But She Plays One On TV
Food celebrity Rachael Ray has
reiterated her longstanding objection to being called a “chef.”
In a recent Huff Post interview she states that she prefers to be
called “a cook.” Why? “I have pause when people refer to me as
a 'chef' because I'm simply not.” She says she didn't go to the CIA
(Culinary Institute of America) and she thinks that calling her a
“chef” would be “disrespectful of people who did.” But let's
think about that one, Rach. There are certain distinctions to be
made.
In the 21st century food and
entertainment world, anybody who cooks on TV is called a “celebrity
chef.” And sometimes the inaccuracy really grinds my gears.
Wolfgang Puck is a chef. Mario Batali is a chef. Cat Cora is a chef.
Emeril Legasse is a chef. Bobby Flay is a chef. Like her or hate her,
Giada De Laurentiis is a chef. On the other hand, Sandra Lee is not a
chef and former “Bag Lady” Paula Deen is definitely not a chef.
(That's not a pejorative: when she started out in the food business
making bag lunches for office workers in Savannah, Deen called
herself “The Bag Lady.”) Her sons aren't chefs either. “Pioneer
Woman” Ree Drummond is not a chef. Neither is the ubiquitous and
vastly annoying Guy Fieri, although he at least has a degree in hotel
management. Nigella Lawson may be a “Domestic Goddess,” but she's
not a chef. And yet the undiscriminating public lumps them all
together as “celebrity chefs.” Emphasis, I think, on the
“celebrity” part.
Let's look at the
word “chef.” Literally translated from French, it means “chief.”
It refers to someone who is the head or the leader of a group of
people. Old French-Canadian records indicate that all my male
ancestors were chefs because that was how they were designated on the
census forms. In that instance, the word related to their status as
heads of their households. In the food world, the “chef” is the
head of the restaurant staff. At it's most basic form, the position
of “chef” is merely an indicator of the person who oversees the
kitchen. The “chief cook.” And that certainly does not require an
extensive and expensive culinary education. In simple terms, a “chef”
needs to be able to cook to a degree that enables him or her to lead other
cooks.
But, alas, we no
longer live in simple times. The reality of life today lends itself
to specialization. Everybody has to have a very specific job that
includes a very specific title. And so it is with chefs. Most people
define a “chef” as the person who creates the menu and oversees
all back of the house functions like ordering and scheduling. They
have to be up on food costs and they need to know their way around
health codes and regulations. According to some purists, a chef has
to meet the stringent criteria of the American Culinary Foundation.
They have to be certified in nutrition and sanitation. There are
exams and practical skills tests involved. They have to take
management courses and have at minimum a two-year degree from an accredited
culinary school. And, oh yeah, it helps if they can cook.
On the
flip side, there are just a hell of
a lot of chefs out there who never saw the outside of
a culinary school, much less the inside. Their exams and practical
skills started with washing dishes and working their way up. Let me
be there when you tell Tom Colicchio, Jamie Oliver, or Thomas Keller
that they aren't really “chefs” because they didn't go to
culinary school. Certainly the world renowned Ferran Adrià is
a classically trained chef, right? Surely he met all those stringent
educational criteria before basically inventing molecular gastronomy,
right? Nah. He dropped out of school and worked as a dishwasher in a
hotel restaurant. Then he learned his trade from a bunch of other
people who probably didn't meet the criteria for being “chefs”
either.
Want to know who else doesn't qualify
academically as a chef? How about the aforementioned Wolfgang Puck?
His education came through apprenticeship. Does anybody debate the
inclusion of Alice Waters among the pantheon of American chefs? She
has a degree in French Cultural Studies, but no culinary school.
Internationally recognized chef Jacques Pépin
started out in his family's restaurant and later apprenticed in
Paris. But no “Le Cordon Bleu” or other “formal training.”
Similarly, French legend Paul Bocuse studied under Eugénie Brazier,
the first chef to attain six Michelin stars. She also had no “formal
training.” Daniel Boulud was a finalist in France's competition for
Best Culinary Apprentice at age fifteen. No culinary school for him;
he apprenticed his way to culinary stardom. Hunky Aussie chef Curtis
Stone worked his way up ladder. Lidia Bastianich may head a
restaurant empire now, but in her first eatery in Queens, she copied
recipes from successful Italian restaurants and hired an
Italian-American chef to execute them. No culinary school for her.
And the late Cajun and Creole king, Paul Prudhomme, was entirely
self-taught.
