Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on Ceci N'est Pas Un Croissant, M. Schultz

1

That's the most disgusting thing I've ever heard.

Posted by giantladysquirrels | March 8, 2007 9:24 AM
2

How long can this last?? Are there going to be fat speakeasies?

Posted by Misty Brown | March 8, 2007 9:32 AM
3

Even the butter croissants at Starbucks are/were ass. Net loss zero.

Posted by matthew fisher wilder | March 8, 2007 9:40 AM
4

Health through legislation is idiotic. People are gonna think now because it's 'trans fat free' it's healthier and they can indulge more than they should. If people just ate less and moved more the trans-fat issue wouldn't be an issue.

Posted by Enigma | March 8, 2007 9:49 AM
5

Enigma, trans fat has nothing to do with obesity. All fats have the same number of calories. The problem with trans fats is that they kill you, much like cigarettes, asbestos, mercury, lead, etc.

It also has nothing to do with "health through legislation." It's a matter of LABELING so you KNOW what's in your food and so you can make INFORMED choices.

Cities like NYC are banning only "artifical" trans fat (why soybean oil is considered "artifical" and hormone and antibiotic-filled cream chemically hydrogenated by a cow's rumen is "natural" is beyond me).

Posted by jamier | March 8, 2007 10:10 AM
6

Starbucks can suck my dick.

Posted by catnextdoor | March 8, 2007 10:19 AM
7

I know trans fats are bad jamier, that wasn't the point of my post. My point was trans fats are a part of a bigger problem where people eat more and more artifical foods which aren't as healthy, getting away from natural foods that are filling and aren't filled with bad chemicals. I brought up the obesity thing because if people did eat more sensibly and thought about what they put into their body, there wouldn't be an issue around trans-fats because no company would use them. I agree labeling laws are good, as they let us make informed Desisions- but that's not the same as health legislation. The government telling me I can't eat trans-fats is the same as telling me I have to eat broccoli because it's good for me. If it doesn't harm anyone around me, I should be able to indulge in trans-fats as much as I want.
Sorry I didn't make my point clear before.

Posted by Enigma | March 8, 2007 10:35 AM
8

Aw man - I remember I was afraid of this when they first introduced the trans fat ban. Hell, in a few years, there'll probably be studies indicating that the "natural" trans fat is actually harmless, and saturated vegetable fat is worse for you - at which point people will suddenly demand the mass replacement of palm oil with butter.

Posted by tsm | March 8, 2007 11:03 AM
9


Sorry, Enigma, it's not the same thing. Banning trans fats in foods is like banning sharp glass in foods. It's a whole other deal. If it's that dangerous, I don't want companies putting it in my food.

Actually, the news here for me is that butter has trans fats in it. I thought butter was only saturated fat. Still bad for you, but not nearly as damaging as trans fats.

Posted by nope | March 8, 2007 11:18 AM
10

Banning trans fats in foods is like banning sharp glass in foods.

But it may not be that simple. See, there is other evidence actually indicating that the "naturally" produced trans fat in animal products actually doesn't have the same toxic properties as hydrogenated vegetable oils.

Which suggests that perhaps the horror about the small amount of trans fat in butter and beef is a waste of time. And that maybe we should be prepared to not every new scientific finding with regards to nutrition as immutable truth that must be codified into legislation immediately. (That much should be obvious now anyway - remember when margarine was the "healthy" choice?)

Posted by tsm | March 8, 2007 11:26 AM
11

I think the equivalent would actually be the drug ban. We know lots of drugs are bad for you, so the government says we can't take them. But it is my body and if I want to snort coke, or enjoy a box of triscits with trans-fats, that's my choice. I don't do hard drugs, and try to stay away from hydrogenated oils because I know they're bad for me and I like to be healthy.

Posted by Enigma | March 8, 2007 11:32 AM
12

Ugh. Palm oil is not a good substitute, at least according to this post:

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/01/palm_oil_a_rain.php

Posted by Andrew Hitchcock | March 8, 2007 11:47 AM
13

Personally, I've never liked the croissants they make here in the US, they use way too much. In France, the croissants are made with just enough butter, and are light and fluffy.

