4 ms·

> but I can't see myself ever using a plain-text recipe with no clue as to who the author is and no reason to suspect that they know what they're talking about.

> but I can't see myself ever using a plain-text recipe with no clue as to who the author is and no reason to suspect that they know what they're talking about. Isn't this how recipes - outside of friends and family - have worked forever? Celebrity chefs are the minority. People normally just Google "air fryer fried okra" and click on one of the first three. A meandering SEO tale doesn't prove this person cook, it proves they know how to game Google.

Niksko 6y ago
This is why most people's cooking sucks. It's not that recipes with meandering SEO tales necessarily have better recipes. It's that recipes without any explanation usually suck. If you pick something with a meandering SEO tale, it _might_ not be terrible. Possibly not terrible is better than definitely terrible.
- nkozyra 6y ago
  > This is why most people's cooking sucks. I'd argue that recipes themselves are why a lot of people's cooking sucks. The recipes tell you what how much and how long but fail to account for the basics of seasoning, preparation and tool selection. If people apply a formal or acquired training to recipes they'd usually vary a lot from person to person much less the original recipe
  - cratermoon 6y ago
    The cookbooks I have I acquired thinking they were good sources of recipes, and they kind of are. But the real value I found, is the sections on "how to cook". Everything in those books on technique: from knowing how to convert tablespoons to volumetric ounces (yes, I'm American) to how to temper eggs. My favorite bread recipe book, for example, isn't my favorite because the recipes are the best, but because it taught me how to make bread, including things like creating a sourdough starter from scratch. Recipes are easy to find, especially now with the internet.
    - dceddia 6y ago
      Yeah, I’ve had the same experience. I really like the Salt Fat Acid Heat [0] book for this. It does have a section on recipes, but a solid half or more of the book is on technique, why certain ways work and others don’t, etc. Lots of stuff that I imagine one would pick up by working in a kitchen or going to school for it, but could take a long time to figure out on your own. 0: https://www.amazon.com/Salt-Fat-Acid-Heat-Mastering/dp/1476753830 https://www.amazon.com/Salt-Fat-Acid-Heat-Mastering/dp/14767...
jeffgreco 6y ago
Nope, people got recipes from books and magazines, which were considered reliable gatekeepers. Looking back at some of the gelatin casseroles of the 60s, of course, casts doubt on some of that reliability.
- nkozyra 6y ago
  > Nope, people got recipes from books and magazines, which were considered reliable gatekeepers. You're making my point - they were gatekeepers because they were discoverable and promoted. That's what gave them credibility. Just as showing in search results does now. People didn't pick cookbooks because they had the most aimless stories that hid the actual recipe.
  - tired-dev 6y ago
    No, but when you have a cookbook or magazine, you also have things like photos of what the finished product looks like, so that you can a) tell if it looks like something you'd enjoy b) tell if it turned out right after it's done. None of the recipes on this site have any pictures, which I think will hold it back.
  - ghaff 6y ago
    I'd say most people these days very much do pick cookbooks for the text/stories, design, etc. Raw recipes are pretty much a commodity these days.
    - nkozyra 6y ago
      These days? Sure, but I was specially talking about pre internet. This is a rather new phenomenon that i believe comes mostly from SEO and a shift to things like cooking and organizing becoming commoditized "lifestyle" genres.
  - SamBam 6y ago
    They were gate keepers because there was an editorial standard to uphold. That's what gave them credibility. If you run the magazine Food & Wine and you just publish random recipes that you found for free in church-ladies' xeroxed recipe pamphlet, you're going to lose your readership pretty fast. Of course, some magazines applied more standards than others, and so that's when the reader learns to trust the recipe in Food & Wine (or whatever, I'm not recommending them) over Reader's Digest.
moehm 6y ago
I don't think OP talkes about polished SEO blogs or celebrities, but about experience and knowing the basics. If you e.g. quote Escoffier or Harold McGee etc, I trust you did your research.[0] Also, OP mentions techniques, which I agree are interesting and worth to share. [0] (Of course you don't have to read and quote books, and a lot of good chefs didn't as well, but that is just one factor for me to decide how much experience you have/how trustworthy you are. Just showing some recipes don't tell me that much.)

