Quote from: Jmolinari on August 11, 2010, 07:26:55 PMIn reality Loundry's posts always do boil down to "my way rules, and the other way is inherently flawed and wrong, even if other enjoy it, because they can't possibly enjoy it in reality, it's a facade".I think that's true for things like wine, which is impossible to view logically because of its use as a measurement of sophistication. I despise wine culture and think it's full of shit. And yes, I do think people invent flavors, especially with wine, since the appreciation of it is used as a measurement of sophistication. Perhaps that's what you were referring to with the "always" brush of the hand? If so, then I fully agree with you. But you don't have to take my word for it. Your argument is with Frederic Brochet, not with me. What do you think of his experiment that showed that professional wine tasters can't tell the difference between red wine and white wine? If professional wine tasters can't do it, then what hope do neophyte wine tasters have? Perhaps they'll just say things like, "I'm getting some star fruit notes in this one!" It's a facade.Now the subject at hand is quite a different one, and it's one that doesn't merely apply to bar-be-cue or even cooking. The best analogue I can think of is the use of the programming language INTERCAL, or even C++, which spawned the phrase, "Life is too long to know C++ well." It's likely that might be outside of your realm of expertise and thus completely meaningless to you. In short, it's not a facade. It's something quite different, but altogether very human.Quote from: Jmolinari on August 11, 2010, 07:26:55 PMI don't like my pulled pork dripping juices.For some reason, people have assumed that I like my pulled pork "dripping juices" or "almost like soup". Where on earth did I write that, or imply that not throwing all of the juices of the pulled pork into the fire would result in such? I'm disappointed that BBQ aficionados haven't been able to mount a serious defense of, "All the juices dripping from the meat are garbage and should be thrown into the fire!"Quote from: Jmolinari on August 11, 2010, 07:26:55 PMI like the bark to be a bit dry and the inside moist, and flavorful. To say that all BBQ cooked pork is dry and bland is an exaggeration to elicit a response.Most pulled pork is dry. Almost all of it is bland. Compare it to thit nuong or dae ju bulgogi, both of which are also cooked from the pork shoulder, and pulled pork pales in comparison. You know it's true. Why deny it? Have you ever heard someone say, "This pulled pork is so good, it doesn't even need sauce!"? They say that because pulled pork is usually so dry and bland that it needs sauce, and it comes out that way because of the traditionally flawed way that it's cooked. (Throw all those worthless juices into the fire!) A course in the study of surface area to volume ratio would be instructive.The "response" I'm trying to "elicit" is a serious defense of throwing all the juices into the fire, given how bland and boring the meat turns out.Quote from: Jmolinari on August 11, 2010, 07:26:55 PMAnd i've never seen anyone on any BBQ boards comparing smoke rings as an indicator of what BBQ is better.I wrote specifically that BBQ is about personal competition as well as professional and semi-professional. It's coming from the belief that Cooking Should Be Hard. It's a means of creating a feeling of superiority out of the mastery of methods that are unnecessary. I think that's another reason why chefs and some supine home cooks hate the garlic press. It makes mincing garlic easy. They think mincing garlic should be hard, so they mock people who use garlic presses.
In reality Loundry's posts always do boil down to "my way rules, and the other way is inherently flawed and wrong, even if other enjoy it, because they can't possibly enjoy it in reality, it's a facade".
I don't like my pulled pork dripping juices.
I like the bark to be a bit dry and the inside moist, and flavorful. To say that all BBQ cooked pork is dry and bland is an exaggeration to elicit a response.
And i've never seen anyone on any BBQ boards comparing smoke rings as an indicator of what BBQ is better.
<major snipage>I'm sure your method produced a completely delicious product, but rather than making a blanket statement that it's "better" than any other method, maybe you should say it's "different". After all, "better" is a judgment call which you have no right to make on other people, lest you become one of those you so despise.
1) I can't disagree with you on the wine stuff. I dont drink wine, but i do laugh at people describing it. Coffee is somewhat similar and some descriptions make me laugh as well. But what do i care? I mean, if people WANT to taste starfruit and hints of boysenberry and overripe mangosteen who am i to tell them not to? If they derive enjoyment from "finding" these flavors, and enjoy discussing them in a group, why would it bother me, even if i think they're making it up? If it bothers you, or people belittle you for NOT tasting them, find a different crowd that doesn't judge you on what you can and can't taste. If THEY like to do that, i don't think it's up to you to tell me otherwise, then aren't you becoming like them?
I'm not even sure what the whole reference to computer programming means.
2) When did i every say all the juices from the meat are garbage and should be thrown in the fire? I think collecting them is a great idea, and would make a very tasty addition to the sauce or back into the meat, just like you did. In fact, there is a place in Texas that does just that with their brisket drippings. Can't think of th ename...they spoke about doing it on tv. They said the briskets flavor the sauce, instead of the sauce flavoring the meat.
3) comparing BBQ pork to thit nuong is like comparing pancetta and bacon. They're made from the same piece but are 2 completely different, equally delicious, products. One has nothing to do with the other and i want to eat both depending on what i'm doing. Do i want pancetta for breakfast? no. Do i want bacon in carbonara? no (well, maybe sometimes depends on my mood).
If your reference point for pork shoulder is thit nuong or bulgogi, i have a much simpler solution that what you're doing. Make thit nuong. I don't understand these 2 items even being in the same paragraph. One is a thin sliced, super hot grilled shoulder, the other is a super tender smokey piece of meat. One has nothing to do with the other, and they are not mutually exclusive, they both need to exist, and neither one's existence detracts from the other, and neither should ever strive to be the other.
Many, maybe MOST people, have not had good BBQ, and therefore assume sauce is needed.
