Bacon! Is It The Perfect Food? 

My grandson Archer and I have a game we play called Mr. Bacon. It centers around bacon. If we see a picture of bacon or we are having bacon at a meal, I call him Mr. Bacon. He says, "No. You are Mr. Bacon." It goes back and forth a couple times and finally Archer will say, "No. I am Bacon Junior." And that's how it goes until the next time. My life is based on simple pleasures.  

When he has breakfast at our house, there is always bacon. Sometimes we have it for lunch in the form of a BLT. This brings about the question, "Is bacon the perfect food?" If you look on social media, the answer is a resounding, YES. Crispy, salty, and smoky with a rich umami flavor, it pairs with almost everything. What's not to love?

The history of bacon is a long one. Some folks say the concept of curing pork dates back to 1500 BCE China, where they preserved pork bellies with salt. Although, the Mesopotamians and Egyptians were doing this 1500 years before that. It doesn't really matter to me who invented it or when. I'm just glad somebody found a way to make it. 

The Greeks and Romans had a form of bacon called "Petaso". Bacon, as we know it, became a common food item in Europe and especially England during the Medieval period and into the Renaissance and Modern period 1500 CE to 1800 CE. (Why do we no longer say BC and AD? I guess we now have to be politically correct. Why doesn't anyone care about my feelings? Oh, that's right, thinking like that makes me a bigot. I am a bigot about bacon.) The English and other Europeans brought bacon making techniques to the New World. 

Pigs were first brought to North America by Spanish explorers in the early 1500's, notably by Hernando de Soto in 1539. He brought 13 pigs. Within 3 years, they had become a herd of 700. How in the world did that happen? Oh yeah... Of this herd, some escaped, some were stolen and some were traded with Native Americans. Wild and domesticated pig populations spread rapidly across the southeastern area of what is now the United States. 

Early settlers in the English colonies of Virginia and Massachusetts brought pigs with them as a food source as well. By the 1600's, these settlers had adopted curing and smoking as a way to preserve meats. Smithfield in Virginia became a major hub for ham and bacon curing due to its ideal climate, salt access, and curing expertise. Pigs were one of the first European animals to thrive in America. 

The average pig has a total live weight of around 280 pounds.  Depending on breed and butchering technique, of that total weight, 150 to 160 pounds are useable meat. Of that useable meat 20 to 30 pounds are bacon. This is in the form of Pork Belly Bacon, Jowl or Cheek Bacon, and Back Bacon like Canadian Bacon and British Back Bacon Rashers. 

Pork Belly Bacon is the bacon, we in the United States know and love. It is also called "Streaky" bacon. It is cut from the belly of the pig and cured in several different ways. It has several uses besides being a cornerstone of breakfast. According to Archer, it is always delicious no matter where it's used. 

Jowl or Cheek Bacon is known as Hog Jowls in the southern states and is used in soul food renditions of collard greens and blackeye peas. In Italy it is known as Guanciale and is a key ingredient in Carbonara as is pecorino romano cheese. I've had this dish in Rome at a restaurant named La Carbonara and can attest to its necessity as an ingredient. Jowl Bacon is a prized component in several countries i.e. Germany, Spain and China. In the country dialect of the South "Most peoples be liking them some hog jowls". There I go being a bigot again. 

Back Bacon is better known in the United States as Canadian Bacon and another product known as British Back Bacon Rashers. It obviously comes from the back and is more like ham in the case of Canadian Bacon. It is a core part of Eggs Benedict and the American breakfast staple the Egg McMuffin. 

British Bacon is sort of a combination of Back Bacon and Pork Belly Bacon and is a core element in a Full English Breakfast.

Why cure bacon or other meats? Curing came before refrigeration. It was a way to preserve, enhance flavor, improve texture, ensure safety, and make pork and other meats absolutely delicious. In addition to pork, other meats that are cured include beef, lamb, poultry and fish. My life wouldn't be the same without Pastrami, Corned Beef, Bresaola, Duck Prosciutto, Lox or Bacalao. How about you?

