A Chef’s Manifesto

In today’s restaurant climate, being a chef has lost a lot of its meaning. Being a chef is more than just putting food together to make something taste good, it’s about delivering an experience that has not and cannot be delivered by anyone other than you. There are some things that separate a chef and a common cook, and they need to be revisited to restore the pride that comes with the title, Chef. 

Suggestion 1

As a chef, whenever you pick up an ingredient with the intention to make something, you are choosing to make something representative of a culture and that culture’s tradition. Most people’s perception of food is simply just something you’re supposed to eat, it can taste good, but best not to dwell on it for long. The word “food” is even overlooked. Food is a symphony, unrivaled in being so simple, yet so complex. Every flavor you experience, every texture, was all a deliberate choice made by someone. Maybe it was a split second decision made minutes before you were served, or maybe centuries ago to make the experience better for their starving families, it doesn’t matter because those were purposeful choices. How many dishes have you had that were created out of need? Some of the world's most recognizable foods, like paella, sushi, ramen, tacos, bahn mi, feijoada, were all created in an effort to create real food, in the harshest of conditions, all in an effort to put food on the table. Every ingredient was a choice made to elevate the dish. When you taste those flavors properly, you can experience a fraction of what it was like back then.  

 A real dish is a story. Many “chefs” will combine two things just for the sake of making them sound better, on the basis of “Well this is good and this is good, but what if we combined them to make them better!”  That’s not reason enough to change food! By now the sushi version of everything has come out, and each one of those defeats the purpose of sushi. Sushi is supposed to be a small bite that delivers an amazing combination of flavors in ONE bite, each one of those flavors being emblematic of different japanese specialties, but when chefs decide to turn it into a burrito, a pizza, nachos, it loses the point. All you’re left with is unseasoned fish with an over acidic or tart sauce with bland rice and seaweed, nothing like the original product. Yet it’s such a popular practice, everywhere you go there’s a sushi product.The experience is fundamentally different, and it disgraces what the dish is truly meant to be.

When a chef makes the choice to change something fundamental in a dish, they are changing the story. Yes, make whatever you want, but if you choose to call something by a specific name, that dish better be a proper representation of what that dish can and should be because those dishes are part of other people’s stories. A dish is such an important part of so many stories, even the smell alone can be enough. When that auroma reaches you, and furthermore when that flavor reaches you, you are sent back to those moments in time, whether it be your mother’s kitchen when you get back home from school, the meal you had when you got that straight A report card, or maybe even the french revolution. When you change those fundamentals, you are leaving behind what makes that dish special to a lot of people. If you want to change something, you must first ask yourself why. Discover if that change really does bring innovation to something you already know. Innovation is and should be a purpose driven force made to better something that already exists.

Suggestion 2

By using that type of language, I understand that the impression given is that of a purist, someone blind for tradition, but don’t mistake firmness for ignorance. Food relies on innovation, it relies on being fresh. New discoveries are made every day and they have infinite potential. To close the door to that potential is denying the natural growth and evolution of a dish. A chef cannot be blind to those possibilities. Part of being a chef is understanding that there is no ONE correct way to do anything in the kitchen. Food has had millenia of time to evolve, palettes change, quality changes, cultures grow, and food has to grow with it. It goes hand and hand to respecting culture really. A chef has to acknowledge  the fact that dishes can be elevated higher than the original formula, and sometimes it makes it better. Classics are classics for a reason, yes, but how many chicken parmesans have to be made, how many pepperoni pizzas, how many steak tacos? Those dishes are fantastic and speak to the past, yes, but they all have infinite potential to be made something new. To say a classic has to be done a certain way is absurd, because it becomes a process and loses its voice, loses the quality that makes it a piece of art.

As a chef you literally have an entire world of options. Think of all the possible ingredients, all the different combinations, the different techniques, there is no stopping you from making something new. We’ve all been to the italian restaurant with spaghetti and meatballs, lasagna, shrimp scampi, calamari, and pizza. It’s been done so many times, there is no need to do it anymore. You’re in charge of making something new that deserves attention and has proven quality as a dish. Take those classics, change the process, change the sauce, change your protein, you can even change it all and call it something new.

 Eventually the classics become basic. Classics are held upon such a high pedestal,  but not without merit. It’s correct to hold those iconic foods high because they’re proven to be worthy of the status, but it’s incorrect to appraise them higher that other foods. A lot of food is special, and even if they’re not quite as popular, they are more than capable of proving their validity as a dish and as an experience.  There’s nothing gained from making those classics, we’ve tasted those flavors, we know the story. Give us new flavors, tell us your story. 

We can all eat something and think nothing of it, but real food deserves thought, it deserves recognition as a representation of you. No, not every dish has to be the perfect piece of art, but they should make the diner feel something. Those emotions and the story told are what separate you, a chef, from a cook. Chef has become a title given to anyone who knows how to cook a piece of meat, but the word goes beyond that. A chef is an artist, someone who tells of their life, makes you feel strong emotions, all in one meal. A cook’s only job is to make something that tastes good and to make it consistently. Yes that’s difficult but people don’t remember those meals. A chef creates those experiences through effort, time, and hardwork. It doesn’t have to be the most complicated thing in the world to make a diner feel a real emotion. When you cook, try to take the time and effort to make something that only you could create. Dig into your memory and think of those dishes from your childhood, think of all the places you’ve seen, think of all the flavors you’ve experienced and take them, and try to put them together, to form something that speaks to you and you alone.

Suggestion 3

Cooking relies on both respecting traditions and not being afraid to create something new, it’s a thin line that all chefs must balance on to really stand out as an artist. While difficult to understand at times, it can be reduced down to getting the best ingredients and tools. This sounds like a no-brainer to most “Of course, higher quality means it tastes better”, that’s true but it goes beyond just getting something fresh. If you buy things premade,or  instant,  you’re surrendering some of the effort to a factory, but if you decide to make every little thing from scratch, you will end up with an infinitely better result than if you  had used anything from a store.

 By making things yourself you control every aspect of that ingredient and it results in the HIGHEST quality you could possibly achieve in your kitchen. When everything is put together, the diner can tell the difference between the two. All the small additions or changes you make to those ingredients push your end result just a little further than if you had bought things pre-made because all that extra effort, those small touches, result in a nuance that couldn’t possibly be achieved in a factory or by anyone else for that matter. Too often will you see a cook use packed, frozen, or even canned ingredients and it loses so much authenticity and flavor, sometimes it even adds its own flavor, tasting processed, salty, or just cheap. It’s more convenient, yes, but putting in that extra effort will put your dish miles beyond anything that uses pre-made ingredients.

  It’s looked at like “Oh well it’s the same thing” when there’s a world of difference. Using velveeta cheese and diluting it with milk isn’t going to come close to choosing your own cheese blend, taking the time to grate it, and mixing it together with a thickened milk to make a mornay sauce for a mac and cheese. Some seasoned ground beef from the freezer aisle won’t have the flavors of a good beef blend with pork and other fats  seasoned with care for your burger. No matter how simple it may seem, those elevations are what make a dish worth remembering. To say that something frozen or packaged is just as good as something homemade is a complete fallacy. There is no doubt that ingredients closer to the source will be infinitely better than anything you could possibly buy at some grocery store. As a chef you are responsible for getting the highest quality ingredients and putting in the extra work for your diners, even if it is just your family.