THE CULT OF THE
CHAFING DISH
“What does cookery mean? It means the knowledge of Medea, and of
Circe, and of Calypso, and of Helen, and of Rebekah, and of the Queen
of Sheba. It means knowledge of all herbs, and fruits, and balms, and
spices, and of all that is healing and sweet in groves, and savoury
in meat. It means carefulness and inventiveness, watchfulness,
willingness, and readiness of appliances. It means the economy of your
Great-grandmother, and the Science of modern chemistry, and French
art, and Arabian hospitality. It means, in fine, that you are to see
imperatively that every one has something nice to eat.”
RUSKIN
THE·CULT·
OF·THE·
CHAFING·
DISH·
BY·
FRANK·
SCHLOESSER·
LONDON
GAY·AND·BIRD
1905
_Published_ _May 1904_
_Second Edition_ _March 1905_
_To_
THE ONLY WOMAN
WHO COULD TURN
ME FROM
BACHELORDOM
CONTENTS
CHAP. PAGE
I. The Chafing Dish 1
II. Preliminaries 19
III. Soups 38
IV. Fish 54
V. Flesh and Fowl 79
VI. Vegetables and Salads 108
VII. Eggs and Savouries 138
VIII. Sauces 159
IX. Sweets and Oddments 177
X. Amenities of the Table 192
Index 207
[Illustration: THE·CULT· OF·THE· CHAFING DISH ···
CHAPTER·1·
THE·CHAFING·DISH]
“There does not at this blessed moment breathe on the Earth’s surface
a human being that willna prefer eating and drinking to all ither
pleasures o’ body or soul.”--THE ETTRICK SHEPHERD.
Every bachelor has a wife of some sort. Mine is a Chafing Dish; and I
desire to sing her praises.
My better half--I love to call her Chaffinda, and to dwell upon the
doubled consonant--is a nickel-plated dish on a wrought-iron stand,
with a simple spirit-lamp wherewith to keep herself warm. I bought her
at Harrod’s Stores for twelve shillings and ninepence--and she has
sisters.
It has been borne in upon me that many quite nice folk may be glad to
learn something of the possibilities of Chaffinda. Whether married or
single, there are moments in the life of nearly every man and woman
when the need of a quick, hot, and light little meal is worth much fine
gold. To such I would politely address myself.
The ordinary domestic cook is a tireless enemy of the Chafing Dish.
She calls it “fiddle-faddle.” Maybe. But inasmuch as it is clean,
economical, speedy and rather simple, it would naturally not appeal to
her peculiar sense of the culinary art.
To bachelors, male and female, in chambers, lodgings, diggings,
and the like, in fact to all who “batch”; to young couples with a
taste for theatres, concerts, and homely late suppers; to yachtsmen,
shooting-parties, and picnickers; to inventive artists who yearn for
fame in the evolution of a new entrée; to invalids, night workers,
actors and stockbrokers, the Chafing Dish is a welcome friend and
companion.
It has its limitations, of course, but they are few and immaterial,
and its obvious advantages and conveniences far outweigh its trivial
drawbacks. At the same time it must be remembered that it is a serious
cooking apparatus, and by no means a mere toy.
It is quite erroneous to imagine that the Chafing Dish is an American
invention. Nothing of the sort. The earliest trace of it is more
than a quarter of a thousand years old. “Le Cuisinier Français,” by
Sieur François Pierre de la Varenne, Escuyer de Cuisine de Monsieur
le Marquis d’Uxelles, published in Paris in 1652, contains a recipe
for _Champignons à l’Olivier_, in which the use of a _Réchaut_ is
recommended. A translation of this work, termed “The French Cook,” was
published in London in 1653, and the selfsame recipe of _Mushrooms
after the Oliver_ contains the injunction to use a Chafing Dish;
moreover, the frontispiece, a charmingly executed drawing, shows a
man-cook in his kitchen, surrounded by the implements of his art; and
on the table a Chafing Dish, much akin to our latter-day variety, is
burning merrily. This was in 1653. The _Mayflower_ sailed in 1620.
So much for the antiquity of the Chafing Dish. At the same time our
mitigated thanks are due to America for its comparatively recent
reintroduction, for until quite lately, in Great Britain, its use was
practically limited to the cooking of cheese on the table. The Chafing
Dish is much esteemed across the Atlantic, although one is forced to
admit that it is sometimes put to base uses in the concoction of unholy
stews, which have not the natural flavour of fish, flesh or fowl, or
even good red herring. Still, if the Americans are vague in their
French nomenclature, unorthodox in their sauces, eclectic in their
flavourings, and over-lavish in their condiments, yet they have at any
rate brought parlour cooking to a point where it may gracefully be
accepted as an added pleasure to life.
When two or three are gathered together, and one mentions the magic
word “Chafing Dish,” the second invariably chimes in with “Welsh
Rabbit.” This is an error of taste, but excusable in the circumstances.
Chafing Dishes were not created for the exclusive canonisation of
Welsh Rabbits, although a deft hand may occasionally play with one in
a lightsome mood. There are other and better uses. All the same, a
fragrant and delicate Rabbit is not to be despised, although it must
not be made conceited by too great an elevation into the realms of high
cookery.
My Chaffinda has at least seventeen hundred and four different charms,
therein somewhat exceeding the average number appertaining to her sex,
but it would require volumes to mention them separately, and it must
suffice to indicate roughly a few of the more prominent.
