Will not deny, that I'm a cook.

I compleatley agree this cannot be taught its something you're born with something you always have and will always have its not a taught or learned skill its a gift given to you its a talent true chefs and cooks aren't taught what they do its all from themselves the only things learned. are new items foods and what to do with them all else beyond that is up to the individual to do what they think is best with their knowledge the food speaks for who cooked it not that person's experience not their schooling

Seriously?  Cooking is a skill and it absolutely IS learned.  It's total nonsense to believe that it is anointed by God.  There is technique, procedure, and decision making involved.  That's not to say that talent doesn't come into play but to say that you're born knowing how to is just flattering yourself.  You'd never hear a successful chef claiming something like that, they will always credit their mothers, mentors, good instruction and their hard work for it.

And yet some people are absolutley unteachable in the culinary arts....its an art, i'm skilled in many diffrent kinds of art and i truly belive from everything ive seen in all of those arts ART IS A SKILL YOU ARE BORN WITH. In culinary you're creating beautiful concepts with ingredients the paint the food item as the mixed color and the plate the canvas. Some chefs out there cant cook at all but they can run a kitchen verry smoothly some people cant run a kitchen but can cook amazingly, what about the people who learn new things insainley quick in the kitchen but struggle in every other feild...we who can combine flavors in our head from a young age... the cooking itself is not taught what is though is the names of items and same with food items you've never seen before and their cooking method what is also taught is how to be a exec. Chef
Edited by Anime Shefu - 4/4/12 at 8:31pm

Uhm.... ok.

Punctuation and effective sentence structure is a learned skill.

 

Show me an 18 month old toddler who regularly whips up a hollandaise and I'll agree with you two.

Where's the beating your head on a wall emoticon when you really need it?

 

Dave

My 10month old can't make hollandaise, but he can poach an egg.  Do you think there's a future for him hehe?  Seriously, if there wasn't so much reality tv people wouldn't be so brainwashed to think that they have actual talent these days.  There is so much crap out there that is deemed great or beautiful that truly isn't, that people are confused.  It takes a lot to become good at something, even if you have lots of talent.

Talent in any endeavor, be it cooking, dancing, music, writing,, theater, engineering, law, medicine, whatever, is enhanced immeasurably with a firm grounding in fundamentals.

 

 

 

I just about died laughing about being anointed by God.  

 

I really think cooking is one of the most skill oriented (skill being defined as something you learn) thing a person can learn.  I don't think anyone at first picks up a Chef Knife in a pinch grip, or chops an onion properly the first go.  

 

I consider myself a cook (not a chef) because I consistently try and learn about food and enjoy cooking food.  I am not the greatest cook ever, and I wasn't blessed by the gods, but I continue to learn.  LOL

are you two sharing the same crack pipe? as the story goes, i came out of the womb with a tiny whisk in my tiny little fist!....it has taken me the rest of my life to get this far and i have so much more road to cover..art is a gift you are born with....the skill comes later... it needs to be nutured and cultivated.....it takes an incredible amount of work and reading and doing and studying and learning and more doing to even come close to knowing much of anything, then there is always more to learn and more doing.....it's ongoing and endless...it's a lifetime investment for the serious. ...a cook needs to be taught just as anyone else does who finds their passion and wants to turn over every stone to become the best in their craft...artists, atheletes ,actors, dancers, musicians,philosophers, any artist...any field.  while you may be naturally gifted, you are not naturally educated......the more you know the more you want to know, the more you need and crave to know...seems pretty shallow and cocky thinking to me that you know  all and can do all  just because you have a 'gift'...the two virtually have nothing to do with the other...

joey

i'm sorry, was there a question in your post

Edited by durangojo - 4/6/12 at 8:47am

IMHO, cooking is a craft much like carpentry, a trade that is learned. Some have an aptitude for learning to cook, others have a harder time learning the necessary skills.

 

As with carpentry, there are those rare few that combine an aptitude for cooking with the talent to create works of art. Once they learn the skills necessary to execute the fundamentals successfully and train their palate to recognize the subtleties of flavor, texture, and taste, they can utilize those skills to create masterpieces.

 

Are cooks "born"? No, not IMHO. However, some are born with a greater than normal aptitude for cooking and a very few of those with the innate talent for artistic expression. And even the most apt and talented individual benefits from guidance and education.

 

Couldn't agree more; however I had trouble typing this reply as my arms are sore from patting myself on the back because I now realize that I am anointed from on high, even though not "everything that I make is Gold", as occasionally a brass clunker does thuds out.

lol who is this guy? 

 

Obvious troll. 