There are four basic methods to curing meats. All of them are based on salt. The salt draws out moisture, inhibits bacteria, firms up meat texture, fixes color when used with nitrites and makes it taste amazing. Some cures use other ingredients in addition to salt. Some use sugar or molasses, some use smoke, some use spices, some use curing salts (sodium nitrite or nitrate) and some use other chemicals.  

Dry Curing is the most traditional method. The pork is rubbed with salt, sugar and sometimes spices. It is left to cure for days or weeks in a controlled environment. Some examples are Italian Pancetta and Guanciale and Tennessee's Benton's Smoky Mountain Bacon.  

Wet Curing or Brining is juicier and milder than dry curing. The meat is soaked in a saltwater solution (brine) that often contains sugar, spices, and curing salts (sodium nitrite or nitrate). It is left to cure for a few days up to a couple weeks. This gives the meat a moist tender texture and a milder slightly sweet flavor because the meat absorbs the water. It is common in mass produced bacon because water = more weight. Gotta chase that dollar. Canadian bacon and most American grocery store bacon is produced this way. 

Injection Curing is a fast and industrial method of wet curing. It involves injecting the curing solution (brine, sugar or corn syrup, spices, curing salts and sometimes other chemicals) directly into the meat. After this the meat is immediately smoked or cooked. It is a fast cure taking hours instead of days or weeks. Since it is such a quick cure, there is more water retention which gives the meat a less flavorful and less smoky taste, but more water = more weight. You see this in cheap grocery store bacon and precooked bacon. 

 

Smoke Curing adds flavor and preservation. The bacon is dry cured or wet cured first then smoked. The wood used gives different flavors (applewood, hickory, oak, or cherry). Smoking is not a stand alone method of curing. It needs salt curing prior to the smoking. Meat can be cold smoked (70 - 90 degrees F) which does not cook it but flavors it and dries the surface. Or it can be hot smoked (165 - 225 degrees F) which partially or fully cooks it and adds more flavor. It can also be warm smoked (90 - 140 degrees F) which must be closely monitored but gives a deeper smoke flavor than cold smoking. An example of bacon that is salt cured but not smoked would be Italian Pancetta. It is air-dried not smoked. An example of warm smoked bacon would be Benton's Smoky Mountain Bacon. 

There are dozens of different types of bacon from all over the world. It is a popular pork product everywhere, from British Rashers to Chinese Lap Yuk. The bacon that Archer and I love is the American "streaky" bacon that comes from the pork belly and is smoked. For us this is true bacon. Growing up this is the bacon my mom bought and served us.

As a chef I have used different kinds of bacon. My first restaurant was in Virginia so I was inclined to use a Virginia product. I selected bacon and country hams from S. Wallace Edwards & Sons of Surry Virginia, near Smithfield.  

As I grew older and hopefully wiser, I was exposed to other bacon varieties. On my first trip to Europe in London, I had British Back Bacon Rashers in a Full English Breakfast. How anyone eats all that I'll never know. In Italy, I had Pancetta, although Italians value their Prosciutto more. Early on, I was exposed to Canadian Bacon in Eggs Benedict not the Egg McMuffin. I can't eat McDonald's food although Archer is a fan. My love of bacon centers around good old American Bacon. Although I'm willing to try pretty much anything.

When I opened the Sunshine Cafe on Captiva, we served breakfast so, I had to cook large quantities of bacon. That's when I discovered the Hormel Bacon Layout Pack. It came in a 15 pound box with the bacon laid out on parchment paper. Those sheets fit a 1/2 sheet pan perfectly. All you need to do is open the box, slide out a sheet onto a sheet pan and slide the pan into a 350 degree oven. It's so easy that it has a slight problem, it's easy to forget it's in the oven. I can't tell you how many pans of bacon I have burned. I have the same problem with croutons. By the time you smell the burning product, it's too late. 

