NOTE: My Correct Address is in my signature (just remove the spaces).
On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 01:26:56 -0000,
(Alex Rast) wrote:

>For various reasons I've been thinking about extremely decadent chocolate
>desserts recently (what - a REASON is necessary?) Anyway, I can't really
>decide which among several possibilities would be best. The key thing is I
>want it to be served warm, not cold (or even room temperature). So I'll put
>it to the newsgroup : which one of these would you think would be the best
>warm? I'm not asking you to identify the ones which would turn out better
>served warm instead of cold - rather, taking the fact that they'd be warm
>as a given, which would you most want? Please - "Yes" isn't an answer (or
>at least, it isn't a very informative answer).
>
>Chocolate Decadence: that dense, more-or-less flourless chocolate "cake" -
>generally served in narrow wedges with raspberry sauce. Warm, this is a bit
>like eating chocolate truffles that somehow have been made warm without
>them melting.
>
>Fallen Chocolate Cake : the one usually baked in individual ramekins and
>served partly baked, so that the outside is like a cake but the center is
>still liquid batter. Always served warm.

When this is cool, the center becomes almost solid. I'd say that it
is better warm.

>My "Hyper-Chocolatey Brownies" (see recipe posted on DejaNews). Warm, these
>take on the characteristics of something of a cross between a steamed
>chocolate pudding, a cake, and very potent chocolate fudge.

How do you warm it after baking?

>Chocolate Mousse cake : for a reference see Cook's Illustrated December
>2002. This is like a fluffy version of Chocolate Decadence. I tweak the
>recipe slightly, sugar going down to 1/2 cup, chocolate up to 14 oz. It
>goes without saying that I use a much better chocolate than the Hershey's
>Special Dark that CI recommends (what's with that!?).

My guess - ignorance.

>Warm, this is a bit
>like an extremely dense souffle - as if it's the result of an happy
>accident whereby something went terribly wrong with an ordinary souffle but
>ended up creating something terribly right.

Sounds like you'd need to bake it just prior to eating - no?

>Fudge-Nut pie : straight out of the February/March 2004 issue of
>Chocolatier. I'd use hazelnuts instead of walnuts, however, because I
>happen to like hazelnuts much better, and on the glaze I see no reason to
>use corn syrup or hot water in the glaze - it's basically a ganache. So I'd
>just make a good firm ganache and leave it like that. Never tried this
>recipe, but it looks awesome. The mag recommends serving warm.

Again, how would you warm it?

>Now I suppose I've started a mad dash for the kitchen...

Oh, yeah!

(Too bad I cut the tendons in my left hand and can't use it for at
least another month. Once again, my daughter will get a cooking
lesson!)

--
Davida Chazan (The Chocolate Lady)
<davidac AT jdc DOT org DOT il>
~*~*~*~*~*~
"What you see before you, my friend, is the result of a lifetime of
chocolate."
--Katharine Hepburn (May 12, 1907 - June 29, 2003)
~*~*~*~*~*~