I suppose that every nation has the cooks that it deserves, and, if
this be accepted as an axiom, the general degeneration of the Plain
Cook of the middle classes amply accounts for the growing cult of the
Chafing Dish. The British school of cookery, in its mediocre form, is
monotony exemplified. Too many broths spoil the cook; and hence we
derive our dull sameness of roast and boiled.
Sweet are the juices of diversity, and whilst there is no reason for
the Chafer to elaborate a sauce of thirteen ingredients, the cunning
manipulation of three or four common articles of the domestic
store-cupboard will often give (intentionally or otherwise) surprising
results. This I shall hope to explain more fully later on.
Imagination and a due sense of proportion are as necessary in cooking
as in any other art--more so than in some, for Impressionism in the
kitchen simply means indigestion. Digestion is the business of the
human interior, indigestion that of the doctor. It is so easy to cook
indigestible things that a savoury cunningly concocted of Bismuth and
Pepsine would seem an almost necessary adjunct to the menu (or _Carte
Dinatoire_, as the French Revolutionists called it) of the budding
Chafist.
But the demon of indigestion may easily be exorcised with a little care
and thought. Three great apothegms should be borne in mind. Imprimis:
Never worry your food; let it cook out its own salvation. Item: Use as
few highly spiced condiments as possible; and, lastly, keep to natural
flavours, juices, and sauces.
Much modern depravity, for instance, I attribute to the unholy cult of
Mayonnaise (or Mahonnaise, or Bayonnaise, or Magnonaise, according
to different culinary authorities). At its best it is simply a saucy
disguise to an innocent salmon or martial lobster, reminding the
clean-palated of an old actor painted up to look young. I once knew a
man who proposed to a girl at a dance-supper simply because he could
not think of anything else to say, and suddenly discovered that they
both hated Mayonnaise. I have no reason to suppose that they are
unhappy.
At the same time I am in no wise against trying new dishes, new
combinations of subtle flavours, if they do not obliterate the true
taste of the basis. An experimental evening with Chaffinda, when
one is not sure how things are going to turn out, is, I find, most
exhilarating, and a sure cure for the blues. But I am fain to admit
that on such occasions I always provide a chunk of Benoist pressed beef
as a stand-by in case of emergency.
There is nothing final about the Chafing Dish.
Another point about having a wife in the shape of a Chafing Dish is
somewhat delicate to explain. Coarsely indicated, it amounts to this.
Continuous intercourse with such a delicious, handy and resourceful
helpmeet tends to a certain politeness in little things, a dainty
courtesy which could not be engendered by the constant companionship of
a common kitchen-range. Chafing-Dish cookery bears the same relation to
middle-class kitchen cookery that the delightful art of fencing does to
that of the broadsword. Both are useful, but there is a world of subtle
differentiation between the two. The average rough and tumble of the
domestic saucepan contrasts with the deft manipulation of the miniature
battery of tiny pans.
And politeness always pays; moreover, it is vastly becoming. I gave
a little tea-party recently to some dear children. Some of them were
twins. Edith, a female twin of nine, asked me to help her to some more
blackberry jam. “Certainly, Edith,” I said; “but why don’t you help
yourself?” The maid was even politer than she was hungry: “Because I
was afraid I should not take enough.” And thus we learn how things work
among manikinkind.
There are some who delight in the flavour of onions. I do myself--but
then I am a bachelor. Politeness and onions form one of life’s most
persistent inconsistencies. His Most Gracious Majesty King George IV.,
it is recorded, attempted to kiss a royal housemaid, who said: “Sir,
your language both shocks and appals me; besides which, your breath
smells of onions!” And again, in a Cambridge dining-room, a framed
notice on the wall stated: “Gentlemen partial to spring onions are
requested to use the table under the far window.”
Nevertheless, the benefits of onions toward the human race are
probably not less than those attendant on the discovery of steam. It
is a vegetable whose manifold properties and delights have never been
properly sung. As a gentle stimulant, a mild soporific, a democratic
leveller of exaggeration in flavour, a common bond between prince and
peasant, it is a standing protest of Nature against Art.
On my wall, as I write, hangs a delightful oil study of a clump of
onions in flower, which the deft artist aptly dubs _Le Fond de la
Cuisine_. Dr. William King said that “Onions can make even heirs or
widows weep”; and the “Philosopher’s Banquet,” written in 1633, seems
to meet the case excellently:
“If Leekes you like, but do their smelle disleeke,
Eat Onyons, and you shall not smelle the leeke;
If you of Onyons would the scente expelle,
Eat Garlicke, that shall drowne the Onyon’s Smelle.”
I would not go quite as far as the poet, but I confess to a weakness
for chives. A judicious touch to many salads and made dishes is very
desirable. Chives are to onions as the sucking-pig is to pork, a baby
scent, a fairy titillation, an echo of the great Might Be.
Charles Lamb had a friend who said that a man cannot have a pure
mind who refuses apple dumplings. In the plural, mind you, not the
singular. Appetites have vastly changed since then, probably not for
the better, but the test even to-day seems adequate and noteworthy.
I do not propose to recommend either onions or apple dumplings as
Chafing-Dish experiments, but merely adduce them as worthy examples of
the toothsomeness of simplicity.
The late lamented Joseph, of the Savoy and elsewhere, once said in his
wisdom, “Make the good things as plain as possible. God gave a special
flavour to everything. Respect it. Do not destroy it by messing.” These
are winged words, and should be inscribed (in sugar icing) above the
hearthstone of every artist in pots and pans.