There are dozens of artisan producers of bacon. If you've got the money someone will make expensive bacon for you. The top 2 are probably Benton's Smoky Mountain Ham and Bacon in Madisonville, Tennessee and Nueske's Applewood Smoked Meats in Wittenberg, Wisconsin. I have tasted both and prefer Nueske's because of its versatility.  

I first tasted Nueske's Applewood Smoked Bacon at a food show and it was love at first bite. They are secretive about the process they use but the experts have figured it out. It is wet cured in brine for several days and then applewood smoked for 24+ hours. This produces a bacon with a sweet, smooth, refined smoke flavor and a clean silky texture. It gives you a bacon that has a flavor that lets you know it's there but not so strong that it overpowers the dish or other foods served with it. 

I first tasted Benton's Smoky Mountain Bacon also at a food show. It is a bold example of bacon at its finest. It is dry cured with a hand-rubbed salt and brown sugar mixture. It is left to cure for 2-3 weeks and then is hickory smoked for several days. They are proud of their process and you can find several videos of it online. This produces a bacon with a bold, funky, deeply smoked flavor almost country ham like. The texture is drier and more chewy with an intense savory quality. 

They are both great bacons. I favored the Nueske's because it was for me more versatile. I could use it as an ingredient in dishes as well as on its own. I used it extensively at the Crazy Conch Cafe, on Burgers, BLTs, in Hot Bacon Dressing for Sally's Endive Salad, in Soups and Chowders, and as Lardons in several preparations.

Now that I'm retired and on a fixed income I no longer use artisan bacon. I use the bacon from whichever company is on Bogo at my local Publix that week. I only buy the straight up kinds of bacon either applewood or hickory smoked, only thick cut, and definitely not any of those nasty tasting flavored bacons especially the maple ones. 

So to answer the question, Is bacon the perfect food, I have to say YES. I can't imagine breakfast, lunch, or dinner without it and neither can Archer, who is Mr. Bacon.  

 

 

Do We Need Food Critics In The Digital Age

When I started in the restaurant business I was aware that there were professional food critics out there but I didn't pay much attention to them. I was waiting on tables so what they had to say wasn't relevant to me at the time. As I grew more involved in the business, I started paying more attention. I started to read the reviews of some food critics. Caroline Bates and Jay Jacobs in Gourmet Magazine were my favorites. They were fair and always reviewed restaurants that they liked. They might mention things that could be improved but always had a positive spin. I ended up going to a lot of the restaurants they reviewed. 

Not all food critics are so benevolent. In the words of Anton Ego, the food critic from the movie "Ratatouille", "In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read." There are some critics who seem to enjoy shoving the dagger in and giving it a little twist. With them, there seems to be no regard for who gets hurt by this criticism.

As restaurateurs, chefs and staff who have suffered from a bad review will tell you, in the words of Chef Carl Casper to the food critic Ramsey Michel in the movie "Chef", “It hurts, it fucking hurts when you write this shit!” 

Both of these examples come from movies but it is the same in real life. I have read several eloquent yet vicious reviews from the pages of the New York Times and other major newspapers. Including the following excerpt as the NYT critic took a prestigious four star restaurant down to two stars: "The kitchen could improve the bacon-wrapped cylinder of quail simply by not placing it on top of a dismal green pulp of cooked romaine lettuce, crunchy and mushy at once. Draining off the gluey, oily liquid would have helped a mushroom pot pie from turning into a swampy mess. I don't know what could have saved limp, dispiriting yam dumplings, but it definitely wasn't a lukewarm matsutake mushroom bouillon as murky and appealing as bong water."

Food criticism has a long history. People have been talking about food since a caveman or cavewoman put a hunk of meat over a fire. With the rise of restaurants in the 1700's in Paris, people started writing about the establishments and the dishes they served. One of the first restaurant critics was Alexandre Balthazar Laurent Grimod de La Reynière, a French lawyer and gourmand. His "Almanach des Gourmands", published in the early 1800's, reviewed Paris restaurants and gave his opinion on certain dishes. Others followed his lead and began writing about restaurants and what they prepared, including Alexandre Dumas of "The Count of Monte Cristo" fame.

