

True, I've been cooking for almost 30 years now.  But then, even as a 10 yr old, I'd ruin my Mom's cookbooks, her cookware and "experiment" with her ingredients.  It's not that I knew I wanted to become a cook then, I was just interested, just as interested in taking apart appliances and hockey.

I've always thought of cooking as a survival skill.  How is it that fully grown adults don't know how to heat up a can of peas?

True, I've been a professional cook for all my life, but that doesn't mean I haven't had the interest or time to learn other surival skills.  Like learning enough about a car in order to keep one on the road for many years and not get taken when I need repair work.  Enough about plumbing to put in new faucets or a toilet, and enough to go and get the right tools or parts from the Home despot--because everyone else there is even more clueless than I am  IF anyone's around......  Enough about electrical to leave it alone and call an electrican--other than putting in light fixtures.  And enough about woodworking and carpentry to build furniture for my home, my kids, and my store while keeping all my fingers.

So if cooking is one of the most basic survival skills, why do people need reheating instructions on a can of peas?

This ranks right up there with my bro-in law calling me up and asking me to help him put together a simple Ikea shelf.  At the time, I never thought I'd hear anything so pathetic

How is it that fully grown adults don't know how to heat up a can of peas?

How is it? Who knows all the societal pressures which have led us to this. But the fact is, many of them don't.

Here is a story. In truth, a story. Two years ago we suffered a major ice storm. Power was out. Deliveries impossible. A local radio station had a call in show, where folks could share their stories, complain, etc.

One woman called on Friday. Her tale: The power had been off since Tuesday. But, she said, they were able to keep the house warm by burning wood in the fireplace. "But we haven't had a hot meal in four days."

I would not make that up. Four days burning wood nonstop and she couldn't figure out how to make a hot meal.

It go even better. "We've been ok until now," she continued. "But the wood is getting low." Uh, huh. The world is littered with downed branches and whole trees, but she has no wood to burn. I guess if it doesn't come in those shrink-wrapped little bundles it isn't firewood.

What's sad, of course, is that she isn't all that exceptional.

The food industry has not helped at all in that they perpetuate the ignorance of cooking and eating. For instance those pizza breads that Stouffer's makes would include a commercial on how to microwave them and show in the ad as that and only that for dinner. When I talk to co-workers about what they ate for dinner the past night, it is almost always one thing.

"Oh I had a BLT for dinner" or "I made macaroni and cheese for dinner last night."

Is that all? No salad, or vegetable or protein?  Many people I come in contact with do not know how to cook nor eat. It is sad.

And yet, when exposed to it, many of them do appreciate good food, and want more of it.

Many of Friend Wife's co-workers, for instance, have told her things like, "you have the best lunches." When they're told it's just leftovers, they're in awe. "You mean you eat like that all the time?"

Yet, it's nothing most folks here would consider particularly special. Yesterday, for instance, her lunch was a bowl of oyster stew and a wedge of potato/olive frittata.

As a result of seeing, and sometimes tasting, her lunches, several of them have evinced a desire to learn more about cooking. The problem is, they either don't know where to turn for the basics, or can't afford cooking classes (when they can even find them). This is the market FN should be addressing. But they'd rather be telling us that being an Air Force vet and former DJ are, somehow, criteria for having a cooking show.

WOW. You guys sure are hard on the rest of the world. Is the view really good from up on that mount you all sit on? LOL. Maybe this philosophy might help a little bit. It gets my by every day. 

"Live and Let Live."

If all the rest of the world knew how to cook like us, would there be any jobs? 

IceMan, you should change "world" to "USA".  Much of the world can cook like most of us chefs, or at least, much closer to us than those in the US.  It has only been the last few generations that have forgotten how to cook.  Besides, even if everyone relearned how to cook there would always be a need for chefs.  Just because people can cook, doesn't mean that they do it all the time.  I can cook like crazy, but we still often eat out.  Believe me there will always be a place for cooks and chefs in this world.

On to the OP, and the recipe that brought this about.  While I was kind of appalled by the simplicity of the recipe, and that it was presented on FN's website, what appalled me more was the fact that she used canned peas.  This may be a personal thing, but I think canned peas are one of the most disgusting things ever invented.  At least use frozen peans, which aren't bad at all in my opinion.

