FoodNet

Culinary jottings

1885

Page 282

Presented as published in 1885. Historical recipes may not meet modern food-safety standards. Cook from the modern interpretation, not the original instructions.
The siiiierior quality of the food cooked -with a perfect appliance of this kind when compared with tlie best results obtainable by the native system, is another strong recom- mendation in favour of the range. Take one item of daily consumption — our souj). It is not exaggeration to say that, as a general rule, the native cook takes nearly double the amount of meat and bone necessary to produce this article of food. His doing so may be attributed, of course, in a gi'cat measure to ignorance ; but he can also plead as an excuse the want of a proper kitchen equipment. His practice, if left to himself, has been explained at page 41. Now, independently of the ignorance there exposed of the elementaiy principles of soup-making, observe the wanton wastefulness of fuel. The extraction of the nutritive elements of meat and bone requu-es, we all know, that slow process of cookery called simmering — a process as readily canned out with an English range, as it is almost impossible with the open brick and mud fire-places of the cook-room. At least, it stands to reason that — be the tunny-cuich never so careful — the low fire, at an even degree of temperature, which simmering requires, can scarcely be maintained for hours together by the eye and hand alone. With a range in oui- kitchen, therefore, all we should have to do would be to explain the simmering system, and point out how easily it can be managed. Then, as soon as the native cook discovered that all that was necessary was to pull his soup kettle so many inches back upon the hot- plate, he would do so, for the new plan would not interfere with his customary absence for "rice." In the end wo should get a soup of superior quality extracted from about half the quantity of meat that we formerly issued. In like manner all dishes requiring slow cookery, hashes, stews, sauces, — even our curries, which are often sent up tough from being too quickly cooked,— would be easily OUR KITCHENS IN INDIA. 511 prepared, and certainly be far more digestible. The cleanliness of the system need not be dwelt upon, smoke would become a thing unknown, and ashes could no longer be wafted by every breeze into our food. With so much to be said in favour of the kitchen range, it seems strange that its cost should be considered pro- hibitive by so many well-to-do people in India. If pro- perly used the economies it effects must, in the end, repay its purchase, while it ought to be at all times a very sale- able article. Why, I repeat, should we hesitate to provide ourselves in India with an appliance that in England is regarded by people of ordinary respectability as a common necessary of life ? Ingenious and painstaking persons who hesitate to go to the expense of an English range may, as I said before, effect a material improvement in their kitchen system by putting together a fire-place upon home principles. I know of a case in which an experiment of this kind has been crowned with success. The method followed may be briefly described as follows : —