I make risotto quite often ... sauté some onions in olive oil, add the rice,
a little white wine, and then a ladle of chicken broth ... reduce ... more
chicken broth ... reduce ... etc. ... some saffron in the last ladle or two
of chicken broth. Good stuff!

So, I'm making the last batch and wondering ... what happens if you dump all
of the chicken broth in at once and let it go? Not that I'm going to do
this, but just curious about the outcome.

Bob

"raj" > wrote in
om:

> I make risotto quite often ... sauté some onions in olive oil, add the
> rice, a little white wine, and then a ladle of chicken broth ...
> reduce ... more chicken broth ... reduce ... etc. ... some saffron in
> the last ladle or two of chicken broth. Good stuff!
>
> So, I'm making the last batch and wondering ... what happens if you
> dump all of the chicken broth in at once and let it go? Not that I'm
> going to do this, but just curious about the outcome.
>
> Bob
>
>
>

You end up with just cooked rice. You won't have the creamy, saucy texture
that cooking by the traditional method produces.

Wayne

raj wrote:

> I make risotto quite often ... sauté some onions in olive oil, add the rice,
> a little white wine, and then a ladle of chicken broth ... reduce ... more
> chicken broth ... reduce ... etc. ... some saffron in the last ladle or two
> of chicken broth. Good stuff!
>
> So, I'm making the last batch and wondering ... what happens if you dump all
> of the chicken broth in at once and let it go? Not that I'm going to do
> this, but just curious about the outcome.
>
> Bob
>
>

to have a good risotto you shouldn't be in the condition of having to
stir too much all the time. it may result more than creamy, a little too
starchy.

the best way would be to add the first time half of the broth, and stir
occasionally. you can even cover the pan. then add the rest a ladle at
the time. if the flame is at the right point (medium) you shouldn't stir
very much. italian rice like carnaroli, vialone or arborio are quite
starchy already themselves. also you should use a sautee pan about 4" high.

and yes if you put all the liquid at one time you have boiled rice not
risotto.

risotto very good stuff.... today we did it with dry porcini mushrooms.

ciao, anna maria


www.annamariavolpi.com

"raj" > wrote in message
om...
> I make risotto quite often ... sauté some onions in olive oil, add the
rice,
> a little white wine, and then a ladle of chicken broth ... reduce ... more
> chicken broth ... reduce ... etc. ... some saffron in the last ladle or
two
> of chicken broth. Good stuff!
>
> So, I'm making the last batch and wondering ... what happens if you dump
all
> of the chicken broth in at once and let it go? Not that I'm going to do
> this, but just curious about the outcome.
>
> Bob

One of the objects of the methodology of making a risotto is the friction
caused by the stirring of the rice. This action releases some of the
starch. It is the release of this starch that causes the risotto to make a
"creamy sauce". By dumping all the liquid is at once you lessen the amount
of the starch released, a hence a thinner sauce.

Dimitri.

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 03:51:58 GMT, anna maria wrote:

> raj wrote:
>
>> I make risotto quite often ... sauté some onions in olive oil, add the rice,
>> a little white wine, and then a ladle of chicken broth ... reduce ... more
>> chicken broth ... reduce ... etc. ... some saffron in the last ladle or two
>> of chicken broth. Good stuff!
>>
>> So, I'm making the last batch and wondering ... what happens if you dump all
>> of the chicken broth in at once and let it go? Not that I'm going to do
>> this, but just curious about the outcome.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>
>
> to have a good risotto you shouldn't be in the condition of having to
> stir too much all the time. it may result more than creamy, a little too
> starchy.
>
> the best way would be to add the first time half of the broth, and stir
> occasionally. you can even cover the pan. then add the rest a ladle at
> the time. if the flame is at the right point (medium) you shouldn't stir
> very much. italian rice like carnaroli, vialone or arborio are quite
> starchy already themselves. also you should use a sautee pan about 4" high.
>
> and yes if you put all the liquid at one time you have boiled rice not
> risotto.
>
> risotto very good stuff.... today we did it with dry porcini mushrooms.
>
> ciao, anna maria
>
>
> www.annamariavolpi.com

I disagree. That is the reason, stirring only occasionally, that
restaurant risotto is a best so so.