As for the whole shortcut issue, when Rachel Ray first started 30 minute meals I thought it was halfway decent.  She had some great ideas and with so many families that are dual income, I thought the idea had value.  Unfortunately, this trend has gone on way too long and now that any decent shortcut ideas have been used up, they have moved into the realm of crap, just to keep things going.  Shortcuts have their time and place, but some of the stuff they try passing off is just gross.  And you are right, some of these "shortcuts" aren't really short cuts, when you consider how quickly one can cook it from scratch, i.e. fresh vegetables vs. canned or frozen.

Finally, in response to comments about chain restaurants.  While I won't totally condemn them, I think that they have done a great disservice to this country.  The food is mediocre, at best, but they have convinced many people that what they serve is great!!!  Sorry, but the fish they serve at Red Lobster just can't compare with what is served at little Mom and Pop places, Olive garden can't hold a candle to most small, independent Italian joints, nor can Outback or Lonestar outshine a "real" steak house, and except for the steakhouse example, to eat at these independent places won't cost you much more than the big chains, and sometimes even cost less.  Chains also have had the unfortunate effect of homogenizing the American culinary scene, in many ways.  Part of the joy of travelling is experiencing different foods, but the general public has been convinced that consistency trumps adverture when it comes to eating.  What' s the point of visiting New Orleans if you are just going to eat at the Hard Rock instead of the little gumbo shop?  Why travel to Chicago, just to eat at Friday's when you can try a deep dish pizza (regarding the other thread in the forums on this topic, deep dish rocks, sorry folks....NY style thin crust is awesome also, but if you've never tried a Chicago deep dish don't be so quick to dismiss!).  Go to Boston and eat at Chili's, when you are so close to the Ocean and great seafood?  But these places are packed with tourists.  I don't get it.

I still love the FN mostly for the competition shows like Chopped or FN Challenge or the show that discover foods like DDD or MvF but very rarely watch the actual cooking shows.

If all the rest of the world knew how to cook like us, would there be any jobs? 

Don't know how old you are, IceMan, but this is not only a simplistic view, it's historically incorrect.

Until the 1950s, virtually everybody cooked. Or at least knew how to. Families generally ate together at a meal prepared at home. Yet, in all the time preceeding it, there were plenty of restaurants, plenty of professional cooks. Perhaps the one major difference is that, for most people, restaurant dining was a special event.

Starting in the '50s convenience products became all the rage. Every modern woman used packaged and premade stuff. Cookbooks and ladies magazines touted the next great labor saving foodstuff, and things like cream of X soup were considered ingredients for haute cuisine. Frozen foods, particularly the notorious TV Dinners and fish sticks, opened the door even further to non-cookery. Then the microwave oven drove the final nail on the concept of actually cooking.

Come the turn of this century, and we moved a step further away from cooking. More and more people bought into the take-out or go-out every night idea, using "our busy lifestyles" as an excuse. Concurrent with that has been a movement back to real cooking. There have been various pressures behind this movement. But the basic problem is, the people who now want to reverse things and learn how to cook lack the basic skills the older of us learned at our mothers' knees. And there are few places they can go to learn them. Good cooking consistes of using good techniques to manipulate good ingredients.

One would hope that a network devoted to food would know that, and use it as it's baseline. Originally that was the case. FN's lineup were devoted to teaching techniques and methods. But there was a change in direction, and the stars who made FN what it was were all replaced by the current crop of non-chefs who are more concerened with schtick and schlock than with any substance at all.

OH MY EVERLOVING GOODNESS!!!!!

I WAS JUST MAKING A SIMPLE CONVERSATIONAL STATEMENT!!!

Sometimes you members/posters/repliers put WAY WAY WAY too much thought into this stuff. My next quote is from my very first reply. 

I'll ask the question again. IS IT AT ALL POSSIBLE!?!?

The day I need instruction from someone about how to open a tin of peas is the day I KNOW I'm past it and suffering from Alzheimer's. And it would be proof positive, as I have NEVER used tinned peas.

IceMan - you really think that only Americans can cook?  That the rest of us in the world are ignorant of food:  its preparation and culture?  BWAAAAHAAAAAAA. One of the most insidious things about globalisation is that so many of the lower grade, crappy US chains have invaded Europe, for instance, KFC, The Outback (I ate there once, at the invitation of a friend who knew I had australian relatives - there is NO similarity, believe me, between THAT crappy chain and Australian food), McDonalds and Starbucks, for starters.

Your smartairse comments about chain foods being so good is galling to those of us (both outwith the USA and within its borders) who can cook.

FOR THE LOVE OF GOODNESS!!!

Find for me PLEASE, please find where I say anywhere "..... only Americans can cook?  That the rest of [you] in the world are ignorant of food:  its preparation and culture?"    

