Comment by jasode | Hacker News Reader

Comment by jasode | Hacker News Reader

>Why do recipe writers _lie_ about how long it takes to caramelize onions?

Because the author Tom Scocca didn't delve deeper into the meta layer of language usage to see that many people are using the word "caramelize" differently from him. They are not lying. To paraphrase Ludwig Wittgenstein, "problems in philosophy are actually problems in language".

Wikipedia article makes a distinction between caramelize vs browning:

>Like the Maillard reaction, caramelization is a type of non-enzymatic browning. Unlike the Maillard reaction, caramelization is pyrolytic, as opposed to being a reaction with amino acids. -- from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caramelization

But the above internal chemistry definitions are not how many people are using the word. To many folks, "caramelize" == "browning/sautéing/frying/softening" ... which means it can be done in 5 to 10 minutes. This HN thread also has example of people using caramelize as synonym for a quick Maillard reaction.

Because Tom Scocca doesn't explain the language being unknowingly used in different ways, his article actually adds to the confusion instead of clarifying the misunderstanding. By focusing his text on being snarky instead of educating the reader, he actually doesn't even answer the "why" question in the title!

EDIT reply to : >This is a fib, not a language problem. I don't believe that most of these recipe writers are using 5 minute onions themselves. It takes 40m to make the onions good. It's not hard. You can do it in advance. They know the difference and they do not serve the inferior version.

In this HN thread, a poster[1] tried to "prove" that caramelization can be done in 10 minutes by linking a video from a 20-year veteran chef that was professionally trained at the California Culinary Academy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yt_0e72fs9M

And then you have random commenters exclaiming, "it takes me 45 minutes to 3 hours to caramelize onions. How did you break the laws of physics to get it done in 10 minutes?"

Those 2 contradictory statements are about different language usage and not about lies.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27649690

This is often true, but it is not true here.

These recipes (Rogan Josh, Onion Soup) all call for slow cooked onions that take a long time. The 5-10 minute onions are an inferior ingredient, and it's not the one to use for good results. This is a fib, not a language problem.

I don't believe that most of these recipe writers are using 5 minute onions themselves. It takes 40m to make the onions good. It's not hard. You can do it in advance. They know the difference and they do not serve the inferior version.

Fun article. This has been bugging me for decades.

Spending an extra 30 minutes on onions isn’t always worth it. Sure, I could spend 2 hours making and cleaning up a glorious breakfast, but doing it every day isn’t worth the time.

It is if you want to make French Onion Soup.

That's a different question. You can make a different dish, quicker.

The dishes being described in these recipes call for slow cook onions. The chefs writing them prepare them this way. Maybe it's not worth the time, but that's the recipe. The printed recipe is a lie.

In any case, it's 40 minutes of waiting.. not working. You can also onions them in advance. They last a few days in the fridge.

Worth it..? If you're efficient with timing/prep then it doesn't really add any time. I would definitely say that it is worth having good onions if onions are the main part of the dish.. which these are.

Meanwhile, the best quick alternative to caramelized onions is grilled onions, not quick fried onions.

No, if the recipe calls for 10 minutes that’s the recipe.

You can always spice things up by spending 40+ minutes slow cooking onions, but that’s not the recipe as presented. It’s little different than changing the spices for your personal palette, but while you may prefer different steps or different ingredients that doesn’t invalidate faster, simpler, or cheaper recipes.

We're going in circles.

The premise of this article is that the written recipe is a lie. There's a nebulous, yet "real" recipe which is instructions for onion soup or rogan josh with the flavour and texture it's supposed to have.. the good version.

Yes, and at it’s heart that premise assumes saving time isn’t a valid option. Which is as I am pointing out obviously false.

Presumably, for most of these recipes there are many things that could be improved with more effort somewhere in the process. For example grinding flour is best done directly before you use it, it’s however not something that most people can even notice and takes a lot more effort.

Properly caramelized onions freeze and thaw very well, since they are already pretty broken down and much of the moisture is gone.

Since the big factor is the 40-60 minutes on the stove, I make a large batch in several pans. The onions can be cooled a bit and then individual portions in an old ice cube tray and frozen.

Then I can just pop out an onion cube and microwave it until softened, anytime I'd like to add caramelized onions to something.

This is the problem.

Recipes aren't just about instructions. They are also advertising. People have heard the word "caramelize" used with "onion" and it sounds sexy. So a recipe will happily use "caramelize" rather than "brown" to better sell the recipe and take advantage of semantic drift. Now there are two very different meanings of the same word but the impact is very minor for serious recipes because you can just trust the time.

The only time I've ever seen this go badly is on amateur french onion soup recipes which call for cooking onions for only like 6-10 minutes because they've been convinced that this is the only way to cook onions. But that's an easily solved problem by just getting decent recipe books.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com