On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 09:39:08 -0500, "Julianne"
wrote:

"Frogleg" wrote

Odd that some think this sort of fake post is useful. So far there've
no follow-ups that aren't at least somewhat negative. It's certainly a
silly, overpriced gadget that "anyone who enjoys cooking" would steer
clear of.

Everything else aside, I am not a gifted cook although I enjoy it immensely.
I assure you that if I am preparing a recipe that requires constant stirring
like a gravy or a roux, I need to be right there watching it the whole time!
As long as I am standing there, I might as well stir. It only takes one
hand to handle the beer in a two beer roux.

^_^ How many people regularly make things that require constant
stirring on the bottom of a pan without any scraping of the sides? The
only constant-stir I've ever made was risotto, which requires one to
be standing by anyhow. In fact, there are very few long-cooking
operations that need constant bottom-scraping. I'll be trying fig jam
again soon, and learned (from Barb) last year that it's the very last
part of a long process that requires constant (and reasonably
intelligent) supervision.

And stuff that requires constant stirring requires supervision. Wonder
what this plastic-bladed thing looks like when the stirred substance
has boiled dry?

It's good to have a forum like this where idiotic ideas can be
compared with the truly useful. Can't say I use a stick blender for
every meal, but it's useful to have. *Adore* my Mr. Coffee ice tea
thingy. The tortilla-maker was a bust, as far as I'm concerned.
Another storage problem that saved me no more work/time than my
old-fashioned press and a skillet.

at Fri, 10 Oct 2003 22:51:30 GMT in RJGhb.30826$k74.7027@lakeread05,
(Julianne) wrote :


"Darryl L. Pierce" wrote in message
ws.com...
wrote:
I just got a great new gadget that I thought anyone who enjoys
cooking
would
be interested in. It's called StirChef, ...

A large serving spoon works for me and it cost me $1.00.

....

I cannot imagine a use for such a gadget other than taking up valuable
cabinet space. I even tried to justify it for the handicapped but if
you can hold a saucepan stirrer you can probably stir.


This seems to be the prevailing attitude, however, it's an idea I've always
thought would be a good one, for 2 important uses:

1) Something you have to stir continuously, without losing attention, and
with which at the same time you're making something else, so you just don't
have your hands free to give the stirred item your undivided attention. The
classic : custard. The number of times I've been making, or wanting to
make, a custard or custard-based sauce, while simultaneously attempting to
do something else are innumerable. There's only so much prep you can do in
advance for some things, and there are also days when you simply don't have
the time to do *anything* ahead of time. And for people with several young
kids in the house, it's impossible to give your undivided attention to
anything at all. For them, this kind of tool enables things that otherwise
they couldn't even have considered.

2) Something that you have to stir, at least periodically, for *hours*.
There's a milk pudding that I really like and make from time to time, but
to make it for 4 people takes 4 hours of stirring milk on a stovetop. I'd
rather have the time to do other things.

However, while the *idea* is great, the implementation isn't especially
good. First, running on 4 AA batteries, it can't have that much power to
plow through dense, heavy substances like cooked barley or potloads of
polenta. Second, it uses, as far as I can tell, plastic paddles. Plastic is
flimsy and I suspect the paddles wouldn't last long. Furthermore, they
don't have the assertive scraping action you need for certain things that
really like to stick to the bottoms of pans, such as rice. Finally, it's
virtually impossible when stirring with plastic to avoid having everything
taste "plasticky". What they need is a heavy, metal blade that has plenty
of weight and a good, sharpish edge (not knife-sharp, but not really,
really blunt). Third, the paddle itself appears to be flat. That's fine if
you're stirring in a flat-bottomed pot. But what if it's in a pot with a
curved or sloped bottom, or a bowl in a double-boiler? As I imply above,
this would be one of the most important uses of such a tool and if it can't
really be used in bowls or double-boilers, it's not nearly as useful as it
could be.

--
Alex Rast

(remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)