Reading is fundamental. Listening is a skill. 

Did you type this? 

For a self-professed 'Chef' you seem to delight in misunderstanding what is being said about food, culinary expertise and ability.

OK. I see. 

"US" = those of us all here (members and/or posters), on this bulletin board, with some connection to the cooking/food service industry. 

"REST OF THE WORLD" = everyone else on the planet who are not at all included on this bulletin board reading or replying to the posts.

edit: I think this comment is a little inappropriate coming from a moderator:

Quote:

Originally Posted by IceMan 

 

 

edit: I think this comment is a little inappropriate coming from a moderator:

Quote:

For a self-professed 'Chef' you seem to delight in misunderstanding what is being said about food, culinary expertise and ability.

You do seem to be acting intentionally contrary and exceesively argumentative.

Maybe FNTV is not the only "joke"?When one defines a "dish" as heating canned peas, one begins to wonder, next maybe, a recipe for MREs??

IceMan

FYI

I only moderate on 'my' forum, ie the Welcome area.

The rest of the time, I try to be helpful and polite - but consider I have just as much right as anyone else to post my views on other fora here.   Sometimes being polite is more difficult than others.

next maybe, a recipe for MREs??

Ask and it shall be given, Pete:

1. Borrow buddies K-Bar cuz you used yours to open beer cans, and the edge is gone.

2. Cut open bag. Remove non-edibles. Lay where the wind can grab them.

3. Activate heating unit if  appropriate.

4. Reach in with flimsy plastic fork provided.

5. Drop half the food on the ground.

6. Cuss appropriately.*

*Cussing as pertains to MREs is a still-developing art form, unlike, say, with C-rats, where it's a fully matured craft. Thus there are great opportunties for making a contribution.

Heirloomer, I don't have any military in my background, but literally growing up in the restaurant world I could probably help on this point.  In fact, in a number of cities, I'm quite well known for my creative use of questionable language!! 

Let's approach this from another angle for just a moment.  The first "review" was in 2007.  Now, let's imagine that this is a new feature or something has been modified in the webpage where Paula can log on, enter a recipe, and have it auto-posted.  Naturally, this goes through testing in a lab environment, but even when it gets moved into production, it has to be tested.  Let's suppose that this was a "test" and let's face it, it's beyond simple, but has the basics of a recipe.  Can we hope, just for a moment, that this was simply a test that never got deleted? 

I realize that some genius came across this one recipe and decided to go viral with it, but can you find me other such recipes to indicate that this was actually an intentional recipe, rather than a test?  I find it rather odd that Paula would post such a recipe, nor that the Food Network would intentionally allow such a horrible "recipe" to exist on their site.  Even if you wish to rip on Food Network for their perceived injustice to the food industry, I cannot imagine Paula Deen intentionally posting this as a true recipe. 

Brilliant idea gobblygook.

Here is their address:

http://www.foodnetwork.com/contact-us/package/index.html

Here is their phone number: 

1-866-587-4653

Anyone interested can contact them and get back to us with their answer. 

Gobblygook, I would highly doubt this is some kind of "test." In the past FN has been very quick to remove items, from their site, that have appeared by accident (most recently the screw up where they accidentally listed Arti Whats-her-Name as part of the chef line up for the upcoming year before the final episodes of The Next Food Network Star aired).  This has been around for about 3 years so I can't believe that it has been accidentally overlooked for that long.

A test? Hardly. One thing to remember is that FN runs their stars' recipes organized by the show they appeared on.
 

So, if on episode X one of Paula's "dishes" was a can of peas warmed in butter, it will appear that way on the FN site.

I have a feeling this thread took a different direction than the OP anticipated. But I'm thoroughly enjoying it.

On the note of Sandra Lee and culinary school, everything that I can find indicates that she spent two days of a two week course at Le Cordon Bleu in Ottawa. She quit without even completing the two week course. However, the Food Network would have you believe that she graduated from a full program at the top of her class: "Sandra then attended the world's leading culinary art institute, Le Cordon Bleu. She learned how to apply her Semi-Homemade® philosophy and savvy shortcuts toward gourmet recipes so that anyone could create and savor delicious dishes at home in less time and at a fraction of the cost. " Their dishonesty is disgusting.  

Nothing dishonest about that statement, just as a broken clock WILL tell the time accurately twice a day--for a minute...

Well... She did attend the school, albeit for a few days.  No one said anything about graduating, did they?