The 20th Century brought about the professionalization of food criticism. First in 1900 with the publication of the Michelin Guide by the Michelin tire company. They wrote about restaurants and places out in the countryside, so people would get in their cars, hopefully riding on Michelin tires, and drive out and explore them. By the 1920's, the Michelin Guide began awarding stars to restaurants and became a benchmark for fine dining criticism. Several other guides, like Zagat and Gault Millau have appeared to join in the frenzy to be the defining guide. I have used all three to find good restaurants when I travel and they are fairly reliable. 

After that came the start of food journalism, with recipes, reviews of restaurants and articles on food trends in newspapers and magazines. By the mid 20th century, newspapers and magazines employed food critics to cater to the growing interest in dining out. The main problem back then was they focussed on high end fine dining establishments, which at that time meant French restaurants. Today all major cities have food critics for their newspapers. There were also magazines devoted almost exclusively to food and wine and travel. When you travel you have to eat and if you're civilized drink wine.  

It wasn't until the late 20th to early 21st Century that there was a democratization of food criticism. It expanded beyond fine dining to include a wider range of establishments, from casual eateries to street food vendors which reflected a shift in tastes for the majority of consumers. 

With that came the rise of Food Media, television programs, whole television networks devoted to food. The early stars were mainly on PBS with James Beard starting in 1946. I especially remember watching Julia Child and Graham Kerr, the Galloping Gourmet. Their shows added a bit of humor and showmanship and took some of the mystery out of fine dining and gourmet cooking. 

With the coming of the Internet, online platforms like Yelp, TripAdvisor as well as food blogs have entered the mix. These online platforms allow everyday diners to share their opinions, no matter how much or how little they actually know about food or cooking. Professional critics have had to learn to adapt to compete with all these widespread voices. 

With all the old and new media focus on food and restaurants, chefs started to emerge as celebrities. No longer just masters of their kitchen, they became stars, with all the perks, challenges, and responsibilities that come with that. Their job was no longer just about cooking but also branding, media presence, and business ventures. With this, came money and power. Some of these rockstar chefs lost their way i.e. Mario Batali, Mike Isabella, and Paula Deen. Power, Money, and Ego is sometimes not a good mix. 

When celebrity chefs lose their way, forgetting their main purpose is to create good quality food, the food critics are there to point out their failings. Which brings up the question, should they also pounce on small mom and pop operations, just trying to make a living. Or should they let word of mouth be the downfall of these types of establishments. Should they let the people who come in, sit in the seat, and put their money down each night be the ones to determine if a restaurant wins or loses. This is something I have pondered a lot over the years.

I have opened five restaurants in my career. I have been reviewed about twenty times by newspapers and magazines. I have received good reviews in every case except one and I deserved that bad review when I got it. I know for a fact, a good review will result in a surge in business, no one wants to miss out on the latest culinary hit, where the tables are full, the plates are empty, and there is a smile on every face. Critics wield a lot of power. They can make or break a small restaurant. 

With the birth of social media platforms like Instagram, TikTok, YouTube and Food Blogs we have witnessed the birth of the Food Influencer. Some of these folks are trained chefs and culinary experts who bring a vast knowledge of food and cooking techniques into their opinions, i.e. Emeril Lagasse, David Chang, and Massimo Bottura. Some of these influencers bring nothing more than a pretty or handsome face and the ability to snap a picture, but they have a large following brought about by the savvy ability to utilize this new media, i.e. Lara Lepp, Keith Lee, and Carleigh Bodrug. Then there are the middle ground influencers who have some not so formal culinary training and a huge following, i.e. Martha Stewart, Rachel Ray, and Nick DiGiovanni. 

With the technology available today, pretty much anyone can take a great picture of a plate of food. With the technology available today most chefs can produce a beautiful plate of food. The ultimate question concerning that plate of food is: "What does it taste like". A picture doesn't tell you that. This is where a knowledgeable food critic becomes relevant.