The Chafing Dish is a veritable Mephistopheles in the way of
temptation. It is so alluringly easy to add just a taste of this or
that, a few drops of sauce, a sprinkling of herbs, a suggestion of
something else. But beware and perpend! Do not permit your culinary
perspective to become too Japanesque in the matter of foreground.
Remember your _chiaroscuro_, take care of the middle distance, and let
the background assert its importance in the whole composition. “I can
resist anything--except temptation” is the cry of the hopelessly weak
in culinary morality.
Lest I should be hereafter accused of contradicting my own most
cherished beliefs, let me hasten here and now to assert that
condiments, esoteric and otherwise, were undoubtedly made to be used
as well as to be sold; and I am no enemy of bolstering up the weak and
assimilative character of--say--veal, “the chameleon of the kitchen,”
with something stronger, and, generally speaking, of making discreet
use of suave subtleties to give completeness to the picture. But the
watchword must always be Discretion! To those who muddle their flavours
I would commend the words of the Archbishop in Gil Blas: “My son, I
wish you all manner of prosperity--and a little more taste!”
Sidney Smith thought Heaven must be a place where you ate _pâté
de foies gras_ to the sound of trumpets. There is a late Georgian
ingenuousness about this which is refreshing. The liver of the
murdered goose and the scarlet sound of brass! Nowadays a Queen’s Hall
gourmet would compare the celestial regions to a continuous feast of
_Cailles de Vigne braisées à la Parisienne_ to the accompaniment of
Tschaikowsky’s “Casse Noisette” suite, which is more complicated, but
perchance not less indigestible.
The typical crude British cookery, if carelessly performed, is a
constant menace to its disciples. If well cooked there is nothing more
wholesome, save perhaps the French _cuisine bourgeoise_, but--“much
virtue in your If.” As a matter of fact, in nine households out of
ten, in the middle-middle classes (and the upper too) the fare is
well-intentioned in design, but deadly in execution, with a total
absence of care and taste.
There is a curious old book, probably out of print nowadays, which
deals tenderly, if severely, with the shortcomings of British cookery.
It was published in 1853, and is called “Memoirs of a Stomach, written
by Himself.” A typical passage runs: “The English system of cookery
it would be impertinent of me to describe; but still, when I think of
that huge round of parboiled ox-flesh, with sodden dumplings floating
in a saline, greasy mixture, surrounded by carrots, looking red with
disgust, and turnips pale with dismay, I cannot help a sort of inward
shudder, and making comparisons unfavourable to English gastronomy.”
This is fair comment, and brings me back to the advantages of the
Chafing Dish. An old German fairy tale, I think one of Grimm’s, says:
“Nothing tastes so nice as what one eats oneself,” and it is certain
that if one cooks so as entirely to satisfy oneself (always supposing
oneself to be a person of average good taste), then one’s guests will
be equally satisfied--if not more so.
In dealing with Chaffinda we may, after a minimum of practice, be
almost certain of results. If one is naturally clean, neat and
dainty in one’s tastes, then one’s cooking should display the same
characteristics. One’s individuality shines forth in the Chafing Dish
and is reflected in one’s sauces. Chaffinda conveys a great moral
lesson, and, as a teacher, should not lack in honour and reverence.
The late Prince Consort, being on a visit, wrote to a friend: “Things
always taste so much better in small houses”; if one substitutes small
dishes for small houses the Prince predicted the Chafing Dish.
The kitchen is the country in which there are always discoveries to
be made, and with Chaffinda on a neat white tablecloth before one,
half a dozen little dishes with food in various stages of preparation,
a few select condiments, an assortment of wooden spoons and like
utensils--and an inventive brain--there are absolutely no limits to
one’s discoveries. One is bound by no rule, no law, no formula, save
those of ordinary common sense, and though it might be too much to
expect to rediscover the lost Javanese recipe for cooking kingfishers’
or halcyons’ nests, the old manner of treating a Hocco, or the true
inwardness of “the dish called Maupygernon”; yet there are illimitable
possibilities which act as incentives to the enterprising.
There is a Chinese proverb to the effect that most men dig their graves
with their teeth, meaning thereby that we all eat too much. This is
awfully true and sad and undeniable, and avoidable. The late Lord
Playfair asserted that the actual requirements of a healthy man for a
seven-day week were three pounds of meat, one pound of fat, two loaves
of bread, one ounce of salt, and five pints of milk. What a contrast to
the chop-eating, joint-chewing, plethoric individual who averages five
meals a day, and does justice to them all! Sir Henry Thompson says:
“The doctors all tell us we eat too fast, and too often, and too much,
and too early, and too late; but no one of them ever says that we eat
too little.”
The proper appreciation of Chaffinda may ameliorate this, for in using
her one speedily becomes convinced of the beauty of small portions, an
appetite kept well in hand, and the manifold advantages of moderation.
It is easy to feed, but nice eating is an art.
Bishop Wilberforce knew a greedy clergyman who, when asked to say grace
before dinner, was wont to look whether there were champagne glasses on
the table. If there were, he began: “Bountiful Jehovah”; but if he only
espied claret glasses he contented himself with: “We are not worthy of
the least of Thy mercies.”
Of course growing children and quite young grown-up folks require
proportionately more food than real adults, for they have not only to
maintain but to build up their bodies. But to such the Chafing Dish
will not appeal primarily, if at all, and they may even be found
impertinent enough to look upon it as a culinary joke, which it is not.
Chaffinda hates gluttons, but takes pleasure in ministering to the
modest wants of the discerning acolyte, fostering his incipient talent,
urging him to higher flights, and tempting him to delicate fantasies.
