Improvisation, or abomination?

Cute poem, Ron. But there’s a message in it.

Anyone who hangs out at cooking sites has seen the claim, “I never follow recipes exactly!” Personally, I have no patience for people who make that claim. Far too often cooks make radical changes to recipes, and then complain that it didn’t work out. Must have been something wrong with the originator, right?

get me wrong. There are, to be sure, lots of bad recipes out there. They are either poorly written, or, sadly, were never actually prepared by the author. But, compared to the thousands of recipes published every year, those bad ones are distinctly in the minority. But how do you know, unless you make it as it appears?

More to the point, if you correct, or modify, or improve a recipe, then what are you talking about when it doesn’t work? The author’s recipe? Or your own?

Even cookbook reviewers are guilty of this. When I ran the review section at another cooking site, I had a rule that the reviewer had to make at least two dishes from the book. I had to constantly stress that the recipes had to be followed exactly. Later on they could adapt and modify. But if the recipe was prepared other than as written, then they’d be reviewing their own recipe, not the author’s.

This is especially important with chef-written cookbooks. We assume that a chef knows what he or she is talking about. And that might be true. Except there is many a slip twixt the pen and the lip, as somebody once said. Most chef-written cookbooks do not get the editing they deserve, particularly when it comes to the recipes. Ingredient amounts get changed. Ingredients get left out. There are radical differences between the ingredients list and the directions. Etc.
I reviewed once cookbook that was so rift with these errors as to render it almost useless. After panning the book I got an email from the author, in which she said, “If they bothered you, just think how I felt about those errors….” The difference is, she signed-off on the proofs, and had no basis, other than laziness, for letting them appear.

Sometimes it’s hard to follow a recipe exactly, because experienced cooks do modify. Especially if there’s a perceived problem. They automatically correct it; might not even be aware they’re doing it. Or they change the amounts of ingredients, or substitute others, or just leave some out. Long term there’s nothing wrong with that. It’s how dishes evolve. Just don’t blame the author if things go awry.

On the other hand, less experienced cooks can often learn from badly written recipes. If they make it as written, and it doesn’t come out well, they have a tendency to blame themselves. They’d be better served by analyzing the recipe, trying to identify what led them astray, and correct for it the next time.

That’s one way, btw, we learn how flavors work with each other.

I’m sure others will have a different opinion. But that my two cents.

Hoser wrote: I always, always prepare a new one to the letter, then if I want to play with it later I will.

This is what I do as well, the first time, unless there is an obvious, glaring error. After that, I feel free to play around with it a little bit, but almost always strive to keep it within the context of the cuisine or method that it is meant to be, as far as I can tell.

Maiden voyage I always follow a recipe to the letter.  With one exception.  I always add more garlic. I can't help myself.  >I have a problem<

HistoricFoodie wrote: There's a 12 step for that, G-Man.

I am happy to report that I am not the only one