Niksko 6y ago

This is why most people's cooking sucks. It's not that recipes with meandering SEO tales necessarily have better recipes. It's that recipes without any explanation usually suck. If you pick something with a meandering SEO tale, it _might_ not be terrible. Possibly not terrible is better than definitely terrible.

nkozyra 6y ago
> This is why most people's cooking sucks. I'd argue that recipes themselves are why a lot of people's cooking sucks. The recipes tell you what how much and how long but fail to account for the basics of seasoning, preparation and tool selection. If people apply a formal or acquired training to recipes they'd usually vary a lot from person to person much less the original recipe
- cratermoon 6y ago
  The cookbooks I have I acquired thinking they were good sources of recipes, and they kind of are. But the real value I found, is the sections on "how to cook". Everything in those books on technique: from knowing how to convert tablespoons to volumetric ounces (yes, I'm American) to how to temper eggs. My favorite bread recipe book, for example, isn't my favorite because the recipes are the best, but because it taught me how to make bread, including things like creating a sourdough starter from scratch. Recipes are easy to find, especially now with the internet.
  - dceddia 6y ago
    Yeah, I’ve had the same experience. I really like the Salt Fat Acid Heat [0] book for this. It does have a section on recipes, but a solid half or more of the book is on technique, why certain ways work and others don’t, etc. Lots of stuff that I imagine one would pick up by working in a kitchen or going to school for it, but could take a long time to figure out on your own. 0: https://www.amazon.com/Salt-Fat-Acid-Heat-Mastering/dp/1476753830 https://www.amazon.com/Salt-Fat-Acid-Heat-Mastering/dp/14767...

jeffgreco 6y ago

Nope, people got recipes from books and magazines, which were considered reliable gatekeepers. Looking back at some of the gelatin casseroles of the 60s, of course, casts doubt on some of that reliability.

nkozyra 6y ago
> Nope, people got recipes from books and magazines, which were considered reliable gatekeepers. You're making my point - they were gatekeepers because they were discoverable and promoted. That's what gave them credibility. Just as showing in search results does now. People didn't pick cookbooks because they had the most aimless stories that hid the actual recipe.
- tired-dev 6y ago
  No, but when you have a cookbook or magazine, you also have things like photos of what the finished product looks like, so that you can a) tell if it looks like something you'd enjoy b) tell if it turned out right after it's done. None of the recipes on this site have any pictures, which I think will hold it back.
- ghaff 6y ago
  I'd say most people these days very much do pick cookbooks for the text/stories, design, etc. Raw recipes are pretty much a commodity these days.
  - nkozyra 6y ago
    These days? Sure, but I was specially talking about pre internet. This is a rather new phenomenon that i believe comes mostly from SEO and a shift to things like cooking and organizing becoming commoditized "lifestyle" genres.
- SamBam 6y ago
  They were gate keepers because there was an editorial standard to uphold. That's what gave them credibility. If you run the magazine Food & Wine and you just publish random recipes that you found for free in church-ladies' xeroxed recipe pamphlet, you're going to lose your readership pretty fast. Of course, some magazines applied more standards than others, and so that's when the reader learns to trust the recipe in Food & Wine (or whatever, I'm not recommending them) over Reader's Digest.

moehm 6y ago

I don't think OP talkes about polished SEO blogs or celebrities, but about experience and knowing the basics. If you e.g. quote Escoffier or Harold McGee etc, I trust you did your research.[0] Also, OP mentions techniques, which I agree are interesting and worth to share. [0] (Of course you don't have to read and quote books, and a lot of good chefs didn't as well, but that is just one factor for me to decide how much experience you have/how trustworthy you are. Just showing some recipes don't tell me that much.)