“Do have some more; it isn’t very good, but there’s lots of it.” So
said a friend of mine to his guests about his half-crown port. This
is the sentiment of the man who knows not the Chafing Dish. “Lots of
it” is the worst kind of hospitality, and suggests the quantity, not
quality, of the cheap-jack kerbstone butcher. Little and good, and
enough to go round, is the motto of the tactful house-husband. A French
cook once said that it was only unlucky to sit down thirteen at table
if the food were but sufficient for twelve.
There is such a deal of fine confused feeding about the ordinary
meals of even a simply conducted country house that imagination
boggles at the thought of the elaboration of the daily menus. With
four, or possibly five, repasts a day, few of them chaste, most of
them complicated, a careful observer will note that the cook has been
listening to the pipings of the Great God Sauce, and covers natural
flavours with misnamed concoctions which do nothing but obliterate
nature and vex the palate.
There are some few houses, great and small, town and country, where
the elemental decencies of the kitchen are manfully preserved, where
wholesome mutton does not masquerade as _Quartier d’Agneau à la
Miséricorde_, and the toothsome lobster is not Americanised out of all
knowing. To such establishments, all honour and glory.
But to those whose means or opportunities do not permit of a carefully
trained cook, a home-made artist, I would in all diffidence recommend
the cult of the Chafing Dish, whose practical use I now propose to
discuss.
[Illustration]
[Illustration: CHAPTER II·
PRELIMINARIES·]
“Tout se fait en dinant dans le siècle où nous sommes,
Et c’est par les diners qu’on gouverne les hommes.”--CH. DE MONSELET.
Chaffinda’s cooking battery is small, but select. The Chafing Dish
proper comprises the stand and lamp, and the dish, called the “Blazer,”
which has an ebony handle; and there is an ingenious spirit diminisher
which enables one to reduce the flame to a minimum, just enough to keep
the flame simmering, or to put it out altogether. A second, or hot
water pan, belongs to the outfit, and an asbestos toast-making tray may
be bought for a trifle. In addition, a couple of green or brown dishes
of French fireproof china, an egg-poacher, a marmite, and perhaps a
casserole, all of which are best from Bonnet in Church Street, Soho,
will come in very usefully. To these may be added the usual complement
of plates and dishes and several wooden spoons of different sizes; a
fish-lifter is also desirable, so is a strainer, and a pair of graters
come in very handily. This practically completes the gear of the
budding Chafist, though additional items may be added from time to time
as occasion demands.
The makers of the Chafing Dish sell a useful methylated spirit can,
with a curved spout to fill up the asbestos wick. It will be found that
a good filling will burn for thirty to forty minutes, which is ample
for all ordinary purposes. Much of course depends on the quality of
the spirit used, and, further, the wick will only become thoroughly
saturated after half a dozen usings, and will subsequently require
rather less spirit. I have found that water boils in the “Blazer,” or
handled Chafing Dish, in about ten minutes, and instructions on bottled
or preserved food, soups and the like, must be slightly discounted.
Thus if one is told to boil for twenty minutes, it will be found that
fifteen minutes in the Chafing Dish will be ample in nearly all cases.
As this is mainly a true story of my own personal adventures among the
pots and pans, I can hardly do better than describe the first dish I
tried my ’prentice hand upon, with the devout wish that all neophytes
may be as successful therewith as I was.
Beef Strips.
The experiment, the preliminary exercise, if I may so term it, has no
name, although it savours somewhat of the Resurrection Pie, unbeloved
of schoolboys. Let us call it Beef Strips. Cut three thick slices from
a rather well-cooked cold sirloin of beef, cut these again into strips
a quarter of an inch wide and about three inches long. Take care that
they are very lean. Chop up half a dozen cold boiled potatoes (not of
the floury kind) into dice. Put the beef and the potatoes into the
Chafing Dish. Light the lamp and see that the heat is steady, but not
too strong. Add at once a good-sized walnut of butter, a teaspoon of
Worcester sauce, salt and pepper. For at least ten minutes turn over
the mixture continually with a wooden spoon until it is thoroughly
heated. Turn it out on to a hot dish, and garnish with half a dozen
tiny triangles of toast.
This is a simple luncheon or supper dish which takes little time,
and--to my taste at least--is appetising and satisfying. Like all
Chafing-Dish preparations, it can be cooked on the table, with no more
protection than a tray under the wrought-iron stand, and a square of
coloured tablecloth upon your white one to receive possible splashes or
drops.
Jellied Ham.
Now for exercise number two, which I have christened Jellied Ham, and
commend as a dish very unlikely to go wrong in the manipulation.
Get your flame steady and true, and put a small walnut of butter in
the dish. When it is fluid, add a good dessert-spoonful of red currant
jelly, a liqueur glass of sherry, and three drops of Tabasco sauce.
Drop into this simmering mixture a few slices of cold boiled ham
cut thin and lean, and let it slowly cook for six to eight minutes.
If you wish to be extravagant, then instead of the sherry use a
full wine-glassful of champagne. It is by no means necessary to eat
this with vegetables, but if you insist on the conjunction, I would
recommend a purée of spinach, directions for which appear hereafter.
This Jellied Ham is an agreeable concoction, which I find peculiarly
soothing as a light supper after having seen an actor-manager playing
Shakespeare. This is, however, after all only a matter of taste.