JakeInHartsel

Glenn Jacobs wrote:

> On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 03:51:58 GMT, anna maria wrote:
>
>
>>raj wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I make risotto quite often ... sauté some onions in olive oil, add the rice,
>>>a little white wine, and then a ladle of chicken broth ... reduce ... more
>>>chicken broth ... reduce ... etc. ... some saffron in the last ladle or two
>>>of chicken broth. Good stuff!
>>>
>>>So, I'm making the last batch and wondering ... what happens if you dump all
>>>of the chicken broth in at once and let it go? Not that I'm going to do
>>>this, but just curious about the outcome.
>>>
>>>Bob
>>>
>>>
>>
>>to have a good risotto you shouldn't be in the condition of having to
>>stir too much all the time. it may result more than creamy, a little too
>>starchy.
>>
>>the best way would be to add the first time half of the broth, and stir
>>occasionally. you can even cover the pan. then add the rest a ladle at
>>the time. if the flame is at the right point (medium) you shouldn't stir
>>very much. italian rice like carnaroli, vialone or arborio are quite
>>starchy already themselves. also you should use a sautee pan about 4" high.
>>
>>and yes if you put all the liquid at one time you have boiled rice not
>>risotto.
>>
>>risotto very good stuff.... today we did it with dry porcini mushrooms.
>>
>>ciao, anna maria
>>
>>
>>www.annamariavolpi.com
>
>
> I disagree. That is the reason, stirring only occasionally, that
> restaurant risotto is a best so so.
>
> JakeInHartsel


Well, that explains why restaurant risotto, even from very good places,
always tastes/feels a bit like wallpaper paste.

Peg

raj saw Sally selling seashells by the seashore and told us all about
it on Mon, 10 Nov 2003 02:33:13 GMT:

>I make risotto quite often ... sauté some onions in olive oil, add the rice,
>a little white wine, and then a ladle of chicken broth ... reduce ... more
>chicken broth ... reduce ... etc. ... some saffron in the last ladle or two
>of chicken broth. Good stuff!
>
>So, I'm making the last batch and wondering ... what happens if you dump all
>of the chicken broth in at once and let it go? Not that I'm going to do
>this, but just curious about the outcome.

You still get risotto - but not as creamy. That's how I do it because
I'm lazy. I put in half the stock and once it starts to boil away I
add the second half. But I've started doing the sauteeing the rice
thing first and it really does improve the finished product.

(huggles)

~Karen AKA Kajikit

Nobody outstubborns a cat...

Visit my webpage: http://www.kajikitscorner.com
Allergyfree Eating Recipe Swap: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Allergyfree_Eating
Ample Aussies Mailing List: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ampleaussies/

"Kajikit" > wrote in message
...
> raj saw Sally selling seashells by the seashore and told us all about
> it on Mon, 10 Nov 2003 02:33:13 GMT:
>
> >I make risotto quite often ... sauté some onions in olive oil, add the
rice,
> >a little white wine, and then a ladle of chicken broth ... reduce ...
more
> >chicken broth ... reduce ... etc. ... some saffron in the last ladle or
two
> >of chicken broth. Good stuff!
> >
> >So, I'm making the last batch and wondering ... what happens if you dump
all
> >of the chicken broth in at once and let it go? Not that I'm going to do
> >this, but just curious about the outcome.
>
> You still get risotto - but not as creamy. That's how I do it because
> I'm lazy. I put in half the stock and once it starts to boil away I
> add the second half. But I've started doing the sauteeing the rice
> thing first and it really does improve the finished product.
>

You ought to try risotto in the microwave - it comes out every bit as good
as the stovetop version with much less fussing.


--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.

