Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Make dull food sound exciting


Guest simon
 Share

Recommended Posts

All chefs do this, I mean what is the point of adding pan when describing a fried product? As in pan-fried croquette of horsecock or whatever.

 

My brothers favourite is hand-battered, yeah right you cooking that sumbitch in your hands are you?

 

I call shenanigans

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ShoePiss
All chefs do this, I mean what is the point of adding pan when describing a fried product? As in pan-fried croquette of horsecock or whatever.

 

My brothers favourite is hand-battered, yeah right you cooking that sumbitch in your hands are you?

 

I call shenanigans

 

Well, there's pan fried and deep fried. Quite different really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ShoePiss
Yes, like the 2 different points I was making!

 

No idea what you're on about. There's a point in adding 'pan' to fried if it was fried in a pan as opposed to being submersed in a vat of boiling oil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No idea what you're on about. There's a point in adding 'pan' to fried if it was fried in a pan as opposed to being submersed in a vat of boiling oil.

Oh I see what you are getting at. Still disagree though, the pan bit is an unnecessary poshing up word in my view. You need to specify deep-fried, but if something is fried it's usually taken as shallow cooked.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ShoePiss
Oh I see what you are getting at. Still disagree though, the pan bit is an unnecessary poshing up word in my view. You need to specify deep-fried, but if something is fried it's usually taken as shallow cooked.

 

Call this one a draw :) I think it depends on the food but Sautéed would be more posh than pan fried.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today there was a conversation that i had with my head chef about Gino and how shit he is and he calls things more exciting than what it is Which gave me the idea for this thread add your own im bored and need a laugh

 

Chefs Special Bean and Sausage Fricasse, (Tinned beans and sausage) With Slow roasted Bread (Bread cooked in oven instead of Toaster.

 

Or Chicken Sperical (Poached Egg) With Lightly Coloured moist Battons. Toasted Buttered Soldiers hahaha.

 

Please make my day and join in

 

Such flagrant homoeroticism has never been seen like this before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah sauteed is more restauranty and Pan-fried is your gastropub crowd. In fact there I am using their unnecessary over poshing of foods.

 

Grub house and Pub

 

but Sauted means pan tossed. many people call t5hings sauted not knowing what it means..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...