I’m getting married in October (!) and yesterday we started the process of registering for wedding presents. (fun!) Crate & Barrel was having a “party” for couples who wanted to register, which meant snacks (some demonstrating their gadgets, like waffles made in their waffle makers and fries made with a mandoline there) and extra help.
![]()
Not gluten-free waffles, sadly, but there were fine sausage patties. And cucumber water! I love that stuff.
There were folks from Shun pushing their knives and All-Clad pushing their pots. So we registered for a bunch of stuff, and came home to research some of the things we registered for – like, are Shun knives really better than Wusthof or whoever? (Internet says: the blades are awesome/depends what feels best in your hand/yes but they’re overpriced/I prefer brand X,Y,Z….)
All-Clad copper core versus Calphalon copper core was a harder question to resolve. Calphalon was already sort of off the list because they only had the copper pans as a set, and we don’t need all those pots and pans. But there was an All-Clad representative (or shill) there who was super-emphatic about how much better All-Clad was. She claimed that “because they are made in America,” each one is made from start to finish by one person. (Which would be better, but I don’t think it has a whole lot to do with them being made in America.) And that their copper core is thicker and that the All-Clad handles try to be heat-proof but aren’t, and… so on.
So, I asked the internet. And I got a freaking torrent of information. It seems to boil down to a couple of points:
* All-Clad copper cores are the only All-Clad pots that people like, and a lot of the time they talk about All-Clad copper pots being crap without specifying whether they mean the copper core ones or the ones that are just wrapped in copper.
* All-Clad has some great pots and Calphalon has some great pots, and both of them are way overpriced.
* You can get better pots with lesser-known names for cheaper, and you can get way way better pots for more expensive. (And sometimes even for cheaper.)
* It’s harder to register for pots from (what basically boils down to) companies with smaller advertising budgets because where do you find them?
* Sauteeing does not mean what I think it means.
A writer on eGullet, where most of my research drew me, was asked what the best pan would be to saute two chicken breasts and then deglaze a quick sauce, and wrote,
The first thing to understand is that we really don’t saute chicken breasts. If you refer back to my description of the saute pan, you will see that the French verb “sauter” means “to jump.” When we saute, we have a number of small items in a pan over high heat, and the pan is constantly agitated in order to jump the ingredients around and expose every side of the ingredients to the heat. The straight, relatively tall sides of the saute pan help to bounce food around back into the pan. You don’t really need to “toss” or “flip” the ingredients to saute either. All you need to do is simply shake the pan back and forth vigorously on the burner. My impression is that home cooks don’t tend to do all that much real sauteing.
Sauteing is, then, something you might do with chunks of chicken breast, but not with whole chicken breasts. Whole or flattened chicken breasts just sit there in the pan and fry. Fundamentally there is no reason you shouldn’t use a fry pan to do this. Among other things, it will be much easier to get a spatula under the food when it needs to be turned if it is in a fry pan. As for the pan sauce, if all you are going to be doing is deglazing with a little white wine and maybe swirling in a little butter there is no reason you couldn’t do this right in the fry pan. I’d recommend a nice heavy fry pan.
But, let’s take a slightly different approach and see how that changes the pan requirements. Let’s say we want to fry some chicken thighs until they are nice and brown together whith some small onions then add some white wine to the pan and quickly braise/steam the chicken until it is cooked through, at which point the solid ingredients will be removed and the liquid will be reduced and mounted with butter to form the sauce. In this case, a saute pan would be much better — even though you are not sauteing — because the higher sides and the lid make it a better environment for the quick braise and subsequent reduction part.
Fascinating, no? But what kicked me in the head here was that I have been evidently using “sauté” all wrong.
I always say – as any PeaceMeals customers may have noticed – “sauté.” Anytime you’re sticking food in a pan for hotness. Because I don’t think it’s as suave to say “Stick those potatoes in a pan with the onions, for hotness.” (I’m willing to entertain arguments that I am wrong about this.)
I didn’t even know what the difference was between a frying pan and a sauté pan! I would have guessed they were the same. I know omelette pans are different – at least I think they are.
Apparently, this is a sauté pan:
And this is a frying pan (or what may be more grammatically correct, “fry pan” – after all, we don’t say “sauteeing pan,” do we?):
What do I have, anyway? I know we have a (terrible, thin, overheating, non-stick) sauté pan, which I still find myself wanting to call a “frying pan.” And we have one black enamel actual frying pan and one aluminum actual frying pan. (Both of which are awesome, in case you were wondering.) And a scratched non-stick wok, which is irrelevant but nicely concludes the “pan-type-things” category.
The fry vs. saute question is fascinating to me because I think it goes back to “fear of fat.” I strongly suspect that the reason we overuse “sauté” in the United States is because we think we’re not supposed to “fry” things. “Frying” carries connotations of heavy, oily, FRIED food, which is supposed to be BAD because frying means FAT. Greasy greasy fat. Which, as we all (erroneously) know, leads straight to heart attacks and clinical obesity and probably grease-brain. (Like water on the brain. But with grease.)
Whereas “sauté” is French! Which means, even if it really translated to “a lump of cholesterol from inside a dead goose,” it’s not fat but “rich,” not heavy or oily but “light,” not bad but magically inherently healthy because of “the French paradox.” (The ultimate killer of the whole “fat is bad” thing, where everyone opens their eyes and says “Wait! How can people have such better health in France, where they eat foie gras and drink wine all day!” And I suppose access to health care has nothing at all to do with it….)
So one doesn’t say “fry those chicken breasts” – after all, they’re chicken breasts! You went out and got the least flavorful, least fatty, most easily overcooked part of the chicken just to avoid accidentally consuming any FAT! You’re not ALLOWED to fry it – it’s illegal in like 48 states!
Which is also what makes me struggle with the pan names. Because in my mind, I’d want a pan with deeper, straighter sides to fry something. Because I’d want more oil, more concentrated heat. I’d be frying it, hard-core, practically deep-frying. (Actually, the reason I think this is that when I was working to lower my cholesterol – partly a hereditary issue, partly affected by what was very nearly an all-cheese diet – one of the things I did was deep-fry everything in olive oil. Which worked beautifully, both on the food and my cholesterol.)
And if I were flipping things around, making them dance and fly across the pan, I’d go to one with wider, angled sides, to give them more space. (This is probably why my stovetop is such a mess. Too much food hurling itself out of the pan and across the stove.) Maybe if I can remember that the sauté pan has the tall sides, I can keep it a little cleaner in there – and explore some of the fast-moving, pan-shaking cooking styles.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_c.png?x-id=644460d6-758a-4e46-9a21-762a725fbf90)