Glenn Jacobs wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 03:51:58 GMT, anna maria wrote:
>
>
>>raj wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I make risotto quite often ... sauté some onions in olive oil, add the rice,
>>>a little white wine, and then a ladle of chicken broth ... reduce ... more
>>>chicken broth ... reduce ... etc. ... some saffron in the last ladle or two
>>>of chicken broth. Good stuff!
>>>
>>>So, I'm making the last batch and wondering ... what happens if you dump all
>>>of the chicken broth in at once and let it go? Not that I'm going to do
>>>this, but just curious about the outcome.
>>>
>>>Bob
>>>
>>>
>>
>>to have a good risotto you shouldn't be in the condition of having to
>>stir too much all the time. it may result more than creamy, a little too
>>starchy.
>>
>>the best way would be to add the first time half of the broth, and stir
>>occasionally. you can even cover the pan. then add the rest a ladle at
>>the time. if the flame is at the right point (medium) you shouldn't stir
>>very much. italian rice like carnaroli, vialone or arborio are quite
>>starchy already themselves. also you should use a sautee pan about 4" high.
>>
>>and yes if you put all the liquid at one time you have boiled rice not
>>risotto.
>>
>>risotto very good stuff.... today we did it with dry porcini mushrooms.
>>
>>ciao, anna maria
>>
>>
>>www.annamariavolpi.com
>
>
> I disagree. That is the reason, stirring only occasionally, that
> restaurant risotto is a best so so.
>
> JakeInHartsel

i disagree with your disagreement.... :-)

to make risotto takes: about 2-3 minutes for the soffritto (generally
sauteeig the chopped onion) and about 18-22 minutes for the risotto to
cook. its about 25 minutes in total. as far as i know since restaurants
don't want you to wait so long (many good restaurants in italy do make
you wait) they precook the rice half the way. then they put it back into
the pan with quite an amount of butter and they revive it with broth.
that's why it is mushy and sticky.

i am from rome and i have to admit we are not the best risotto makers.
my mother was used to make risotto in a pot, and the result was a very
dense starchy paste. in my book i still indicate the technique of
stirring continuously that you and most others use. it is not wrong.
simply gives you a very starchy risotto that resembles a paste. to
obtain instead a risotto more creamy, lightly starchy but where the
grains are well cooked "al dente" but still separated from each other
("all'onda" or wavy as they call it in north italy) you don't have to
stir that much.

first i prepare the soffritto in a sautee pan (generally onion sauteed
in butter) then add the rice, and stir for max 1-2 minutes until well
coated. add wine (if required) and evaporate. then add half of the
broth, stir occasionally. when the risotto is reduced add the rest a
ladle at the time and proceed to the end, stirring as needed. adding of
course the flavoring ingredients depending on the recipe.

ciao, anna maria


www.annamariavolpi.com

Peter Aitken wrote:

> "Kajikit" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>raj saw Sally selling seashells by the seashore and told us all about
>>it on Mon, 10 Nov 2003 02:33:13 GMT:
>>
>>
>>>I make risotto quite often ... sauté some onions in olive oil, add the
>
> rice,
>
>>>a little white wine, and then a ladle of chicken broth ... reduce ...
>
> more
>
>>>chicken broth ... reduce ... etc. ... some saffron in the last ladle or
>
> two
>
>>>of chicken broth. Good stuff!
>>>
>>>So, I'm making the last batch and wondering ... what happens if you dump
>
> all
>
>>>of the chicken broth in at once and let it go? Not that I'm going to do
>>>this, but just curious about the outcome.
>>
>>You still get risotto - but not as creamy. That's how I do it because
>>I'm lazy. I put in half the stock and once it starts to boil away I
>>add the second half. But I've started doing the sauteeing the rice
>>thing first and it really does improve the finished product.
>>
>
>
> You ought to try risotto in the microwave - it comes out every bit as good
> as the stovetop version with much less fussing.
>
>
oh yes , and you can do it in the rice steamer also, and if you put some
raw fish on top you can call it sushi...
sorry but couldn't resist the sarcasm... :-)