I was born talented and gifted, by the age of 10 months I was Executive Chef with a brigade of thirty-five. I was so gifted that none of my brigade could cook at all, they completely relied on me for everything.

 

Heck I was a musician, dancer, painter and sometimes I even cooked. We cooked gold, silver and platinum but nobody even noticed as we danced to our beautiful music. I was unteachable as I already knew everything there was to know about everything and whenever someone had a great idea I yelled at them.

 

Ahh those were the days...

 

 

 

 

 

Life's too short.

I agree that you might be blessed with a great love and ability to make great food. But that being said I myself always wanted to be a "CHEF" but for the same reasons you had, I never attended any culinary school. I did however start working in the food industry at the tender age of 12 back in the day when child labor was not fround upon. My love for food started when I was a small child, being the oldest I was always in the kitchen wanting to help my mother and by the time I was six or seven I was making eggs, bacon, cookies, pancakes, muffins, cakes, sloppy Joes you name it, all back in the day before ready made meals. Subsequently I worked in the food industry until about 19 years old when I tried to get into CIA but couldn’t, but I never lost my zest for cooking. Life took over and my career went in a different direction.

 

Now, many years later and a Grandparent multiple times over I still love to cook and I am even better at it then I ever was. I go to friends homes and can always make something from nothing, when they ask were I bought all the ingredients I tell them in your fridge and pantry, they always pause for a second and say the same thing “I didn’t even know I had these things”. A good cook is always creative, a great chef is creative and consistent! That being said even though I have not been formally trained I have spent many years learning from others and other sources, spreading my experiences and knowledge and even at my age of over half a century I am still in love with cooking.

 

Now call it what you want, but there are chefs and there are cooks! All of them do the same thing they make food that makes them and others happy (hopefully) that being the case it's great that you love to cook and you feel you are so good at it. But remember no matter how good you think you are there is always someone that does things a little different than you, and taste is subjective. Doesn't mean what you do is bad or good but everyone’s taste is different and I might like roast pork for instance but I might not like the way you cook it, doesn't mean you're wrong in the way you prepare it, just that people like different tastes.

 

Being consistent in what you do is more important than being able to follow a recipe or copying someone. Whatever you do when cooking just do what you do best, like most, and be happy that you can share your love for food with others that enjoy what you do!

 

 

This sure is an interesting thread. I believe we are all born to urinate, to eat, to cry and to smile, to fart etc...I think our interests vary. My wife loves math problems and accounting and I hate it. I have always had artistic sense, played guitar in bands for 20+ years. I had to learn all the basics of physically forming chords, and learning theory and application, I had to develop chops and a musical vocabulary of things to fall back on when needed. Now I am bored and apathetic to the music biz and have immersed myself in learning culinary 101. How to chop vegetables and hold a knife. How to make stock, how to braise, how to cook in a pan that isn't non-stick (UGH!) etc. I don't believe many have true god given talent at anything. It's all in mastering the lowest row of basics on the learning "pyramid" and expanding and growing and having patience and making sure you aren't taking instruction from an idiot. There's no mystical nature to learning new skills in my opinion.   

LOL

I haven't laughed so hard at CT

You gotta' love 'em

different types of people are what make the world, well, different

 

 

 

Actually you're not born knowing how to smile. Smiling is a cultural means of communicating an emotion, and it is taught by the environment. It is a learned functions, not a natural one. Babies might make faces that, to US, look like smiles, but it's only several months after birth that they'll actually smile to express happiness, joy, amusement, seduction, or whatever it is that smiles communicate.  
 

 

Sorry French Fries, this was what psychologists and pediatricians believed years ago but has been widely disproven.  Not all abilities that we acquire later are environmentally caused, some simply develop later.  Some reflexes are different at birth, and change later in life, like the one where you splay your toes when someone scrapes the sole or your foot, or curl your toes - they're both reflexes,. meaning they don't go through the brain, but are activated at the level of the spinal cord, and so are not affected by culture.  The smile develops later, (as does the fear of the dark and the ability to walk, both even later still), but they are all instinctive and innate to humans.  (You don't have to TEACH a kid to walk, the kid will walk if you don't prevent him from walking). 

The infant, at a couple of months, will smile at the mother or main caretaker, or at any human face.  If the face doesn't respond, or never does, that instinctive smile will stop happening, so it can be influenced by environment, but all humans smile.  Darwin showed already back in the 1800s that human facial expressions are universal, and anthropologists have found that the most diverse cultures, even those that have never been exposed to tribes outside their own, have universally recognizable facial expressions of happiness, sadness, anger, disgust, etc.  Anyway, like the dog's wagging of the tail, it's not done to "express" happiness, it just happens, and is a social signal but is not intentional at first.  Babies love to see human faces that respond to them, and they automatically smile.  That smile triggers another less powerful instinct, but still instinct, to smile back and to interact, talk, play.  Eventually it's learned that smiling brings social interaction but it doesn't begin that way. 