In my career, I have run across several good knowledgeable food critics, Frank Bruni, Ruth Reichl, Jonathan Gold, Tom Sietsema, and Anthony Bourdain to name a few. These folks draw you an honest picture of a restaurant and its food without letting their egos get too involved. 

Then you have someone like Michael Bauer, who spent 32 years as the critic for the San Francisco Chronicle. One could argue that being in that position for so long allowed his ego and power to take over. The old saying, "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely", could be abridged to read, "Power and ego corrupts and absolute power and ego corrupts absolutely". 

No one has ever proved that Bauer used his power in a corrupt manner, although, several people have questioned it and especially combined with his 25-year relationship with companion Michael Murphy, who is involved in a culinary business. Conflict of interest? 

The fact that Bauer never tried very hard to disguise himself when he visited restaurants and that most restaurants had his picture posted in their kitchens speaks a lot. Do you think he got special treatment? Where these restaurateurs and chefs intimidated by the fact that he was the only critic they had known their whole careers? Possibly.   

This brings us to a key question. Is the purpose of a food critic to evaluate and analyze restaurants, chefs, and food trends, providing the public with informed, unbiased, and engaging insights into dining experiences? Or, should they shape culinary culture by guiding consumers to their vision of what constitutes a good restaurant and a good meal? Ego and power. Critics are not immune to the possibilities of corruption when these two get together. There is a certain lack of accountability in most situations with food critics. 

Then we come to the selection of the restaurant the critic is going to review. Most of the major city food critics have a large expense account. The average consumer cannot afford to eat at the places most of these critics review. As Drew Magary said about NYT critic Pete Wells' review of Le Bernardin, "There are only three people who can afford to eat at a place like Le Bernardin: Rich assholes, food critics, and other chefs who run other restaurants that only serve rich assholes, food critics, and other chefs."  

Michael Bauer's replacement Soleil Ho, brought a more diverse and socially conscious perspective to restaurant criticism, as did the work of Jonathan Gold at the L.A. Times. Tom Sietsema at the Washington Post does this as well. This seems to be the wave of the future.

Having been in the restaurant business, when I read a negative review of a restaurant, especially on Yelp or TripAdvisor, my thoughts swing to motivation. Is this person looking for a free meal, is it another restaurateur looking to slam a competitor, is it someone with unrealistic expectations or personal preferences or is it someone with an exaggerated sense of entitlement, or is it someone looking for revenge or is it someone that has a personal grudge... I could go on but you get the idea. There are lots of reasons for a negative review that have nothing to do with the actual dining experience. 

When a restaurant or chef receives a negative review, there are some strategies to mitigate the damage and respond in a professional, brief, and constructive manner. This is no time for an emotional, defensive, or aggressive response. You can't win and it will make things worse. This is a good time to get your longtime regular customers involved in writing reviews of their positive experiences. 

To answer the question, "Do we need food critics in the digital age?" Yes, we do. More now than before. Of course that doesn't really matter because they aren't going anywhere. They have always been there and they always will be. We need restaurateurs and chefs that recognize the power of social media and have the ability to utilize the different forms of media to their advantage. Today there is a lot more to the restaurant business than just food, service, and ambiance. 

This should be a two way street. Restaurants need customers with less entitlement and more enlightenment, people that understand how hard this business is. A customer that understands that restaurants are run by humans and anyone can have an off night. A customer who is willing to commit to a long term relationship. 

The first few times you visit a restaurant, you have a transaction. They feed you and you give them money. When you visit a restaurant continually over a period of time, you develop a relationship. They have had the time to learn your likes and dislikes. They know you like a twist of lemon in your martini, not olives. They know you like Caymus Cabernet but are willing to try something different. They know you like yellowtail snapper but will try king salmon. You have built a relationship. That relationship is based on trust. You trust that they are giving you exactly what you like and exactly what it says on the menu. They trust that if they take care of you, you will take care of them through good times and bad. They trust that if they get a bad review, you will stand up for them and write a good one.  