ciao, anna maria


www.annamariavolpi.com

"anna maria" > wrote in message
...
> Peter Aitken wrote:
>
> > "Kajikit" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> >>raj saw Sally selling seashells by the seashore and told us all about
> >>it on Mon, 10 Nov 2003 02:33:13 GMT:
> >>
> >>
> >>>I make risotto quite often ... sauté some onions in olive oil, add the
> >
> > rice,
> >
> >>>a little white wine, and then a ladle of chicken broth ... reduce ...
> >
> > more
> >
> >>>chicken broth ... reduce ... etc. ... some saffron in the last ladle or
> >
> > two
> >
> >>>of chicken broth. Good stuff!
> >>>
> >>>So, I'm making the last batch and wondering ... what happens if you
dump
> >
> > all
> >
> >>>of the chicken broth in at once and let it go? Not that I'm going to
do
> >>>this, but just curious about the outcome.
> >>
> >>You still get risotto - but not as creamy. That's how I do it because
> >>I'm lazy. I put in half the stock and once it starts to boil away I
> >>add the second half. But I've started doing the sauteeing the rice
> >>thing first and it really does improve the finished product.
> >>
> >
> >
> > You ought to try risotto in the microwave - it comes out every bit as
good
> > as the stovetop version with much less fussing.
> >
> >
> oh yes , and you can do it in the rice steamer also, and if you put some
> raw fish on top you can call it sushi...
> sorry but couldn't resist the sarcasm... :-)
>
> ciao, anna maria

Sarcasm or ignorance? Have you tried making risotto in the MW? I have and it
works just great. I have traveled extensively in Italy so I know what good
risotto is.


--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.

>
> Sarcasm or ignorance? Have you tried making risotto in the MW? I have and it
> works just great. I have traveled extensively in Italy so I know what good
> risotto is.

Interesting I would like to know how to do it. Risottos are wonderful
dishes but tough to prepare especially when you are trying to do other
things at the same time.

I may have to buy a small microwave.

JakeInHartsel

"Glenn Jacobs" > wrote in message
...
>
> >
> > Sarcasm or ignorance? Have you tried making risotto in the MW? I have
and it
> > works just great. I have traveled extensively in Italy so I know what
good
> > risotto is.
>
> Interesting I would like to know how to do it. Risottos are wonderful
> dishes but tough to prepare especially when you are trying to do other
> things at the same time.

I'm a stirrer and I don't find it difficult at all. I usually add spicy
italian sausage to mine because DH is such a meat-o-phile.

Brown the crumbled meat and remove from pan with slotted spoon, leaving the
drippings in the pan. Try not to eat the sausage while making the risotto.
In fact, this is the toughest part of making risotto in my house.

Sautee the onions and then the rice in butter, a dash of EVOO, and white
wine or dry vermouth (I almost never have white wine on hand, and the
vermouth adds a nice flavor) for a few minutes.

Add a cup or so of chicken broth. Stir. Let soak in.

Add broth by the 1/4 cup, stirring every couple of minutes, until all the
broth is done and the rice has gone just past al dente. Add the sausage back
in during the last addition of the broth.

Top with grated parmeggiano-reggiano.

It's true that you have to stand right there the whole time, but it really
couldn't be much easier. This may not be the purist's way to make risotto,
but it's creamy, not starchy, and the rice doesn't stick togetherl. (Until
you're eating it as leftovers the next day.)

Cate

"Glenn Jacobs" > wrote in message
...
>
> >
> > Sarcasm or ignorance? Have you tried making risotto in the MW? I have
and it
> > works just great. I have traveled extensively in Italy so I know what
good
> > risotto is.
>
> Interesting I would like to know how to do it. Risottos are wonderful
> dishes but tough to prepare especially when you are trying to do other
> things at the same time.
>
> I may have to buy a small microwave.
>
> JakeInHartsel

Barbara Kafka's cookbook "The Microwave Gourmet" has the recipes.


--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.

Peter Aitken wrote:
> "anna maria" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Peter Aitken wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>You ought to try risotto in the microwave - it comes out every bit as
>
> good
>
>>>as the stovetop version with much less fussing.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>oh yes , and you can do it in the rice steamer also, and if you put some
>>raw fish on top you can call it sushi...
>>sorry but couldn't resist the sarcasm... :-)
>>
>>ciao, anna maria
>
>
> Sarcasm or ignorance? Have you tried making risotto in the MW? I have and it
> works just great. I have traveled extensively in Italy so I know what good
> risotto is.
>
>

i don't own a mw. i had one many years ago, and i gave it away. i seldom
use frozen food and there is nothing i can't do better with oven or
stove. i know that lots of people's cooking revolves around the mw and
they will not agree, but i don't think cooks appropriately. for me mw
for cooking is worthless, for tawing maybe or warming up.