Babies' smile is instinctive - unfortunately we can rub it out.  Hopefully we don't. 

 

Sorry for the didactic interjection, but this is my field!

 

????????                  ??????????  What are you people blabbering about or what did you bake into your Brownies.??

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

yes, that is why we need to choose our teachers and our mentors very well.

joey
 

 

 

 

But isn't that a form of teaching? They notice that faces looking at them are smiling and rather playful and non-threatening, so they associate the facial expression with the feeling? 

 

The question is: if you had a baby raised in an environment where nobody ever ever smiled, would he end up smiling? If a baby was raised in a hospital room where no one could visit him, would he end up naturally smiling to express happiness after a few months, even though he's never even seen someone else smile before? 

 

Thanks for your feedback Siduri, that's a fascinating topic for someone raising a child. Probably a fascinating field for you to work in. 

I think we should move this particular discussion not to hijack the thread.  How about The Late Night Cafe under "non food related discussions"  Take a look there for my reply. 

the smile- reply to french fries from another thread

I didn;t want to keep hijacking a thread back in the food section so i'll reply here to French Fries' question. 

 

this was the question- we were discussing if the human smile is learned or innate and i had said that humans are born with the innate tendency to smile at a human face, which emerges from some weeks to months after birth and that the caretakers will smile back.

 

Originally Posted by French Fries 
 

But isn't that a form of teaching? They notice that faces looking at them are smiling and rather playful and non-threatening, so they associate the facial expression with the feeling? 

 

The question is: if you had a baby raised in an environment where nobody ever ever smiled, would he end up smiling? If a baby was raised in a hospital room where no one could visit him, would he end up naturally smiling to express happiness after a few months, even though he's never even seen someone else smile before? 

 

Thanks for your feedback Siduri, that's a fascinating topic for someone raising a child. Probably a fascinating field for you to work in.

 

Back in the 1800s when contagion was understood but there were no vaccines or antibiotics, babies in orphanages were cared for only physically, and interaction was kept at a minimum, with masks and gowns to prevent massive epidemics within the institutions.  The babies frequently died of unknown causes, which they called marasma, lack of human connection and attachment.  The babies would just refuse to eat and would die.  In any case they grew up severely deprived and with serious problems connecting with others. 

 

So to answer your question, the baby would smile at the caretaker but if the caretaker repeatedly didn;t smile, the baby would at first try more to engage the face, then would just withdraw in frustration.  Many people now study babies with detailed filming of interaction and we've learned a lot from this.  A couple of months of steady interaction with a seriously depressed person who is incapable of responding, and the baby will show all the physiological and psychological symptoms of depression - no genes required!  It can be reversed with good relatedness. 

 

If the caretaker responds to a smile with a still face, the baby will try to engage it even harder, maybe becoming even more appealing, more open smile, waving arms and legs - if the caretaker doesn't respond the baby will cry.  Caretakers who habitually don't respond, make the baby stop smiling, and they can permanently lose their motivation to smile even with others - it's just too frustrating.  It begins as an instinct, but environment always has a role in any innate biological characteristic. 

 

A baby raised in a hospital room with no human contact would have no happiness to express.   It's not only smiles but responsiveness that counts - the response to the baby's signals gives him a sense of agency, of cause and effect, of other people like him outside.  If the baby cries and we pick him up, he gets a sense of communication - it's worth trying to communicate.  Same with a smile being returned.  Then smile goes from instinctive to intentional and communicative.  

Babies need to be held and they have an innate predisposition to be soothed if they're rocked at the rate of about 60 rocks per minute - a normal human walking speed.  No wonder women of all cultures had ways to carry infants on their body - they cried less!  The interesting thing is they are soothed even when they're put down.  An hour of rocking and you can have dinner in peace!  We're born to relate and to attach. 

 

Also interesting, a baby copies a human face almost at birth - stick out your tongue and he will copy - he knows he has a face and a tongue!  amazing how much they know.  Motorially they can;t do it all, but they recognize a face as being like theirs, or they wouldn't know to copy it.  .

Siduri, I don't think this was a food-related topic much to begin with anyway.

LOL 
 

 

 

Gotcha, will look there. Thanks!
 

 

Siduri, thanks a lot for the long and detailed answer! Fascinating. But OH so incredibly sad! Tears almost came to my eyes when reading the description of those babies in the orphanage.