And, by the way, do you know what one
of the highest culinary prizes in America is? I'm referring, of
course, to the James Beard award. And did you also know that James
Beard, the Dean of American Cuisine, never spent a day in culinary
school? He was an unsuccessful actor who started up a catering
business that ultimately led to cookbooks, speaking engagements, and
to the establishment of his own cooking school. Not bad for someone
who was never certified in nutrition and sanitation and all the other
fal de rol that some people associate with chefdom. James Beard was
nothing but a cook, and yet all the hoity toity chefs want his name
associated with their restaurants. Strange, huh?
There are four generations of food
professionals in my family. My grandfather and a couple of uncles
were restaurateurs. I do what I do as a cook and a writer, and my son
has worked his way up from fast food to management of a couple of
pretty nice upscale places. My grandfather and my uncles cooked. My
son and I cook. Despite the fact that we've all had a hand in
creating menus, ordering supplies, supervising operations, and, oh
yeah, preparing food, do any of us qualify as “chefs?” Meh.
The people for whom I cook often call
me a chef. And for lack of a more comprehensive term, I sometimes
bill myself as a “personal chef.” All that means is that I cook
for people who pay me to do so. Perhaps “personal cook” would be
more accurate, but such a term does not exist in the industry, so I
go with what works. I do not, however, delude myself or others into
thinking that I am a classically trained chef. Sure, I'm a better
than average cook. If I weren't, people wouldn't be paying me to cook
for them. Yeah, I know a lot about food
and technique because I've taken a gazillion classes and read a
gazillion books. And I've been cooking for a gazillion years. But am
I a “chef?” Like Rachael, the word makes me squeamish, largely
because I know my limitations.
Here's why I'm not a chef: Give me some
basic, everyday ingredients and a decent kitchen and I'll whip up
some unforgettably good food for you. A gas stove, some good pots and
pans, a handful of tools and utensils, a few tomatoes, some onions,
garlic, herbs and spices and I'll have you drooling over a delicious
tomato sauce mixed with some of my handmade pasta. And you can sop up
any leftover sauce with some of my fresh-baked bread. It'll be good,
I promise. As long as I'm working with ingredients and techniques
that fall within my comfort zone.
Now...drop off somebody like Mario
Batali in the middle of the woods with nothing but a knife and a box
of matches, and in ten minutes he'll make you a feast. THAT'S a
chef! Oh, and did I mention that Mario dropped out of culinary
school? He never got that minimal two-year degree that qualifies him
as a real “chef.”
I
mean, I watch “Chopped” and “Iron Chef” and “Top Chef”
and similar shows and I sit there, mouth agape and eyes glazed over,
as people throw together real, honest-to-goodness, edible dishes
made from weird things, some of which I didn't even
know existed. C'mon! Cactus flower buds, rose water, quince paste? Goat brains? Sea cucumbers? My
wife and I are are like, “what the hell is that?” And then Ted
Allen explains it and we're still like, “what the hell would you do
with it?” And then the competitors do something wonderful with it
in twenty minutes. Things that I couldn't conceive of in twenty
hours. No, I'm not a
chef. I'm a really good cook, but those people,
the ones who can make something out of anything or nothing,
are chefs. And some of them
never went to culinary school either.
So
what it really comes down to in the final analysis is the ability to
walk the walk and talk the talk. Like James Beard, I came to the
kitchen by way of the theater. There's another place where ability
often trumps education. There are a lot of bad actors out there with
good educations. A diploma does not make someone with no talent into
an actor. You either are one or you're not. Same thing applies to
being a chef. Give me somebody with raw talent and gut instinct any
day. The old joke goes, “you know what you call a med student who
finished last in his class? Doctor.” Just because you got a piece
of expensive paper that says you went to school for two years doesn't
mean you're any good in the kitchen. I've probably logged a thousand
hours in online and hands-on cooking classes. In more than fifty
years of standing at a stove, I've thoroughly tested my practical
skills. I've even studied the ServSafe exam for food professionals.
So I'm a chef, right? Nah. Not once you take me out of my comfort
zone. I know a lot about food
because I've studied it inside and out. I can make a phenomenal
American breakfast and I can handle myself well in an Italian kitchen
because those are the things I know and understand. The things with
which I have great experience and familiarity. Take me out in the
woods with a knife and a box of matches and I'll cut myself and burn
down the forest just before I starve to death. So, no, I'm not a
chef. And a whole lot of people who call themselves “chefs”
aren't either. They're nothing more than over-hyped and/or
over-educated cooks. Or celebrities.
Kudos
to Rachael Ray for recognizing her limitations. That's the real
difference between a cook and a
chef.
No comments:
Post a Comment