Originally entrees were often, and indeed at first
almost always, called hors cV oeuvre, or, as one might
paraphrase it, “ by the way dishes ” ; not included in
the actual menu, but simply trifles brought in “ to
amuse the guests ” whilst waiting for the serious
parts of the dinner, termed releves, or removes, as
we call these main dishes for want of a better word.
Hors d’ceuvre were at first both hot and cold, but
gradually that name was restricted to the cold trifles
sent in as a whet to the appetite ; whilst the word
entree was used for the hot dishes. For this word
there is no actual equivalent in our language,
though some people do call them side-dishes and
made-aislies. To translate it literally we must call
these, “ brought-i *1 ” dishes, a somewhat awkward
term, but one which derives some meaning from the
fact that entrees were brought in with all their
accessories, such as sauce, garnish, &c., on the same
B
9
ENTREES.
dish; and though fashion has since permitted the
addition of sauces to he handed round (to allow of
variety of tastes) with many little dainties that are
properly served dry, the name of entrees has been
retained. The uncertainty as to their name also
extended to their position on the menu, which
wandered about, first appearing before, then after
the soup ; then they were placed, as they still are
often in France, after the joint, whereas in England
the fancy obtained of making them serve as an
introduction to the joint or relevc. Much may be
said for both services, though personally the French
method appeals to me most, for two reasons. First,
the keen edge of the hungry diner’s appetite being
taken off by the solid releve, he is better able to
appreciate the delicacy of the little dishes which
constitute an entree ; in the second place, in England
joints are generally roasted, so that if the joint is
served after the entrees two roasts clash, the roast
game, or rot , of the second course coming on top of
the equally roasted joint, a collision which is avoided
by the French system.
We have so modified the old way of serving food
that we have considerably reduced our dinners, and
indeed a good many of us would shudder and give
tip in despair were we expected to work our way
through the solid bill of fare of former days, when
everything was doubled, if not (in the case of
entrees and sweets) actually quadrupled. Now a
dainty dinner will often consist of soup or fish, one
or perhaps two entrees, a roast bird of some kind, a
sweet (preferably iced), and a savoury, “ and there
ENTRIES AND RECHAUFFES.
3
an end,” as Pepys has it in his most fascinating
diary, which, by the way, is a storehouse of quaint
culinary and gastronomic ideas.
Another fancy has arisen amongst us, and that is
the taste for cold dishes, a fancy which, however,
chiefly affects the temperature of the smaller or
“kick-shaw” part of the meal, such as entrees,
sweets, and savouries. Now there is a good deal to
be said for this fancy, from the point of view of the
economic housewife with a limited kitchen staff.
Page 1
Presented as published in 1901. Historical recipes may not meet modern food-safety standards. Cook from the modern interpretation, not the original instructions.
AI-modernized reading of the original text
Originally entrees were often, and indeed at first almost always, called hors cV oeuvre, or, as one might paraphrase it, “ by the way dishes ” ; not included in the actual menu, but simply trifles brought in “ to amuse the guests ” whilst waiting for the serious parts of the dinner, termed releves, or removes, as we call these main dishes for want of a better word. Hors d’ceuvre were at first both hot and cold, but gradually that name was restricted to the cold trifles sent in as a whet to the appetite ; whilst the word entree was used for the hot dishes. For this word there is no actual equivalent in our language, though some people do call them side-dishes and made-aislies. To translate it literally we must call these, “ brought-in" dishes, a somewhat awkward term, but one which derives some meaning from the fact that entrees were brought in with all their accessories, such as sauce, garnish, &c., on the same
B
dish; and though fashion has since permitted the addition of sauces to he handed round (to allow of variety of tastes) with many little dainties that are properly served dry, the name of entrees has been retained. The uncertainty as to their name also extended to their position on the menu, which wandered about, first appearing before, then after the soup ; then they were placed, as they still are often in France, after the joint, whereas in England the fancy obtained of making them serve as an introduction to the joint or relevc. Much may be said for both services, though personally the French method appeals to me most, for two reasons. First, the keen edge of the hungry diner’s appetite being taken off by the solid releve, he is better able to appreciate the delicacy of the little dishes which constitute an entree ; in the second place, in England joints are generally roasted, so that if the joint is served after the entrees two roasts clash, the roast game, or roast of the second course coming on top of the equally roasted joint, a collision which is avoided by the French system.
We have so modified the old way of serving food that we have considerably reduced our dinners, and indeed a good many of us would shudder and give tip in despair were we expected to work our way through the solid bill of fare of former days, when everything was doubled, if not (in the case of entrees and sweets) actually quadrupled. Now a dainty dinner will often consist of soup or fish, one or perhaps two entrees, a roast bird of some kind, a sweet (preferably iced), and a savoury, “ and there
ENTRIES AND RECHAUFFES.
an end,” as Pepys has it in his most fascinating diary, which, by the way, is a storehouse of quaint culinary and gastronomic ideas.
Another fancy has arisen amongst us, and that is the taste for cold dishes, a fancy which, however, chiefly affects the temperature of the smaller or “kick-shaw” part of the meal, such as entrees, sweets, and savouries. Now there is a good deal to be said for this fancy, from the point of view of the economic housewife with a limited kitchen staff.