It has always seemed to me that different forms of the drama require,
nay demand, different dinners and suppers, according to the disposition
in which one approaches them. For instance, before an Adelphi
melodrama, turtle soup (mock if necessary), turbot and rump steaks are
indicated, whereas a musical comedy calls for an East Room menu, and an
Ibsen or G. B. Shaw play for an A.B.C. shop or a vegetarian restaurant
respectively. But I only hint at the broad outline of my idea, which
is capable of extension to an indefinite limit.
Vegetarian meals do not appeal to me. There is a sense of sudden and
temporary repletion followed shortly afterwards by an aching void,
which can only be assuaged by a period of comparatively gross feeding.
Besides, judging from the appearance of my vegetarian friends (in whom
maybe I am unfortunate) they often seem so much to resemble some of the
foods they eat as to render themselves liable to be dubbed cannibals.
But this is probably mere prejudice.
Minced Chicken or Game.
To resume the cult of Chaffinda. Here is another dish which I recommend
to the beginner. It is a simple mince. Take any remains of chicken or
game, pheasant for choice, and mince it (or have it minced) small, but
not too small. Never use a mincing machine. Put the mince aside, and
mix in the Chafing Dish the following sauce: a full walnut of butter,
a tablespoon of flour, and a pinch of salt and pepper; add gradually
about a tumblerful of milk. Keep continually stirring this and cook it
well for five minutes, adding three drops of Tabasco sauce and half a
tablespoon of Worcester sauce, also a squeeze of a lemon. When it is
thoroughly amalgamated throw in the mince and let it get hot without
burning. Serve it with toast or very crisp biscuits.
The only objection I know to this mince is that all cold birds,
especially cold pheasant, are so excellent that it seems almost
superfluous to hot them up. But there are occasions when the gamey
fumes from Chaffinda are very alluring, and, after all, it is poor
work eating cold cates at midnight, however tempting they might be at
breakfast.
Our forebears were unanimous in their praise of the lordly long-tail.
In a letter from Sidney Smith to “Ingoldsby” Barham, the worthy cleric
says: “Many thanks, my dear Sir, for your kind present of game. If
there is a pure and elevated pleasure in this world, it is that of
roast pheasant and bread sauce; barndoor fowls for Dissenters, but for
the Real Churchman, the Thirty-Nine times articled clerk, the pheasant!
the pheasant!”
Toast.
It should perhaps be mentioned that the making of toast on the Chafing
Dish is the easiest of functions. The asbestos tray, already referred
to, is placed over the flame, and on the metal side the bread in
rounds, triangles, or sippets; a few minutes serve to toast the one
side adequately, and on being turned over it can easily be browned
through. Mrs. Beeton is loquacious on the art of toast-making, and
lays down divers rules, but she knew not Chaffinda. A modern essayist
who discourses learnedly and most sensibly on toast, makes a remark
in his chapter on breakfasts, which although not entirely germane to
my subject, is so true and, to my thinking, so characteristic, that
I cannot refrain from quoting it. He is referring to marmalade. “The
attitude of women to marmalade,” he says, “has never been quite sound.
True, they make it excellently, but afterwards their association with
it is one lamentable retrogression. They spread it over pastry; they do
not particularly desire it at breakfast; and (worst) they decant it
into glass dishes and fancy jars.”
How true, how profound, how typical!
But this is wandering from the point, which is cookery, not casuistry.
Women are never out of place in connection with the good things of the
table, although they do not often aspire to the omni-usefulness of the
well-meaning, if ill-educated, lady who applied for the position of
nurse to one of the field hospitals during the Boer war, and mentioned
as her crowning qualification that, “like Cæsar’s wife, I am all things
to all men.”
Mutton Cutlets.
After this little digression it will be well to turn to more serious
things--cutlets, for instance. Obtain from the butcher a couple of
well-trimmed mutton cutlets, and from the greengrocer sufficient
green peas that, when shelled, you will have a breakfast-cupful.
Melt a walnut of butter in the Chafing Dish. Into the melted butter
drop a tablespoonful of flour and a sprinkling of chopped chives. A
teaspoonful of Worcester sauce and three drops of Tabasco, together
with salt at discretion, will suffice for flavouring, and care must be
taken that the mixture does not boil. Put in the cutlets, and when they
begin to turn brownish add the peas, and half a cupful of milk. About
fifteen minutes should cook the meat through if your spirit flame be
strong, otherwise it may take somewhat longer. A very good substitute
for Worcester sauce, in this connection, is Sauce Robert, which it is
unnecessary to manufacture, as it can be bought ready made, and well
made too, of the Escoffier brand. With certain meats it is an excellent
condiment.
By the way, in some very old cookery books Sauce Robert was termed
Roe-Boat sauce, an extraordinary orthographic muddle. An omelette was
likewise known as a “Hamlet.”
This suggests the somewhat too sophisticated schoolboy’s description of
Esau as “a hairy, humpbacked man, who wrote a book of fables and sold
the copyright for a bottle of potash.”
It may be deemed superfluous, and in that case I apologise beforehand,
to insist on the most scrupulous cleanliness in dealing with the
Chafing Dish and its adjuncts. Not only should the dish itself be
kept spotless and thoroughly scoured, but the stand, the lamp, the
implements, and the glass and china should be immaculate. Servants are
easily persuaded to look after the cleaning process, and do it with
a certain amount of care, but it can do no harm to understudy their
duties and add an extra polish all round oneself. It gives one, too, a
personal interest in the result, otherwise lacking. I recommend the use
of at least three dishcloths, which should be washed regularly and used
discreetly. The Chafist who neglects his apparatus is unworthy of the
high mission with which he is charged, and deserves the appellation of
the younger son of Archidamus III., King of Sparta. Cleanliness is next
to all manner of things in this dusty world of ours, and absolutely
nothing conduces more to the enjoyment of a mealet that one has cooked
oneself than the knowledge that everything is spick and span, and
that one has contributed oneself thereto by a little extra care and
forethought.