What if we didn't have food reviews?  What if we let these restaurants and chefs win or lose each and every night with the person that sits in the chair, eats the food, and pays for it with their hard earned money. "Isn't it pretty to think so."

 

Crème Anglaise, Sabayon, or Zabaglione?

When I worked at Empire Distributors in Atlanta, I worked with Mr. Tony Ridings. At the time, he was their top salesperson and spoke fluent Italian. His dad was in the Air Force and was stationed in Italy for a while. His mom taught Tony how to make a Italian dessert using a fork. He showed me how he did it. It involved egg yolks, sugar and Marsala wine. He called it Zabaglione. It reminded me a lot of the Sabayon I used to make at the Greenhouse in Captiva. There was a good reason for that. It's the same sauce. Zabaglione is the Italian name and Sabayon is the French. 

Zabaglione originated in northern Italy. It was first mentioned in the 1500's, so it's been around for a long time. The classic recipe calls for whipping egg yolks with sugar and Marsala wine in a bain-marie (water bath). This method ensures a creamy consistency while incorporating air to make it light. 

France, being just across the border, adopted the dessert and called it Sabayon. The core preparation stayed the same but they used different wines or liquors instead of Marsala. 

Sabayon is meant to be served warm, as soon as you are finished making it. I've seen it prepared tableside in some restaurants and served on top of whatever fresh berries are in season. I've also seen it prepared, placed on top of fresh berries and then browned with a torch or under a salamander. 

Some restaurants serve it chilled and add whipped cream to help stabilize the sauce so that it will last for a full dinner service. This accounts for the lighter color. I think this diminishes the intensity of the flavors. 

In most professional kitchens, Sabayon is made in a copper bowl. The copper has a chemical reaction with the egg yolks to make a more stable structure. It also provides even heat and can quickly cool down. It has a rough surface which provides friction which makes the yolks whip up quicker and with more volume, which gives it a smoother airy texture. The drawbacks are copper bowls are expensive and require constant polishing to prevent tarnishing. Stainless steel and glass both work, require less maintenance and are less expensive. 

For years, Zabaglione was on almost every Italian restaurant's dessert list. Now, the dessert mainstay is Tiramisu. Times change. Dishes go in and out of fashion. Some restaurants actually use Zabaglione in their recipe for Tiramisu. 

 

The French also make a savory Sabayon to use as a sauce for fish, seafood, vegetables, or eggs. The preparation is similar but instead of sugar and sweet wine, the base is flavored with reduced fish stock, white wine, champagne, or vermouth. They will sometimes include a bit of lemon juice, herbs, or mustard. Sometimes this savory Sabayon is used as a sauce or glaze for chicken, pork, or veal. 

I have used it as a sweet sauce for berries and as a savory sauce with salmon surrounded by spinach. It is versatile, easy and quick to prepare. The only problem is it's fragile nature and short life span. As an a la minute sauce it is hard to beat. It has a simple pure flavor.  

It's this simple pure flavor that makes it such a favorite among my friends and a favorite of the customers in my restaurants back when I was in the business. I have one friend, who shall remain nameless, who liked it so much that I caught her in the kitchen after dinner at my house one night with her head in the copper bowl licking the last bit of Sabayon. Rest assured, I have never let her forget this. We all have our foibles. 

I typically use Kahlúa or Tia Maria as my flavor element. On occasion, I have used Grand Marnier and orange zest.  

There is another sauce that looks similar to Sabayon / Zabaglione called Crème Anglaise. It is so similar, just by looks, you would swear it was Sabayon. It too is used with fresh berries. It starts out with egg yolks and sugar being whipped and warmed. 

There is no wine or liquor component. It is always flavored with vanilla, either extract, seeds, or paste. It is always served cold, in fact it doesn't reach its peak thickness until it is cold. It has a milk / cream component that pure Sabayon doesn't. Therefore, its taste is much different. It is always strained, which makes it lighter and smoother. 

