On Food and Cooking and Science

January 15, 2017 3:42 PM

Dinner with Harold McGee
posted by Lycaste (20 comments total)

“I spent hours in that library because I had never seen anything like it,” McGee told me. “Poultry science and agricultural and food chemistry. I would just flip through random volumes and see microscopic studies of things I eat every day. It seemed so cool and unexpected. It took more than a day to home in on the right sources about beans, but not only did I find out what’s in them and what you can do about it, but there is a fart chart and there are things you can do to lessen your suffering.  Most of the research in the field of flatulence was funded by NASA. If you think about it, it makes good sense — these were still the days of capsules.”

sorry, i can't help myself
posted by indubitable at 4:57 PM on January 15, 2017 [3 favorites]

"so dense with gripping material like the denaturing effect of heat on meat proteins that it cannot possibly have been read cover to cover by more than two or three people, McGee included."

Whaaaaaat, I totally read it cover to cover and it was awesome. In fact it probably annoyed my husband more than any other book I've ever read because every single page I was like, "Huh, FUN FACT -- when you scramble eggs ...

One of my top-two cooking reads, with Julia Child's Mastering the Art of French Cooking, which also deserves a cover-to-cover read, whether or not you do the recipes. SO INTERESTING!
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 5:44 PM on January 15, 2017 [21 favorites]

indubitable: "

“I spent hours in that library because I had never seen anything like it,” McGee told me. “Poultry science and agricultural and food chemistry. I would just flip through random volumes and see microscopic studies of things I eat every day. It seemed so cool and unexpected. It took more than a day to home in on the right sources about beans, but not only did I find out what’s in them and what you can do about it, but there is a fart chart and there are things you can do to lessen your suffering.  Most of the research in the field of flatulence was funded by NASA. If you think about it, it makes good sense — these were still the days of capsules.”

sorry, i can't help myself"

How much of science has been driven by farts?

One wonders...
posted by Samizdata at 5:50 PM on January 15, 2017

How much of science has been driven by farts?

Are you asking about their propellant force?
posted by Greg_Ace at 5:54 PM on January 15, 2017

The part I remember best out of McGee (can't remember which book; maybe The Curious Cook, maybe OFAC) is where he researches how to cook Jerusalem artichokes to reduce their flatulogenic properties.
posted by Halloween Jack at 5:57 PM on January 15, 2017

As I read this, it strikes me as interesting that Food Science departments have been common in agricultural and land grant colleges for a long time. I know that those departments are far more interested in making processed foods better and cheaper, but it is curious that there hasn't been more crossover earlier. Are Food Science majors in culinary schools actually a new thing?
posted by mollweide at 6:14 PM on January 15, 2017

This was served in Baton Rouge to those who were busted flat, right?
posted by jonmc at 6:18 PM on January 15, 2017 [1 favorite]

McGee is on Dave Arnold's "Cooking Issues" radio show / podcast semi-frequently and is always great, though they always seem to get back to farts / Jerusalem Artichokes. Apparently Harold lost his sense of smell for several months at some point due to an illness or something, which severely impacted his eating habits.
posted by ghharr at 7:01 PM on January 15, 2017

I have a knack for zeroing in on one small tidbit of a piece of writing that then colors my impression of the rest of the article, and this did it for me:

The story is also quintessentially modern, speaking to the widespread belief that data and the scientific method can make us all happier, slimmer, fitter, and better in bed. Results are decidedly mixed — if not terrible — in most of these areas…

This sort of casual dismissal of science annoys me, and I am interested to know why he thinks scientific results in the areas he cited are "terrible". Also, in my experience mayonnaise is pretty hard to screw up. If he had been trying to make bearnaise or hollandaise it would have been more believable. Finally, why on earth didn't he let Mr. McGee pick what food to order, since McGee suggested the restaurant in the first place.

Despite these admittedly petty complaints, he does make McGee out to be a fascinating person with a great life story. I definitely need to move On Food and Cooking up on my list of books I have been meaning to get (and read) but haven't gotten to yet.
posted by TedW at 7:14 PM on January 15, 2017 [3 favorites]

it cannot possibly have been read cover to cover by more than two or three people

This is so annoying. I am fully aware that the interviewer has a MFA from a small east coast liberal arts college, but it's really rather gauche to allude to it every time he lowers himself to interview a mere scientist!
posted by monotreme at 7:27 PM on January 15, 2017 [6 favorites]

Yeah, the casual dismissal of science was disturbing, but, hey, science rescued his mayonnaise in the end! I guess results still count for something.
posted by mollweide at 7:33 PM on January 15, 2017

I too almost stopped reading at the "clearly no one has read this" bit. (I admit that I have not "read" in any real sense the tables of numbers, but the rest--sure! It's interesting) Glad I did, it was an interesting profile.

My favourite part of OFAC is the cheese flowchart. A cheese flowchart! That's worth the jacket price all on its own.
posted by quaking fajita at 7:44 PM on January 15, 2017 [2 favorites]

That was just lovely! Thank you for posting it.
posted by KleenexMakesaVeryGoodHat at 7:49 PM on January 15, 2017 [1 favorite]

Read the whole book. Loved it.
posted by mdoar at 2:52 AM on January 16, 2017 [1 favorite]

This "nobody has read the whole book"-schtick is always annoying. Some people like to read.
While I had heard of McGee, I wasn't really aware of the content of OFAC, and now I need to buy it. To read from cover to cover as I usually do with the books in my kitchen library.
posted by mumimor at 3:13 AM on January 16, 2017 [1 favorite]

have also read the whole thing.
also annoyed at the anti-science thing.
still annoyed in general that courses in college still include "rocks for jocks" and other ways to get around taking actual science courses.
shakes fist and goes to reread mcgee.
posted by sciencegeek at 4:09 AM on January 16, 2017

> I totally read it cover to cover and it was awesome.

Well sure, you would say that since you're obviously in the employ of the McGee conspiracy.
posted by ardgedee at 6:16 AM on January 16, 2017 [4 favorites]

"What? Of course I read Uncle Harold's book!"
posted by wenestvedt at 6:54 AM on January 16, 2017

I read books cover to cover as well. Except I do it the quicker way. On the outside.
posted by srboisvert at 8:30 AM on January 16, 2017 [1 favorite]

Loved this book from the first moment I opened it. It's a must-read for any person who likes to cook, yearns to cook better *and*wants to understand the science behind it. As anyone who's ever taken a chem lab knows, cooking is just chem lab, without the stress and mean TAs!
posted by Pocahontas at 4:51 AM on January 19, 2017