A word of warning here. Never use “kitchen butter,” or “kitchen
sherry,” or “kitchen eggs,” or “kitchen” anything else; use the very
best you can afford.
An armoury of brooms, brushes, scrubbers, soap and soda is in no way
necessary. A couple of polishing cloths and a little, a very little,
of one of the many patent cleaners is all that is required. A clear
conscience and plenty of elbow-grease does the rest.
The British equivalent of the continental _charcutier_ is of
inestimable service to the Chafist. At his more or less appetising
emporium, small quantities of edibles can be purchased which are
excellently well adapted for the cult of Chaffinda, especially if
one be inclined towards the recooking of cold meats, instead of the
treatment of them in a raw state. Both have their advantages--and their
drawbacks. It is a general, but totally inaccurate, belief that meat
once cooked needs only to be hotted up again. Nothing could be more
fatal to its flavour and nutriment. A certain amount of the good juices
of the meat must inevitably have been lost during the first process,
and therefore great care must be taken in the second operation to
tempt forth, and, in some cases, to restore the natural flavour. Cold
cooked meat needs long and gentle cooking, a strong clear flame,
without sudden differences in temperature, and it may be taken as a
general rule that cold meat needs practically as long to cook as raw
meat.
Browned Tongue.
For example, take half a dozen slices of cooked tongue, spread on each
of them a modicum of made mustard, and let each slice repose for about
two minutes in a little bath of salad oil (about enough to cover the
bottom of a soup plate). Put the slices one on top of another until
they make a compact little heap. Put the heap of tongue between two
plates, so as to expel the superfluous oil. Let it remain thus for half
an hour. Then put a nutmeg of butter in the blazer, dismember the heap
of tongue, and put the slices into the frizzling butter and turn them
until they are brown. A little sauce, Worcester, Robert, or Piquant,
may be added to suit individual taste. Serve very hot, with sippets of
toast.
I have ventured to christen this dish _Browned Tongue_, which is
simple and descriptive, but every Chafist is entitled to call it what
he likes. There is little, if any, copyright in Chafing-Dish titles.
Alexandre Dumas, author and cook, protests against the mishandling of
names: “Les fantaisies de saucer, de mettre sur le gril, et de faire
rôtir nos grands hommes.”
Personally I object to cooking simple fare and then dubbing it _à la
Quelque chose_. Outside the few score well-known, and, so to say,
classic titles of more or less elaborate dishes, which are practically
standardised, there seems to me to be no reason to invent riddles in
nomenclature when the “short title,” as they say in Parliamentary
Bills, is amply descriptive.
It has been my ill-fortune to be introduced, at an otherwise harmless
suburban dinner, to a catastrophe of cutlets, garnished with tinned
vegetables, and to be gravely informed, on an ill-spelt menu, that it
was “_Cutelletes d’Agneau à la Jardinnier_,” which would be ludicrous,
were it not sad. Then how often does the kind hostess, without a
punitive thought in her composition, write down _Soufflet_ when she
means _Soufflé_?
But mistakes are easily made, as witness that popular sign of a French
cabaret, particularly in the provinces, _Au Lion d’Or_. If you look
carefully at the signboard, you will find a man asleep, the punning
name of the hotel implying _Au lit on dort_.
But the whole question of Menus (Bills of Fare, if you please), and
their mistranslation, is too vast to enter upon here, alluring though
the subject may be. The language of the restaurant cook, save in
especial instances, is as bad, although in a quite different sense,
as that of the Whitechapel Hooligan. At the same time, it is absurd
to insist upon the literal translation of the untranslatable. “Out of
works” for “Hors d’œuvres”; “Soup at the good woman” for “Potage à la
bonne femme”; “Smile of a calf at the banker’s wife” for “Ris de veau à
la financière”; and, lastly, “Anchovies on the sofa” for “Anchois sur
canapé,” are all well enough in their way, but hardly an example to be
followed, although they make “very pretty patriotic eating.”
It would be ridiculous to run away with the idea that because certain
folk misuse the language, French should be henceforward taboo at
our dinner-tables. Such a notion is ignorant and impossible. But
the Gallic tongue should be used with discretion and knowledge, and
if the enterprising Chafist invent a new dish of eggs, there is no
law to forbid his naming it _Œufs à la Temple du Milieu_. It would
only show the quality of his erudition and his taste. There seems no
particular reason why we should not replace _Rôti_ by Roast, _Entrée_
by Remove, and _Entremet_ by Sweet--except that it is not done; it is
an affectation of humbug, of course, but the greatest humbug of all
humbugs is the pretending to despise humbug.
Alderman’s Walk.
