It almost goes without saying, that people have a polarized view of molecular gastronomy. Either you love it, hate it, love to hate it, or if you’re anything like my folks, turn up your nose, in confusion.
In any case, there is a whole lotta misinformation out there. Mostly in the form of people making false assumptions, or half-truths, about a topic they do not fully understand.
My thoughts? See here. I talk about the primary themes of this creative, and necessary cooking style. I explain molecular gastronomy in a very la-mans, straight forward way. Plus why its not weird or unhealthy, but on the contrary, making cuisine better, and better for you.
Think you know better? Agree, disagree? Hit me with your best shot…
8 Jan ’13 at 8:09 pm
I find it fascinating. I also find that at first, it’s really fun and exciting and produces stuff that you really don’t know what to do with. And some of it is just plain unpleasant. And you have to keep at it, really thinking about why you would want to sous vide something instead of braising it. Why would I want to spherize or powder something? And what the hell is with all the foam? The point at the end of it is to create something delicious, something maybe unexpected. Much of the Molecular Gastronomy that works best is fairly invisible as you’ve noted. Most foams, to me are worthless, but, on occasion, they are these magical bits of heaven. I do believe most people only see the odd plates and weird bits of food that sort of dares you to eat it. And that scares them off. If only they knew how much food they already enjoy that has benefitted from Molecular Gastronomy properly utilized. But I still can’t figure put how to make agar spaghetti that isn’t revolting. Fun…but revolting.