going back to risotto just to mention alternative ways, you can do it in
a presure cooker. this way cooks with the sauces and at least you finish
it with stirring a little bit the last few minutes. the result is never
like the true stuff. the mw? naaa. sorry, but its the stirring....

ciao, anna maria



www.annamariavolpi.com

"anna maria" > wrote in message
...
> Peter Aitken wrote:
> > "anna maria" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> >>Peter Aitken wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>You ought to try risotto in the microwave - it comes out every bit as
> >
> > good
> >
> >>>as the stovetop version with much less fussing.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>oh yes , and you can do it in the rice steamer also, and if you put some
> >>raw fish on top you can call it sushi...
> >>sorry but couldn't resist the sarcasm... :-)
> >>
> >>ciao, anna maria
> >
> >
> > Sarcasm or ignorance? Have you tried making risotto in the MW? I have
and it
> > works just great. I have traveled extensively in Italy so I know what
good
> > risotto is.
> >
> >
>
> i don't own a mw. i had one many years ago, and i gave it away. i seldom
> use frozen food and there is nothing i can't do better with oven or
> stove. i know that lots of people's cooking revolves around the mw and
> they will not agree, but i don't think cooks appropriately. for me mw
> for cooking is worthless, for tawing maybe or warming up.
>
> going back to risotto just to mention alternative ways, you can do it in
> a presure cooker. this way cooks with the sauces and at least you finish
> it with stirring a little bit the last few minutes. the result is never
> like the true stuff. the mw? naaa. sorry, but its the stirring....
>
> ciao, anna maria
>

Wow, you can be an expert on something without ever trying it. How
impressive.


--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.

Peter Aitken wrote:

> "anna maria" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Peter Aitken wrote:
>>
>>>"anna maria" > wrote in message
. ..
>>>
>>>
>>>>Peter Aitken wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>You ought to try risotto in the microwave - it comes out every bit as
>>>
>>>good
>>>
>>>
>>>>>as the stovetop version with much less fussing.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>oh yes , and you can do it in the rice steamer also, and if you put some
>>>>raw fish on top you can call it sushi...
>>>>sorry but couldn't resist the sarcasm... :-)
>>>>
>>>>ciao, anna maria
>>>
>>>
>>>Sarcasm or ignorance? Have you tried making risotto in the MW? I have
>
> and it
>
>>>works just great. I have traveled extensively in Italy so I know what
>
> good
>
>>>risotto is.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>i don't own a mw. i had one many years ago, and i gave it away. i seldom
>>use frozen food and there is nothing i can't do better with oven or
>>stove. i know that lots of people's cooking revolves around the mw and
>>they will not agree, but i don't think cooks appropriately. for me mw
>>for cooking is worthless, for tawing maybe or warming up.
>>
>>going back to risotto just to mention alternative ways, you can do it in
>>a presure cooker. this way cooks with the sauces and at least you finish
>>it with stirring a little bit the last few minutes. the result is never
>>like the true stuff. the mw? naaa. sorry, but its the stirring....
>>
>>ciao, anna maria
>>
>
>
> Wow, you can be an expert on something without ever trying it. How
> impressive.
>
>

it looks like you keep on trying to pick up a fight with me, while
evidently i cannot express myself. let me try this again. you can cook
rice in many different ways: boil, steam, microave, pressure cooker (i
am sure i am forgetting many different ways i am not aware of) etc
etc.... it will taste good anyway with all the condiment and stuff, but
without stirring don't call it risotto please.

ciao, anna maria


www.annamariavolpi.com

BubbaBob > wrote in
1:

> anna maria > wrote:
>
>>
>> it looks like you keep on trying to pick up a fight with me,
>> while evidently i cannot express myself. let me try this again.
>> you can cook rice in many different ways: boil, steam, microave,
>> pressure cooker (i am sure i am forgetting many different ways i
>> am not aware of) etc etc.... it will taste good anyway with all
>> the condiment and stuff, but without stirring don't call it
>> risotto please.
>>
>> ciao, anna maria
>>
>>
>> www.annamariavolpi.com
>>
>>
> I can make an unstirred risotto in my pressure cooker that is
> completely indistinguishable from one that was stirred.
>

I find that highly improbable. That aside, it is not a risotto if it is
not stirred.

As Anna Maria said, cook it your way, eat it, enjoy it, but don't call it
risotto. It's NOT.

