A well cooked meal and wine - my greatest joys in life. Simple, romantic and fulfilling. Add butter. Add cream. A beautiful pan sauce from a well timed reduction. A cool glass of white wine in the hot kitchen as all the flavors come together. The scent of fresh cut shallots still lingering as the garlic in the pan sweats.
I don't judge anyone for making food and drink a footnote in their life. I enjoy cooking as much as eating but I don't expect anyone else to enjoy either of those, much less both. But I must admit, I sure don't understand the sacrifices of taste, scent, sight, texture and accomplishment for productivity or convenience.
Perhaps this is a reduction of the "Chicken McNugget"?
> I don't judge anyone for making food and drink a footnote in their life.
I believe you that you're trying not to be judgemental, but FWIW, your statement equating eating soylent to making food and drink a footnote in life sounds at least presumptuous if not judgemental. I love cooked meals too, but I can easily see the value in a quick, controlled meal with a proper balance of macros, it's not a stretch to understand at all.
If you can't understand trading any experience for convenience, then do I assume you cook 3 meals a day and never eat fast food? Running a startup, I'm jealous if you have time for that, I simply don't. I cook once in a while, but no way every meal. (And I hope you're not drinking wine with every meal you eat, morning noon and night! ;) )
I can extra understand people controlling for calories by having a soylent or something like it for lunch. Controlling for calories is really hard to do, and products like soylent help with self-control on multiple levels by making it easy to measure macros, as well as having a meal with no peer pressure to overeat or snarf on fries or beer. If you're controlling for calories or for macros, the lack of a butter cream reduction wine dinner texture experience for lunch is a distinct advantage that leaves room in the budget to splurge on a well cooked dinner in the evenings or weekends.
> * your statement equating eating soylent to making food and drink a footnote in life sounds at least presumptuous if not judgemental.*
But that was a core part Rob Rhinehart's original proposition.
I totally get that it's not why or how everyone consumes Soylent, but these were the words used to introduce it to the world:
In my own life I resented the time, money, and effort the purchase, preparation, consumption, and clean-up of food was consuming
I used to spend about 2 hours per day on food. ... Now I spend about 5 minutes in the evening preparing for the next day, and every meal takes a few seconds.
Food can be art, comfort, science, celebration, romance, or a reason to meet with friends. Most of the time it’s just a hassle, though.
The food is eating us. I don’t know how to change peoples’ behavior, but now that I’ve discovered Soylent, I’m healthier than I’ve ever been, have more freedom with my time and money, and never have to worry about the stuff.
I don't see how equating statements like "I resented the time", "it's just a hassle" and "never have to worry about the stuff" with "a footnote in life" can be called presumptuous.
> I don't see how equating statements like "I resented the time", "it's just a hassle" and "never have to worry about the stuff" with "a footnote in life" can be called presumptuous.
If either the article this thread is commenting on, or the person I replied to, had quoted any of those things, I'd be inclined to agree.
Do you not cook every meal because you don't have the time, or because it's simply easier to buy something? Because I bet you have the time.
Anyway, you don't have to cook to eat a nutritious meal that you make yourself. Nuts and dried fruit is a good meal supplement, as are greens, chopped veggies, homemade granola bars, bread with peanut butter, hard boiled eggs, etc. Even a glass of milk, honestly. All of these things can be eaten on the go, and when balanced against the rest of your daily diet, can be healthy as well as delicious.
You probably do laundry at some point. And even if you pay someone to do your laundry, you probably at least take the five minutes to gather up your laundry and bring it to your taskrabbit. Those same 1-5 minutes can be used to grab simple healthy food from your pantry or refrigerator. And there's probably over 1,000 five minute meal recipes out there. You don't even have to pop down to the market to pick uo ingredients anymore. And civilizations around the world have been making on-the-go food for millennia.
Honestly, the time argument is very improbable. Proof: you have time to comment on HN.
> Do you not cook every meal because you don't have the time, or because it's simply easier...?
Aren't those two sides of the same coin? Yes, I really don't cook every meal because it's easier and because I don't have the time. Unless I do a lot of planning and shopping in advance and change my habits and take lunch to work with me every day. I can't cook at work, and I'm not working from home.
The answer truly is that I do not have the time to cook a reduction for every meal.
> Anyway, you don't have to cook to eat a nutritious meal that you make yourself
Totally agreed. Do it all the time. Not sure what made you think I'm saying otherwise.