Here, they overprocess the flour and overdo the butter and add yucky preservatives.

If you've ever been to France, you know it's true. When you come back to the USA, all the desserts here are way too heavy and overly done.

Posted by Will in Seattle | March 8, 2007 11:57 AM
14

The wikipedia page on fatty acids is pretty good.

In short: The length of the fatty acid, how many double bonds it has, where those double bonds are in the chain and if they are cis- or trans- all matters.

For example: Fully hydrogenated fatty acids of the wrong length, which have been appearing in food, are apparently even worse for health than "bad" trans fats. Conversely, a trans-fat that is trans at the right place and is of the right length is fine.

Part of the confusion here is the (incorrect) conflation of trans-fats with hydorgenated fats. The former can be just fine, but the latter have tended to all be bad for health.

To enigma @11, I generally agree with you. However, it can be difficult to tell when out at restaurants, coffee shops or bakeries if and when the baked goods have hydrogenated fats in them. If it was feasible to require labeling of all hydrogenated-fat containing foods, I'd be down with that. A ban in some ways is easier to implement.

Posted by golob | March 8, 2007 12:19 PM
15

you know who has a good french pastry? Bakery Nouveau in West Seattle. I should know - I've gone thru most of them. Oh, and the hand made chocolates.

so hungry.

Posted by snacky | March 8, 2007 12:22 PM
16

@Will in Seattle: Totally true. Most European countries have this magical ability to make pastries and desserts so much better than we ever could here in the US. Its very very sad. Even the bakeries here that do well, just can replicate that delicate flavor. =*(

Posted by Monique | March 8, 2007 12:56 PM
17

Very very sad. Not that, say, Essential Bakery isn't good, but ...

Posted by Will in Seattle | March 8, 2007 1:54 PM
18

Transfatty controversy notwithstanding, this is delightful news for those intolerant to lactose.

Posted by mattymatt | March 8, 2007 2:07 PM
19

should be cela

Posted by rorry likes anuses | March 8, 2007 2:28 PM
20

yes, well, i wanted to have a picture of said croissant underneath the headline. but starbucks keeps pictures of their croissants carefully guarded, it seems. let me try again.

Posted by annie | March 8, 2007 2:39 PM
21

The whole point of the issue is the American infatuation with making food by industrial processes. It doesn't matter if Starbucks croissants are made with butter or palm oil (ugh) or Saudi Light Crude; it's the mass production that always leads you in the wrong direction.

The reason French croissants are so much better than ours is because they have impeccable technique and quality ingredients. Their butter is astoundingly good, because they actually pay close attention to where it comes from, what grass (and not fucking beef tallow and feed corn) the cows eat and so on and so forth. If this makes it difficult to transform the process industrially, then the process IS NOT TRANSFORMED. This is in fact the way all first-rate manufactured foodstuffs are made -- bread, cheese, butter, etc.

Americans almost always make the opposite choice: if the quality interferes with industrialization, quality has to go. There are always a few people who will buck the trend and try to make things "gourmet", but 90% of them will rapidly find themselves looking for a way to slap that "gourmet" or "organic" or whatever label on...industrial food.

The remaining 10% will find they have the skill to make something simple like bread, but not more complex foods like croissants. The best croissants, or cheese, or salami, etc., come from people willing to make not just a lifetime commitment but a MULTI-GENERATIONAL commitment to doing it, 100 hours a week. Almost no Americans are willing to do that; it goes against our culture. So you get people making croissants for a decade, if they're dedicated, but you probably can't make a good croissant after only a decade, certainly not without an apprenticeship somewhere.

So Starbucks croissants suck. Big surprise. Who in Starbucks has any kind of commitment to anything?

Posted by Fnarf | March 8, 2007 2:59 PM
22

#18 - there is virtually no lactose whatsoever in butter. If you have adverse reactions to consuming butter, it is not due to lactose intolerance.

Posted by tsm | March 8, 2007 8:16 PM
23

@21.

I have a challah recipe like that -- handed down generation-to-generation. Despite having no connection to France both my sister and I can make mean brioche. I couldn't agree more that it takes high quality ingredients and patience. Still, even without those hundreds of hours and generations after generations, I have to believe most anyone could make a decent loaf of bread at home.