End of discussion.

Wayne

Hark! I heard Wayne Boatwright > say:
> BubbaBob > wrote in
> 1:

<snip>

> > I can make an unstirred risotto in my pressure cooker that is
> > completely indistinguishable from one that was stirred.

> I find that highly improbable. That aside, it is not a risotto if it is
> not stirred.

> As Anna Maria said, cook it your way, eat it, enjoy it, but don't call it
> risotto. It's NOT.

Hey, a new version of the "Fettucini Alfredo" brouhaha.

> End of discussion.

Ah, optimism... ;-)


--
J.J. ~ mom, gamer, novice cook ~
...fish heads, fish heads, eat them up, yum!

(J.J. [aka j*ni]) wrote in
:

> Hark! I heard Wayne Boatwright > say:
>> BubbaBob > wrote in
>> 1:
>
> <snip>
>
>> > I can make an unstirred risotto in my pressure cooker that is
>> > completely indistinguishable from one that was stirred.
>
>> I find that highly improbable. That aside, it is not a risotto if it
>> is not stirred.
>
>> As Anna Maria said, cook it your way, eat it, enjoy it, but don't
>> call it risotto. It's NOT.
>
> Hey, a new version of the "Fettucini Alfredo" brouhaha.
>
>> End of discussion.
>
> Ah, optimism... ;-)
>
>

Also reminds me of an old song... "Anything you can do, I can do better"

"anna maria" > wrote in message
...

<snipped>

>
> it looks like you keep on trying to pick up a fight with me, while
> evidently i cannot express myself. let me try this again. you can cook
> rice in many different ways: boil, steam, microave, pressure cooker (i
> am sure i am forgetting many different ways i am not aware of) etc
> etc.... it will taste good anyway with all the condiment and stuff, but
> without stirring don't call it risotto please.
>
> ciao, anna maria
>

I am not trying to pick a fight but you seem unable to understand what I am
saying. Risotto cooked in the MW is every bit as good as risotto made with
stirring. It is EXACTLY THE SAME so why shouldn't it be called risotto? It
is the result that counts, not the preparation method.


--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.

"Peter Aitken" > wrote in
:

> "anna maria" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> <snipped>
>
>>
>> it looks like you keep on trying to pick up a fight with me, while
>> evidently i cannot express myself. let me try this again. you can
>> cook rice in many different ways: boil, steam, microave, pressure
>> cooker (i am sure i am forgetting many different ways i am not aware
>> of) etc etc.... it will taste good anyway with all the condiment and
>> stuff, but without stirring don't call it risotto please.
>>
>> ciao, anna maria
>>
>
> I am not trying to pick a fight but you seem unable to understand what
> I am saying. Risotto cooked in the MW is every bit as good as risotto
> made with stirring. It is EXACTLY THE SAME so why shouldn't it be
> called risotto? It is the result that counts, not the preparation
> method.
>
>

If nothing else, Peter, let's just call it preference. Frankly, I
wouldn't waste my Arborio rice to find out if it's the same or not. I
prefer the classic stirring method, and I know for sure that it produces
a risotto. How you make it and what you call it is your business...just
don't expect others to call it risotto.

Truly not in hostility,,,

Wayne

BubbaBob > wrote in
1:

> Wayne Boatwright > wrote:
>
>>> I can make an unstirred risotto in my pressure cooker that is
>>> completely indistinguishable from one that was stirred.
>>>
>>
>> I find that highly improbable.
>
>
> Improbable? You mean you're guessing, and without data, as well. Try
> both methods before you start pontificating about the differences. I
> use Lorna Sass's technique.
>
>>That aside, it is not a risotto
>> if it is not stirred.
>>
>> As Anna Maria said, cook it your way, eat it, enjoy it, but
>> don't call it risotto. It's NOT.
>>
>> End of discussion.
>>
>> Wayne

If nothing else, Bob, let's just call it preference. Frankly, I wouldn't
waste my Arborio rice to find out if it's the same or not. I prefer the
classic stirring method, and I know for sure that it produces a risotto.
How you make it and what you call it is your business...just don't expect
others to call it risotto.

I'd say you're the one who's pontificating. You're being no less
insistent than anyone else.