> You probably do laundry at some point [...] the time argument is very improbably. Proof: you have time to comment on HN.
That's wildly flimsy "proof", but you already know that, right? I'm a walking counter-example that cooking meals takes longer than commenting on HN, I happen to know from experience, because I do both.
You seem to be in favor of Soylent, your argument is the same as theirs, it's quick and healthy to spend 5 minutes making a shake. You don't seem to be advocating well cooked meals like reductions with wine. I replied to someone talking about cooking a reduction and having wine as the alternative to Soylent, that is the context in which you're replying.
I wish I could have wine with every meal. However, with breakfast that might just be superfluous.
I eat all types of food and because I live in Manhattan I sure am fortunate to have all types of food nearby. I do enjoy fast food from time to time. Is a well made pastrami on on rye fast food? I do know it's delicious. So is a Big Mac for what it's worth.
I probably don't eat many rich lunches. Sandwiches work there. I don't think you need to have a Full English Breakfast, Croque Monsieur and some type of Béchamel based dinner every day. You also don't have to snack on garbage between meals.
Just because you make a meat and reduce a sauce from the drippings doesn't mean it's a rich meal. Served with 2 vegetables you have a rather lightweight meal. Especially when you control for portions. 1/3 pound of meat might be good enough.
If I lived within walking distance or a cab or subway ride of Wolf's or any other well made pastrami on rye, I'd throw moderation out the window and eat that for every meal. There are no well made pastramis on rye where I live.
If I could have a full English breakfast and Béchamel dinner every day, I'd do that too. Once my startup goes unicorn, I will have time to cook. ;)
Soylent is like birth control for food: it lets you choose whether food is going to be for pleasure or for sustenance. I eat it often because it's healthy, quick, and I actually enjoy it. That said, I also very much enjoy food with family and friends. They're too completely different things though, but previously we had to use the same tools for both needs.
I believe the point is that a sandwich doesn't have the macronutrient ratio most people want and a full range of micronutrients so people don't have to be worried about missing anything important if they decide to eat sandwiches for 2/3rds of their meals.
Isn't Soylent equivalent to a supplement in essence? It's a base diffused with certain nutrients. Why is this different than a sandwich and a vitamin in terms of nutrition? Or even more, how is it different from a vitamin?
A focus on fat in the morning, then vinegar in the afternoon and finally umami in the evening would serve me well. All between 2 pieces of appropriate bread.
Guessing you're in Australia by the maccas. Which Soylent do you drink? I've tried multiple flavours of a few local ones and they all universally taste like liquid sawdust.
I couldn't agree more. Food is one of the most accessible luxuries. The most expensive meals, with fine wine, cost less than most business class tickets (to wherever). On the other hand, a soft cooked egg on a piece of toasted bread after a workout can be just as delicious and costs pennies, available to all.
Next they're going to tell us they've found a way to eliminate that pesky sexual reproduction that's been plaguing us...
I agree so much! Many chefs, when asked what they love most the answer is simple. It's almost always some form of an egg. Great food doesn't have to be expensive or with win or be complex. In fact, very often the best things are simple and fast.
We live in an era where these things are readily available and they're really easy to make and to be delicious thanks to an abundance of spices and endless styles of fats.
I enjoy so much an egg fried in a small amount of butter until the edges are crispy on a piece of rye toast. A slice of tomato with a dash of ground pepper on top. Total cost: 50 cents tops? Total time: 4 minutes? Dishes: A non-stick pan that takes 10 seconds to clean?
It has never been more accessible or easy to not only cook but discover how to cook thanks to global shipping and the Internet than today. And we are left with a slurry of questionable nutrients as the future? OK fine - but I refuse.
But what if they introduce the way to make our sexual reproduction activity not causing pregancy?
What if they made something you wear over your penis, or a pill that the woman take, so that sexual reproduction activity doesn't comes with all its consequence?
I mean I think you're right. You can have it all and we do today. An amazing supply line of ingredients from around the world and endless great recipes and education on technique on the Internet. We can have our cake and eat, both in the kitchen and the bedroom. Rejoice!
Now, your gonna probably call me crazy, but take a bottle of cheap wine and throw it in the blender before ya drink it, failing that, a mixmaster works too. Completely changes the complexion of the wine when you do this, generally makes it quite a bit better.
