Once again Dick Adams,( A.K.A.Mr. Ben A. Newbie-Never), has taken the simple
task of baking with, and keeping sourdough and put it on the level of
sending a man to Mars.

Leave us not forget the "Sourdoughs" and "49'ers" who are responsible for
our having heard of the subject in the first place. Not too many of them
considered this a chemistry endeavor? A handful of flour and creek water was
more in their line.

ab

"Dick Adams" > wrote in message
...

"Charles Perry" > wrote in message
...

> [ ... ]

> Well, if we keep this up, we can really get some newcomers
> confused.

Yep!

> ... it is hard for even experienced bakers to keep things
> straight.

So I say we are doin' a good job. The next thing is for one
of us to write a bake book so we can take their money while
we are keeping them confused.

> ... It is my understanding that when you have a starter (or
> yeast for that matter) as the primary agent to raise the dough
> the purpose of the "old dough" is to act as a dough conditioner
> and some would argue as a flavor enhancer. The amount of live
> organisms in the old dough is not at issue.

By what mechanism is it to be supposed that the "old dough" will
"condition" the dough, and in what respect is it to be expected that
the dough will be conditioned?? What might be supposed to reside
in the dough, other than microorganisms and their metabolic products,
which could affect the flavor?

> Most of the Old Dough procedures that I have read call for the
> dough to undergo at least one rise before it is held back. This
> is usually not the case where dough is held back to begin a new
> batch. The dough that is held back to begin a new batch is
> most often saved at a point just before the salt is added. Where
> the salt is the last thing added.

My guess: on account of innate frugality, no baker wishes to throw
away excess dough. So is it saved, and the practice of
incorporating it into new bread is hyped up as desirable.
The same thing happens with old bread, you know -- sometimes
bakers add old bread to new dough, and there is some good reason
for doing that which naturally escapes me, not to say that bread
crumbs are not generally useful.

It appears to me that the same trend is followed in the case of
"retardation", that is, putting the bread in the fridge or other
cold place. When bread was baked on three shifts, it was not
done, but when bakers became professionals and proclaimed a
right to work normal hours, the practice of cold slowing the rise
through the wee hours was promoted to the status of a
"professional touch" and given this name "retardation" to disguise
the simplicity of, and the elemental laziness inherent in, this practice.

> When you add old dough for the purpose of improving the dough it
> is not categorically a starter manipulation.

Aside from being considerably more naive, it is generically equivalent
to the old Granny Beck trick of lacing an active starter with a soured
one presumably to enhance the flavor of the resultant bread.

> While you are correct in that most *sour* flavor is acquired near
> the end of the rise, Those *sour* flavors are most definitely not
> the only flavor that is developed in bread.

Well, there may be flavorful metabolic products other than acids
due to the metabolism of microorganisms, and flavors due to the
browning of the crust. Possibly there are flavors due to the enzymatic
hydrolysis of flour-starches, and other such digestions, but there is
no reason I know of to think that any of these processes would be
favored over any other of them by holding the dough temperature low.

> I submit that many yeast method bakers also argue for a longer
> and slower rise to improve flavor. One way to slow the rise is
> to raise the dough at a lower temperature. If I had to pick a
> point to argue from it would be for cool room temperature.

That is a lot like saying that one way to delay arrival as the result
of a trip is to travel at lower speed. Such a practice might make
sense if you were to take a night train to some place where one
wished to arrive during daylight hours. Fermentation, in all of its
aspects with which I am familiar, proceeds slower at lower
temperature.

> The lack of any standard vocabulary and writers reusing the same
> words to mean different things makes it very difficult to gain a
> good understanding from just reading books.

The bake-book writers stick together. If one of them writes a book
which makes it clear, none of the rest can hawk their stuff. If everybody
knew how to do it, no one would read the books. Nor would they
consult this newsgroup. So that is why I say (above) that we are doin'
a good job.

> However, I still read "Beard on Bread" even though nearly
> every thing he wrote about sourdough is completely wrong.
> His enthusiasm for cooking and eating puts me in a creative mood ...

And Roy, too. You do not even have to buy a book for that, just
wait a while and he will post something here.

> Maybe some books on sourdough should have a "banned for
> beginners" sticker.

Recommended for the newbies!

> The history of language, particularly English, does not lend
> much hope. Once misuse of a word escapes to the public,
> getting back to an old dictionary definition is almost impossible
> despite the best efforts of the word police.

In general, professionalism implies an obfuscatory intent. In fact,
that is only reflected moderately in the bake books. Such intent
reaches its highest level in the classical three professions, which
are thought not to include baking, nor the so-called "oldest" one.

---
DickA