Truly not in hostility,,,

Wayne

"Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Peter Aitken" > wrote in
> :
>
> > "anna maria" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > <snipped>
> >
> >>
> >> it looks like you keep on trying to pick up a fight with me, while
> >> evidently i cannot express myself. let me try this again. you can
> >> cook rice in many different ways: boil, steam, microave, pressure
> >> cooker (i am sure i am forgetting many different ways i am not aware
> >> of) etc etc.... it will taste good anyway with all the condiment and
> >> stuff, but without stirring don't call it risotto please.
> >>
> >> ciao, anna maria
> >>
> >
> > I am not trying to pick a fight but you seem unable to understand what
> > I am saying. Risotto cooked in the MW is every bit as good as risotto
> > made with stirring. It is EXACTLY THE SAME so why shouldn't it be
> > called risotto? It is the result that counts, not the preparation
> > method.
> >
> >
>
> If nothing else, Peter, let's just call it preference. Frankly, I
> wouldn't waste my Arborio rice to find out if it's the same or not. I
> prefer the classic stirring method, and I know for sure that it produces
> a risotto. How you make it and what you call it is your business...just
> don't expect others to call it risotto.
>

I know I should let this drop but some silliness is just too blatant for me
to let pass. You "prefer the classic stirring method?" Prefer it over what?
You clearly have not tried anything else. It's like having tasted only one
beer and then saying you prefer it. Silliness #1.

Now let me propose a hypothetical situation. You are having dinner at a
friend's house and they serve you risotto. You find it delicious, rich,
creamy, equal to the best you have ever had, so you complement the cook:
"This is great risotto." Then they say it was made in the microwave. All of
a sudden it is not risotto? Silliness #2.


--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.

"Peter Aitken" > wrote in
m:

> "Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
> . ..
>> "Peter Aitken" > wrote in
>> :
>>
>> > "anna maria" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> >
>> > <snipped>
>> >
>> >>
>> >> it looks like you keep on trying to pick up a fight with me, while
>> >> evidently i cannot express myself. let me try this again. you can
>> >> cook rice in many different ways: boil, steam, microave, pressure
>> >> cooker (i am sure i am forgetting many different ways i am not
>> >> aware of) etc etc.... it will taste good anyway with all the
>> >> condiment and stuff, but without stirring don't call it risotto
>> >> please.
>> >>
>> >> ciao, anna maria
>> >>
>> >
>> > I am not trying to pick a fight but you seem unable to understand
>> > what I am saying. Risotto cooked in the MW is every bit as good as
>> > risotto made with stirring. It is EXACTLY THE SAME so why shouldn't
>> > it be called risotto? It is the result that counts, not the
>> > preparation method.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> If nothing else, Peter, let's just call it preference. Frankly, I
>> wouldn't waste my Arborio rice to find out if it's the same or not.
>> I prefer the classic stirring method, and I know for sure that it
>> produces a risotto. How you make it and what you call it is your
>> business...just don't expect others to call it risotto.
>>
>
> I know I should let this drop but some silliness is just too blatant
> for me to let pass. You "prefer the classic stirring method?" Prefer
> it over what? You clearly have not tried anything else. It's like
> having tasted only one beer and then saying you prefer it. Silliness
> #1.

This is simple enough to dispel. I have been served "risotto" prepared
by at least two other methods. I didn't like either one. One happened
to be prepared in the MW; the other was prepared by simply dumping all
the ingredients into a pot a cooking it 'til done. Both tasted to me
like just seasoned cooked rice. There was no creaminess and none of the
texture associated with Risotto. I have also eaten it in restaurants
where it bore no resemblance to Risotto, but I have no idea their method
of preparation.

> Now let me propose a hypothetical situation. You are having dinner at
> a friend's house and they serve you risotto. You find it delicious,
> rich, creamy, equal to the best you have ever had, so you complement
> the cook: "This is great risotto." Then they say it was made in the
> microwave. All of a sudden it is not risotto? Silliness #2.

I would have to bow to this situation, but I doubt that it will ever
happen. Should it happen, however, I would agree that it is "great
risotto", call it what you will. In spite of that, I would never cook it
that way myself.

Let's drop this now, okay?

Wayne