I love a good meal and often plan my holidays and trips around them. However, lunch at work I an office park makes it hard to get good prepared food. It's also expensive. I love cooking, but I also love other things like programming and ceramics, so my time is limited. Soylent strikes a nice balance between nutrition and convenience for occasions where I don't have time and/or don't want to spend the money.
I would not otherwise eat z Chicken McNugget but probably a at best mediocre sandwich or cereal.
One of the hardest things when reducing a sauce is to not stop to soon and to not go too far. If you stop too soon you can use a roux or more crudely use flour or starch to thicken the sauce. If you go to far you end up with a glaze. You could add stock or water to thin, however.
A well timed reduction, in my opinion, you end up with a sauce that is "nappe". But the trick is knowing when you're there. An interesting thing about reducing a liquid is that as it reduces further it reduces faster as there is less liquid but the same amount of heat. So there is the critical moment where you go "just far enough" and your sauce is perfect. Too far and you have a glaze or a burned sauce. Not far enough and and the flavors are not blended and concentrated.
I've found in cooking that stopping just before you think something is done is a good heuristic. IT keeps cooking for a bit longer. Timing this can be hard has there is a small window between not reduced enough and too much. It goes fast near the end. A classic "happens slowly, then all at once".
I wonder what kind of sauce you're thinking of when you write all of this... some sort of alfredo sauce for pasta? And Indian curry kind of sauce? Some gravy-like sauce you put on your turkey or chicken?
Could you maybe link to a youtube recipe tutorial of some sort which you feel demonstrates this "reduction" to your approval?
No, way more simple! But closest to a "gravy-like sauce". But you have a lot of room for improvisation once you master the basic technique.
One of the beauties of classical French cooking is that it is simple. It is based on this premise of simplicity. One of the easiest things to learn is a "pan sauce". After that you might learn to make the 5 mother sauces which are super simple too.
What this means is you cook the meat, generally on high heat, in a pan with a fat such as oil and/or butter and when it is done you remove the meat and put it aside. The pan will have crisply bits on the bottom. In French, this is known as "fond". This is good stuff!
After you remove the meat and reduce the heat and you put in a "mirexpox" which is usually some onions or shallots, some diced carrots and some fine diced celery. But really, whatever you want! You're using less heat so they just slowly brown for about 4 minutes or so. This is called "sweating".
Now the magic happens. You crank the heat back up and "deglaze" by adding wine, vinegar, water or whatever. What happens is all the bits that are stuck to the bottom of the pan come off. You use a flat edged wooden spoon to help scrape them off and they come off easily. This is where a ton of flavor lives. You keep the heat on high and let your wine or whatever reduce a bit. It cleans your pan too.
Then you add some meat stock - chicken, beef, veal, etc. Stir everything around a bit and let it reduce. It should boil and steam. Over time the water evaporates and you get to a point where you have a thick sauce that isn't too thick but not watery. In some cases you could add a roux (flour and butter mixture) to thicken. Add some herbs like thyme if that sounds good. When it's at the right thickness you take off the heat and pour through a strainer and add some butter and stir to thicken. Discard the parts you used to help flavor the sauce like the carrots, onions, etc. Or keep them if you like them! Up to your taste!
Now you pour over your meat and whatever else. It's pure flavor and dead simple. And this is but one technique you can play on many ways.
You want a link? Google "pan sauce" and dive in. It is the easiest way to make a basic meal into a gourmet meal I think. Steak, pork, chicken or whatever.
Indeed it can. There are vegetable stocks (and you can make your own if you're really into it) and you can create "fond" from many vegetables. Onion in particular likes to leave sticky bits if you overcook it a bit.
BTW, don't use non-stick pans if you're trying to make a pan sauce! If you really care about cooking at home you should buy some good tools. All-Clad stainless steal is generally good. I have Falk copper but that's probably not a good place to start due to the price. But good cookware matters quite a bit. A cheap $30 pan is OK to boil water in but won't work well for a lot of decent coking.
I don't judge anyone for making food and drink a footnote in their life. I enjoy cooking as much as eating but I don't expect anyone else to enjoy either of those, much less both. But I must admit, I sure don't understand the sacrifices of taste, scent, sight, texture and accomplishment for productivity or convenience.
Perhaps this is a reduction of the "Chicken McNugget"?