I've been remiss on updating this series of pages -- combination of my wife visiting, and the stress of preparing for the class mid-term exam. In 5 1/2 years of university, I never had quite this kind of "test experience". In retrospect, it wasn't that "bad" an exam -- but the lead-up to it, the preparation, the ground-rules for this unique test -- kept my mind... well... engaged.

In school, we are applying technique to ingredients. The home chef typically follows a recipe, which includes the technique in the form of instructions. What separates the home chef from the professional, is the "internalization" of the technique. In theory at least, (it is happening, but at different rates for each student) once you've got the technique, the recipies are just suggestions -- guidelines.

Having said that, we still ingredient lists in class. We're usually given a demonstration, and the mise-en-place -- the stuff you need to have at the ready to execute on the dish, and technique or method. Got these two -- you should be able to prepare the dish.

What was unique about this exam -- was that we were allowed reference to neither our recipes nor technique. For some things we've done repeatedly -- preparing French bread, for example -- both recipe and technique are comitted to memory. But for a complex sauce with perhaps 8 or 10 ingredients, a variety of techniques -- and only once or maybe twice doing it.

The exam was in two parts -- theoretical (written) and practical (in the kitchen). The theoretical exam was fairly comprehensive -- about 3 hours allocated for the test. The lion's share of the exam time was in writing down in sufficient detail, the ingredients and techniques for several dishes. The most interesting question of the lot (in my opinion) was like this:

"Prepare X, Y and Z. Provide the complete ingredient list, technique, and a list of every kitchen item you will need to prepare the dish".

Each whisk. Every pan. Storage container. It was interesting because you had to visualize the whole process, on the fly. I got 10 out of 10 points on that question. Didn't do quite that well on the rest -- got an 80-something overall.

The practical test was much tougher for me. We were advised in advance what the possible dishes we might need to cook would be: a quick bread (e.g. scones) or risen bread (baguette), and a complete main-course with sauce. Then we needed to demonstrate proper knife-cuts, and produce "coronets" -- small, impromptu pastry bags, made out of parchment paper.

I drew the baguette, and venison steak with "turned" potato (this is a classic French technique where you slice the vegetable into 7 more-or-less sides approximating an American-footbal shape. It takes a while). The sauce for the venison was to be a Chasseur ("Hunter style") (a recipe here if you don't mind it in French).

This, plus the knife cuts and the other stuff -- didn't seem like a big deal. Would that it had been so.

I was rattled from the start. In retrospect, nothing on the test was especially difficult. But the environment; the (largely self-directed) pressure -- Chef towering over you looking for you to do something wrong. My knife cuts were adequate -- I'd done better -- coronets, a bit sloppy. But the three minutes that snatched defeat from the jaws of victory -- was the Chasseur. It all seemed fine until I was about to serve it. Then:

Plating

Part of preparing a dish (largely lost on home chefs) -- is presentation. At home, we serve a slab o'meat and a pile of vegetables, pass the salt and pepper please. In "fine dining" (what we're supposed to be learning) the plate is to be a feast for the eyes as well as the palate. So proper attention must be paid to how the plate is presented. I sauteed the venision steak to medium rare (about 2 minutes per side) -- in rendered bacon fat. Cut it into slices about 3/8" thick and fanned it about the center of the plate.

All's Well that Ends

I passed, and with around the grade I expected.

Next Log

Previous Log