Just because that's the case doesn't mean that properly cooked BBQ doesn't have it's place. Mine is neither dry, nor bland, and just because everyone else's is doesn't mean i should change my cooking methodology. Is it "flawed" because it isn't easy to do well? I guess it could be....but then so are many other things in life.
And why do you keep saying people say "throw those worthless juices in the fire"? You're the only one who has said that.
I'm sure your method produced a completely delicious product, but rather than making a blanket statement that it's "better" than any other method, maybe you should say it's "different". After all, "better" is a judgment call which you have no right to make on other people, lest you become one of those you so despise.
It's not just coffee, but some people are trying to do the same thing with beer. It's ridiculous.Your question is insightful and multifaceted, so forgive me if my response is rambling. Why should it bother me that people are claiming to enjoy flavors that are completely imaginary? Because what they believe in is not true, and truth is worth standing up for. But that's not why I harp about winers and their sham of a culture. The reason I degrade them is because they have used their imaginary flavors as an excuse to insult and denigrate people, and the threat of said abuse to snooker even more people into believing in their bullshit. Someone should stand up against that -- why can't it be I? Perhaps you'll see that as making a mountain out of a molehill, and I'm okay with that. Truth be told, I don't spend much time thinking about wine and winers. But if it is, in fact, true that wine appreciation is an extremely expensive exercise in bullshit conformity, then shouldn't I be allowed to say so? Shouldn't I have the right to tell people, "No, you don't have to invest in all that expensive wine. Even the very best wine tasters in the world can't tell the difference between red wine and white wine."? If that is, in fact, true, then don't people deserve to hear it?There is no shortage of people in the world promoting the wine cult and asking for donations. Surely there is room for me saying that there is another way.
INTERCAL was a programming language that was designed deliberately to be hard to program in. Writing trivial programs in INTERCAL is therefore seen as a feat of strength in programmers' culture.
In other words, non-traditional. I think you may agree with me more than you want to.
I think bacon is superior to pancetta in every way. Come to think of it, that reminds me of pork belly. I have never once eaten a piece of "pork belly" in a nice-ish restaurant where I didn't immediately wish I was eating bacon instead after the first bite. Note to chefs: if your pork belly is inferior to bacon, then you failed. It should be called "The Bacon Test".
I disagree. Those are all preparations of a pork shoulder, some better than others. I think pulled pork is the most boring of them all; furthermore, it's the most difficult to prepare with traditional methods. And that's really what my criticism is about: the traditional method of cooking pork shoulder that BBQ chefs crow about and sucks just about everywhere. I think it's because the traditional method puts the whole pork shoulder over a fire, with a very small surface-area-to-volume ratio, and lets all of the juices go to waste. The ones that don't do this are rare enough to be non-traditional. What's needed is innovation, not perfection of a flawed method. Can pulled pork be better? Of course it can! I can make better in my electric roaster oven with liquid smoke. (Well, I *do* put it on the Primo afterwards... call me a hypocrite...) There's no telling what a talented, dedicated chef could do if he weren't hobbled by tradition.I take it back. Pernil is even more boring than pulled pork. It's like Puerto Ricans tried pulled pork and said, "This has too much flavor and moisture. More boring, please!"
It's not an assumption. It's a justified effort to cover flaws in an inferior product. It's amazing to people who eat BBQ when it "doesn't even need sauce". Thit nuong doesn't need sauce, either.
Perhaps you're cutting through the fury to get at the sound. It's flawed because the tools are inferior. BBQ chefs regard it as a matter of pride to turn out semi-decent product with flawed methods, just like some programmers regard it as a matter of pride to write a web browser in INTERCAL.
Case in point: a friend of mine used to take it as a source of great pride that he and his family would cook pulled pork. (He even dreamed of opening his own BBQ restaurant he was so self-satisfied!) His method was to evenly space single lit coals in a pattern on the bottom of the grill while simultaneously keeping a chimney starter lit and blazing with fresh coals. He would constantly feed cold coals into the chimney starter and then extract them to replace, one by one, the coals in the grill that were expiring. He used two probe thermometers to monitor the temperature of different parts of the grill to ensure that a temperature of 210 was being maintained. It was fastidious and painstaking and took quite a bit of finesse. He was intensely proud of his INTERCAL programming BBQ method. I remember the first day I made pulled pork in the Alton Brown flower-pot method with the (gasp!) electric burner to generate smoke. The look on his face was priceless when he tasted it. (It was a C-, which is an A for pulled pork.)
For the same reason that I've said that some chefs' take on pizza sauce is "just throw some tomatoes on it": because there is functionally no difference between collecting the juices and then throwing them in the fire, and cooking the meat so that the juices fall into the fire. And it's obvious: the juices are regarded as worthless, otherwise, why let them go to the fire? (I suppose there is a difference in that the "traditional" method of waste is more slothful, lazy, and less deliberate.) Most importantly, it puts the onus on the believers in the traditional method to defend their choice of wasting all of the juices. It's an effort to get them to say, "But I don't throw all the juices into the fire!" for that moment of introspection that usually follows immediately afterward. If my product has more flavor and less dried-out texture, then I don't see why it's wrong to call it "better". That is, unless it's a valid preference to like dull and dried out gray meat and then claim it as an icon of cultural pride. I think the South deserves better than that, but I could be wrong. (FG, chime in here.) And I don't think I'm in danger of becoming what I despise until I say, "Since everyone in Atlanta completely sucks at cooking BBQ, I'll just have get down from the cross and open my own BBQ restaurant" and follow through on that threat. I'm just a lowly home cook with home cooking methods, so I think that's what makes it all the more poignant when my home cook methods beat the pants off of "pitmasters". Maybe it has something to do with the inferior cooking methods they're beholden to obey.
This is what happens when two engineers debate barbecue.