Your oven is for more than decoration!

Basic bread:

1 c warm water (like a nice hot bath ~ 110 degrees F)

1 tsp Salt

1 Pgk ( ~ 2.5 tsp ) of Yeast

Mix above and wait a bit for the yeast to dissolve.

Add

2-3c of Flour (enough until the dough is tacky rather than sticky)

Use a heavy wooden spoon to mix the flour in a little bit at a time. Knead the ball of dough that forms on a floured surface.

Drop it as a ball on a cookie sheet and bake in a pre-heated 450 degree F oven for 20-30 minutes, or until browned on the outside, and hollow sounding.

Hmmm... I'm going to make a loaf right now.

Posted by golob | March 8, 2007 8:34 PM
24

Making a croissant without butter is ridiculous. The French have eaten them for a long time and the french population tends not to be fat. They eat small amounts. Which brings me to the Americanized Croissant, It is gigantic. That is why people are fat from them. A croissant should be small and flaky not a big giant bun like the ones they sell at Starbucks and most other coffee shops. The best croissant I can get in Vancouver B.C. is at a bakery called the "Bon Ton" on Broadway. It is along established Bakery that used to be Downtown on Granville St.. Walk in their Bakery and it smells like butter and that is my sign of a good bakery one that smells like butter. If it does not smell then they are using Lard. Once you have one from the "Bon Ton" you will not go back to those enormous bread like buns being passed off as croissants buy places like Starbucks. There is nothing wrong with butter. The only problem with butter in North America is it is tasteless so we use more to get flavor and end up fat. European butter has lots of flavor so you use less. Same with milk and cream. Almost everything is Homogenized here so it all tastes bland compared to European milk, cream and butter.
It is just another sales pitch so you can buy big but then that is what Starbucks is about.

Posted by -B- | March 8, 2007 9:31 PM
25

forgot to mention, I make my own croissants so I do know how they should look when done. It is along process of folding "BUTTER" into the pastry and letting it cool between each step and takes about 24 hrs to do it right. After folding them and rolling it out it adds up in layers of butter aprox. 150 if done right.
I enjoy baking them especially when I get it right.

Posted by -B- | March 8, 2007 9:38 PM
26

Yes, the secret is layering, a formula used in several of the best French pastries.

Sorry B-- the French make large croissants - spent years living there - the best are almost addicitive- I worked in Geneva and motored across into France for croissants at a small town bakery that produced the best I ever found, anywhere in France.

They baked three times a day, always a line, expensive, would buy a dozen and they were always gone in a day - then would motor over to France agin and wait for more .......utterly the best.

And large, just like Starrydollars -- a replica.

Good coffee au lait, a croissant and nice slice of swiss grueyere....good food.

The french do not stuff themselves, in anticipation of the next meal, the edge of hunger. Sex and good food are about the same value in France.

American can't quite understand the concept, it is so unique. The French home will have a Sunday meal better than any meal ever tasted by an American family.......at at any special occasion, out come the family and secret receipts, what a taste feast.

Remember, food prices are astro - price means little, quality is all.

And everyone is a gourmet - not knowing food is less than ignorant. Knowing wine and food is more important than looks as a social skill.

And you can suck off any male at the mere suggestion. Bien sur. No big deal at all.

Posted by mister re post | March 9, 2007 11:49 PM
27

with a bit of boldness, casual manner and a smile (some charm), and a joint, C. Hill is almost as good

can I buy you a drink is sure fire at R-Place and Purr

Posted by bien sur, va toi | March 9, 2007 11:56 PM
28

mveads mbfyqz szjr hlks qyzgsv pugyoia jpaoreu

Posted by qvaoznig kwsznr | March 10, 2007 3:32 PM
29

mveads mbfyqz szjr hlks qyzgsv pugyoia jpaoreu

Posted by qvaoznig kwsznr | March 10, 2007 3:34 PM
30

Hi Jim. You letter i received. Thanks! Photos is GREAT!!!!

Posted by Slim | March 20, 2007 5:29 AM
31

Hi Jim. You letter i received. Thanks! Photos is GREAT!!!!

Posted by Slim | March 20, 2007 7:49 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).