_On revient toujours à son premier mouton_--that is to say, let us get
back to Chaffinda. The next dish on the experimental programme is “The
Alderman’s Walk,” a very old English delicacy, the most exquisite
portion of the most exquisite joint in Cookerydom, and so called
because, at City dinners of our grandfathers’ times, it is alleged
to have been reserved for the Aldermen. It is none other than the
first, longest and juiciest longitudinal slice, next to the bone, of a
succulent saddle of mutton, Southdown for choice, and four years old
at that, though this age is rare. Remove this slice tenderly and with
due reverence from the hot joint, lay it aside on a slice of bread,
its own length, and let it get cold, thoroughly cold. Then prepare in
the Chafing Dish a sauce composed of a walnut of butter, a teaspoon
of Worcester, three drops of Tabasco, three chopped chives, and an
eggspoon of made mustard. Stir these ingredients until the amalgamation
is smooth and complete. Then take the bread, which should have absorbed
a good deal of the juice from under the Alderman’s Walk, cut it into
strips, and lightly toast the strips. Drop the meat into the sauce, and
let it cook for eight minutes, turning it once, that is, four minutes
for each side. Slide it out on to a hot dish, put the toast round it,
eat it in a hurry, and thank your stars that you are alive to enjoy
it. This is a dish which has few equals and no superiors. It is simple,
innocent, toothsome, satisfying, and several other things.
Something like it, but lacking its artistic severity, may be found
in Alexandre Dumas’ Great Dictionary, but it is complicated with
eccentric accessories; there is a turbulent confused foreground to
it which effectually conceals the mutton, but then, of course, poor
Dumas, although he knew and appreciated, could rarely obtain the real
Southdown.
At the time that the great author was overwhelmed with commissions for
novels, after the enormous success of “The Three Musketeers” and other
masterpieces, he was commonly understood to put books in the market
which were written by Auguste Maquet, and merely signed by himself.
Dumas, as is well known, was a great amateur cook, and in fact prided
himself more on his dishes than on his novels. One day he invited
the famous Aurelien Scholl to dinner, and put before him a salmon
mayonnaise which he--Dumas Père--had made with his own hands. “Taste
that, Scholl,” he said, “and tell me how you like it.”
Scholl tasted it and made a wry face. “Really, Dumas,” he replied, “I
think it must be by Maquet.”
Having been thus trained by the recipes here given, it seems reasonable
to suppose that the Chafist is able, after a profound study thereof, to
appreciate the possibilities of the Chafing Dish, and may therefore be
permitted to dip as he listeth into the various recipes which follow,
none of which are complicated or expensive, and most of which require
little, if any, previous preparation. At the same time I would most
earnestly beg the Chafist carefully to rehearse all his impromptu
effects, and never to leave anything to chance. Always have your
condiments, your garnishings, your “fixings,” as the Americans say,
ready to hand. Let the manipulation of the Chafing Dish partake of
that Art which conceals Art--simply because everything is foreseen,
and nothing postponed till the last moment. Let your parsley be ready
chopped, your toast ready cut, your lemon duly cleaned, your spare
dishes hot and ready, and, lastly, your apparatus in thorough working
order. You may then proceed in all good faith and earnestness.
[Illustration: CHAPTER · III
SOUPS ·]
“Soup is to a dinner what a portico is to a palace, or an overture to
an opera.”
GRIMOD DE LA REYNIÈRE.
“While there’s life there’s soup,” said an irreverent parodist, but as
a matter of fact the reverse of the proverb would be more true, for, of
a verity, while there’s soup there’s life. There can be no complaint
of having dined badly, or even insufficiently, if one has begun with a
plateful of good soup; _good_, mind you, with some strength and body to
it, for the coloured hot water that masquerades too often as soup is
unworthy and despicable. But soup that has character, individuality,
and belies not its name, is to the nice eater almost a meal in itself.
There are practically no soups beyond the scope of the Chafing Dish,
albeit some of the more elaborate _bisques_, a _bouillabaisse_ (an that
be a soup), and a pink _Bortsch_, have not come within my experimental
experience. The ordinary French _consommé_, which may be likened to
our gravy soup, is practically the foundation of most clear soups. One
meets on different bills of fare with a score of variations on the
theme, such as Printanier, Brunoise, Paysanne, Julienne, Mitonnage,
Croûte au Pot, Faubonne, Macédoine, Chiffonade, Flamande, and many
more, but they are really only a matter of flavouring and vegetable
decoration upon a foundation of good stock. An old French cookbook,
dated 1822, lies before me, which contains one hundred and two recipes
for soups, but the first one mentioned, the Potage au Naturel, is the
Mother Soup of all the rest.
The veritable chef has his store of Mother Soup, and that is his
kitchen Stock Exchange whence practically all his varieties emanate.
The Chafing Dish votary cannot construct his own Mother Soup and keep
up his own stock-pot, but he can use the many excellent preserved
soups, in bottles and boxes, which nowadays are absolutely equal to
those which are self-manipulated or home-made.
I have tried many brands, and really think that there is not very
much to choose between them. For ordinary use I lean to the Maggi
preparations, the “Cross-Star Soups.” They are in tablets, each
sufficient for two persons, and the White Haricots, Onion, Tapioca,
Chervil, Sago, Semolina, Lentil, Parmentier, Sorrel, Barley, Rice and
Julienne are quite excellent.
The method of procedure is simplicity itself. The tablet is broken into
fragments in a cup or a bowl and mixed into a thin paste with a little
cold water. Then heat a pint of water in the Chafer to boiling, pour
in the mixture, and let it cook gently, not boiling, for fifteen to
twenty minutes. Each tablet has its own particular directions on the
wrapper, and I have found that they apply equally to the Chafing Dish,
except that the time required is rather shorter than that mentioned,
owing to the greater heat. The flavour of the soups can be enhanced by
a few drops of sauce, a sprinkling of Paprika pepper, half a wineglass
of sherry, or a dash of Tabasco; but this is a matter of individual
taste. The tapioca, sago, and semolina soups are particularly good,
and I do not find that they require the addition of any salt, although
this again is a purely personal affair. A beaten-up raw egg put into
the soup and well stirred up just before serving makes it richer and
suaver, but is by no means necessary.
