Architects and home builders? Except a chef can actually build a home too, but only builds the first one and then tells everyone else how to build them after that. (I'm guessing, I've never worked in that sort of kitchen).

But then, some great cooks get accused of being fascists.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1728864101.jpg

A fascist or just a typical New York liberal?

Yes, if you follow the recipe you are a good cook. You've let someone else be the creative one, do the experimentation, and come up with the recipe. They are creative cooks. When you follow them, you are a good cook.

I was a little taken back by the "she "comment too.

My grandmother was a great cook. No recipes either. It was a pinch of this or a handful of that. My mom learned from her - I don't ever remember her using a recipe for anything. Baking is a different story, you can't deviate.

I love to cook - If I bake, (pies, scones, bread) I will follow a recipe. for anything else, I will follow a basic recipe but over time, I modify and season to my liking. I'm not that creative. So when I dine out, I rarely order anything I can't make at home - I order something different or can't make at home.

I have been fortunate to have been around cooks and chefs my entire life...both family and as a waiter in many different restaurants.

To me, cooking is like playing music: Anyone can play the piano (but can they tuna fish?) but most hunt and peck.

I became friends with a young chef at a french restaurant I worked at in San Francisco. If I could, I enjoyed getting there early and helping with the food preps and watching him prepare the days sides, soups, and veggies.

My wife can make everything taste phenomenal, once: The same dishes are rarely the same depending on her whims, time of year

My son is the same, my daughter is close.

Me?

Leftovers always taste better in a flour tortilla.

Nice photo.

I'd crop it a wee bit different...

But, well done!

You can be a decent cook by following a recipe but you need to understand a few basics and some food science to be more than that.

Lots of recipes out there that aren't great and if you follow them to the T, the result will be less than spectacular. Maybe even crap...

And, if you understand a particular cuisine well enough, you can make things up from scratch that will taste pretty good. Although the "creative" side is overblown, in my opinion. The best food you'll ever eat is from a well-developed recipe, either born from generations of people (Grandmas) perfecting it over time, or a team of talented chefs developing a recipe through many iterations. Or, some guy spending his whole life cooking one thing, over and over.

Those church cookbooks, etc. were usually a collection of time tested dishes over generations ... then somebody wrote 'em down and submitted.

But the gifted are amazing ...

I'd be FAT :D

Back to my playing weight back in college ... still can't jump a curb ;)

Recipe or not, without at least a modicum of creatively Beef Bourguignon or Beef Wellington is just warm, brown food.
Without a touch of creatively, Shrimp Alexander is soggy fried shrimp in a slather of seasoned mayonnaise
Even the best tested recipes fail to consider the cut of meat, the origins of the catch and the palates you're trying to please.
A poorly butchered cut of meat may require a carving technique not included in your recipe.
I guarantee that the palate of a Cajun is not the same as the palate of a San Fransisco Nob Hill snob.
Even the side dish matters and who in the world thought an zucchini blossom would go with Veal Parmigiana.

Eat Thomas Keller's Beef Bourguignon and give me your ideas for improving it.

Toss the Shrimp Alexander and get you some good Shrimp 'n grits.

San Francisco is akin to a culinary wasteland, compared to Nawlins.

Skip the veal, you want dry-aged, prime, grass-fed beef, baby.

THere are creative bakers that make new things.

That wasn't photoshopped, nor boosted, nor cropped (hah) one bit. raw from Samsung in Photo Pro Mode. shrug.

The true test of a great chef is creating great favors with minimal ingredients.
For Thomas Keller's Beef Bourguignon, he cleaned his ingredients in the sink and threw it in his stew for good measure.
I would first eliminate the ingredients that muddle other favors.
Next, deep flying a decent piece of beef is sacrilege.
Also not a fan of short ribs. Even though it is supposed to put forth the concept of a French country stew, the bones add little other than some marrow flavoring.
I might also substitute green peppercorns for black.
As for the need for leaks and pearl onions?
I would also go with the more traditional Burgundy. Most Cabs would infuse excessive tannins, and a dryness that often offend some palates.
Should I go on?
Why put the potatoes in the stew? I always serve my French country stew [BB] on a pile of garlic mash potatoes. Makes left overs less starchy.

Looks good.

From my couch, I was wishing you had panned left a little and maybe up a little. And shot from a slightly lower position. And, I’ll shut up now.

Great clouds…

I don’t think you actually read his recipe.

That's an interesting and bold statement based on what?
...my comments are directed at his recipe precisely.
Tell me how my critique misses the mark.

Give me a link to the recipe you looked at, I’ll tell you if it’s the one I’m familiar with.

I miss my mom’s cooking… Deviled eggs, fried chicken, fried okra, sweet tea, breakfast for dinner sometimes, etc.