It is basically a thin custard and in fact you can put it in an ice cream maker and you will have vanilla ice cream, a very rich one. It can be used as an ice cream base by adding flavors from chocolate to banana to peach to whatever you want. It too is very versatile.

Crème Anglaise translates to English Cream. The technique for making custards dates back to the Middle Ages in England. France being just across the English Channel adopted the dish, but to be fair, did give it the name Crème Anglaise. Over the centuries French chefs refined the recipe into a more delicate preparation. It became a cornerstone of French patisserie, serving as a base for numerous desserts. 

In my restaurants, I used it extensively as a dessert sauce, especially with chocolate. It was the base sauce for a flourless chocolate cake and a bittersweet chocolate terrine. Sometimes because raspberry couli goes so well with chocolate, I would do a Yin and Yang on the plate with both sauces and then place the chocolate on top. It and the raspberry couli would keep for a couple of days so I could make a larger amount. 

Crème Anglaise has a universal appeal. I haven't met too many people who don't love it. This past Christmas Eve, Sally and I hosted dinner for the family. There are eleven of us, six adults and five grandbabies. For dessert I did a mix and match affair. We had rum cake, sliced strawberries, chocolate chip ice cream, chocolate sauce, whipped cream and Crème Anglaise. All the adults had a mix of everything. The grandchildren, of course, each had a different combination. After tasting the Crème Anglaise, everyone of them had a combination with the Crème Anglaise as a component. I made all of them taste it. It's a rule in our house that you don't have to eat it, but you do have to at least taste it. That's how you can tell if it's Crème Anglaise, Sabayon, or Zabaglione.

  Crème Anglaise

        12 - Grade A Large Egg Yolks            2 - Cups Granulated Sugar 

         1 - Qt. Whole Milk                              1 - Pinch Kosher Salt

         1 - Pint Heavy Cream                        2 - Tbsp. Vanilla Extract

In a bowl whip egg yolks and sugar until ribbons form. In a stainless steel-lined sauce pot heat milk and cream until it is almost to a boil. Temper yolk mixture by adding two ladles of hot milk/cream mixture, stirring all the while, being careful not to curdle the egg yolks. Pour warmed egg yolk mixture into the pot of hot milk/cream. Add vanilla extract. Lower heat and continue stirring until slightly thickened. You can do this over direct heat but you have to be careful not to cook too much or too fast or you will curdle the egg yolks. 

Remove from heat and whip custard over an ice bath until cool.  Place in a stainless steel container and top with a piece of plastic wrap on the surface to prevent a skin from forming.  Place container in the refrigerator and chill thoroughly.

Makes a great sauce or if you want ice cream, once thoroughly chilled, place in ice cream freezer and freeze following manufacturer’s directions.

     Sabayon / Zabaglione

            6 - Grade A Large Egg Yolks          ½ - Cup Granulated Sugar
            ⅔ - Cup Dry Marsala*

Fill a pan with 1/2 inch water and put it over medium heat. In a copper bowl whisk together the egg yolks and sugar until pale and thick -- this will take about 3 minutes of vigorous whisking.

When it reaches this stage, whisk the Marsala into the eggs and set the bowl over the simmering water. Continue whisking, scraping the entire base of the pan as you go. The zabaglione will become fluffy and foamy and will begin to gain in volume. Remove from the heat and continue whisking so it doesn't overcook. Return to the heat if you need to. It is done when it clings to a spoon like a loose pudding. Spoon into 4 small glass dishes or low stemmed glasses. Serve warm or chilled, with a dish of biscotti for a real Italian twist. Its flavors are best when served warm.

*This is the classic recipe for Sabayon / Zabaglione. You can substitute Grand Mariner, Kahlua, Tia Maria, or any other sweet wine or liquor you like.

This is a stand alone dessert or a great sauce for chocolate pastry or fresh fruit or berries. I occasionally add Lemon or Orange zest as a finishing note.