By the way, in cooking soups, as indeed in all Chafing-Dish cookery,
I cannot too earnestly insist upon the use of wooden spoons for all
stirring manipulations. Metal spoons, even silver, are abhorrent to the
good cook. Wooden spoons are clean, cheap, and thoroughly efficient.
The fancy-dress-ball cook (“Cordong blew” he generally calls himself)
always wears one in his apron, but if he only knew it, the wooden spoon
(apart from examination awards) is his surest title to honour as a true
_maître de bouche_. The Spanish Estudiantina also wear a wooden spoon
in their black tricorne hats, but this, I understand, only means that
they are poor and hungry, and glad to dip their spoon in any one’s
mess of Puchero, in order to enjoy a square meal.
Pea Soup.
Pea soup is a great invention. Not the _Purée aux Petits Pois_ (good
as that may be) of the chefiest of chefs, but the plain, good, thick,
flavoursome pea soup which is as nourishing as it is soothing and
satisfying. I find that Chaffinda’s favourite is Brand’s Consolidated
Pea Soup, which sounds like a gold mine, but is really a sort of
_Erbswurst_, only better. It is sold in dainty little tins at an
absurdly cheap price. One little tin makes two good platesful. It is
prepared by mixing the contents to a thick paste with water. To this
paste add a pint of cold water, put it all in the Chafing Dish, and
boil it for about twelve to fifteen minutes until it gets thick. To
make it even better, add a sprinkling of dried mint and a handful of
toast dice, browned with butter, and you have a feast for hungry gods
on a cold day.
Another way: instead of using mint and toast, cut half a dozen thin
slices from a Brunswick sausage, peel off the rind and drop them in
the soup when it is half cooked. The mixture is very toothsome.
Turtle Soup.
From small things to great: from the common and strictly garden pea to
the Aldermanic and luscious turtle. Most turtle importers make their
own preserved turtle, which is sometimes good and always expensive.
For Chafing-Dish purposes I prefer the Concrete Turtle Tablets made by
Levien and Sherlock, of 68 Harbour Street, Kingston, Jamaica. They are
to be had at the Army and Navy Stores. Each little cake is enough for
two moderately greedy people, and costs one shilling.
Put in the Chafing Dish a good pint of water, which bring to the boil;
add salt and pepper (Paprika for choice) to taste. Cut the turtle
tablet into pieces, or if it is too hard, as is often the case in
winter, break it up into eight or ten lumps. Throw these into the
boiling water and keep on stirring until they dissolve and the soup
becomes clear. This takes some little time, but it is worth waiting
for. Add a squeeze of lemon juice, a wine-glass of sherry, and a
teaspoon of Worcester sauce. Give a final stir to these ingredients,
and serve it up steaming hot.
There is extraordinary reviving power about a basin of good turtle
soup, and, as I think I have shown, it is quite a mistake to deem it an
expensive luxury. Abraham Hayward, Q.C., in his inimitable book, “The
Art of Dining,” which were originally _Quarterly Review_ articles on
Police Magistrate Walker’s “Original” (1835), says that “Turtle Soup
from Painter’s in Leadenhall Street is decidedly the best thing in the
shape of soup that can be had in this or perhaps in any other country.”
And if an Alderman, a Queen’s Counsel, a Police Magistrate--and
Chaffinda--agree on this point, who shall say them nay?
The student of mid-Victorian ballads will remember, too, the touching
allusion to turtle soup in “Ferdinando and Elvira,” by one Bab, where
the hero searches for the cracker-motto poet, and at last unearths him
at a confectioner’s where he has ordered soup:
“‘Found at last!’ I madly shouted. ‘Gentle pieman, you astound me!’
Then I waved the turtle soup enthusiastically round me.”
But this was, on reflection, probably mock turtle soup, no bad thing
either, _vide_ Alice’s interview with the Gryphon. It lives, when cold,
in a basin, and is set hard and is therefore wavable.
American soups are not to be despised. On the contrary, they make most
excellent good eating--or drinking; which is it? do we eat or drink
soup? An American book of etiquette says, “Never chew your soup, always
swallow it whole.”
Anyhow I have tried, and found good, Clam Chowder, Clam Broth, Chicken
Gumbo, Okra, Terrapin, and Vegetable Soups. They are in tins, against
which I confess I am prejudiced, but as yet I am totally unpoisoned,
and I am told that there is a possibility of their being shortly put
up in bottles. Each tin has full instructions, and these are quite
applicable to the Chafing Dish, care always being taken not to boil
the soup, but to heat it gently and continuously. The Clam Chowder and
Clam Broth are both quite excellent, of a distinct individual flavour,
cheering, and, I opine, wholesome. They have a peculiar _cachet_ of
their own, and lend a certain Transatlantic originality to an otherwise
banal Chafing-Dish luncheon.
These and other American provisions I procure from Jackson’s in
Piccadilly. They are well “packed,” and adapt themselves excellently
to unexpected calls on a limited larder. Their variety is infinite,
and their flavour remains good and true. Tinned Broadway in London is
a pleasant experience. There are other American delicacies, to which
reference will be made in due course, which adapt themselves admirably
to Chafing-Dish idiosyncrasies. Columbus’ patent egg is not the only
culinary innovation from the New World, but the average British cook is
so ignorantly conservative and abhorrently Chauvinistic that she dreads
novelty as she dreads the Devil.
Poor Man’s Soup.