Thread: clam chowder, thick is best

On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 14:22:43 -0700 (PDT), A Moose In Love
<[email protected]> wrote:

>One time, oh about 25 years ago, I decided to make a top end clam
>chowder. Man it was good. I didn't poison it with thickness; orange
>zest, lemon zest, strong chicken stock(i know, it's cheating) etc.
>Well my boss came up to me and said THICKEN IT! So I did. I
>thickened it with some flour and water. Horrible. I put it back in
>the steam table; he tried it and said THICKEN IT AGAIN!. So I did. I
>made sure that the flour taste came through. He tasted it again and
>put a spoon in it which almost stood up straight, he tasted it again
>and pronounced it fit for human consumption. Good. I hope you
>assholes like your clam chowder real thick and tasting like flour.
>That's what it's all about. Never mind real half assed flavour.
>What's with the chicken stock anyway?

Hey, I feel your pain. Flour is an abomination.

I make my chowders thin (Rhode Island style), and then thicken with
today's version of "ship's bisquit", which is unsalted matzoh. Crush
it up and put it into the pot, or in the bowl, and go. That's the way
they did it then, with SB, so I follow as closely as I can. Sprinkle
with salt pork cracklings, and you're done. NO lemon, no chicken, no
orange, just potatoes, salt pork, clam broth and meat, mebbe some
parsley, certainly some onion. Then if you want thickening, add ships'
bisquit (Matzoh) and you still have a pretty authentic dish. No flour
taste.

HTH

Alex

Chemiker <[email protected]> wrote:

>Hey, I feel your pain. Flour is an abomination.
>
>I make my chowders thin (Rhode Island style), and then thicken with
>today's version of "ship's bisquit", which is unsalted matzoh. Crush
>it up and put it into the pot, or in the bowl, and go. That's the way
>they did it then, with SB, so I follow as closely as I can. Sprinkle
>with salt pork cracklings, and you're done. NO lemon, no chicken, no
>orange, just potatoes, salt pork, clam broth and meat, mebbe some
>parsley, certainly some onion. Then if you want thickening, add ships'
>bisquit (Matzoh) and you still have a pretty authentic dish. No flour
>taste.

A chowder does not need any thickening, but it should have a very
high ratio of non-broth ingredients to broth.

The starch that naturally comes out of the potatoes as they
cook is all the thickening it needs.

Steve

A Moose In Love wrote:

> One time, oh about 25 years ago, I decided to make a top end clam
> chowder. Man it was good. I didn't poison it with thickness; orange
> zest, lemon zest, strong chicken stock(i know, it's cheating) etc.
> Well my boss came up to me and said THICKEN IT! So I did. I
> thickened it with some flour and water. Horrible. I put it back in
> the steam table; he tried it and said THICKEN IT AGAIN!. So I did. I
> made sure that the flour taste came through. He tasted it again and
> put a spoon in it which almost stood up straight, he tasted it again
> and pronounced it fit for human consumption. Good. I hope you
> assholes like your clam chowder real thick and tasting like flour.
> That's what it's all about. Never mind real half assed flavour.
> What's with the chicken stock anyway?

Isnt the whole post just one, big, extended non sequitar?

"I decided to make" followed by "my boss" presumes "you assholes"?

The only thing worse than null content verbiage is its ever more popular
cousine pornographic null content verbiage.

Hormonel Moose?

--

Mr. Joseph Paul Littleshoes Esq.

Domine, dirige nos.

Let the games begin!
http://fredeeky.typepad.com/fredeeky.../sf_anthem.mp3

On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 21:50:12 +0000 (UTC), [email protected]
(Steve Pope) wrote:

>Chemiker <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Hey, I feel your pain. Flour is an abomination.
>>
>>I make my chowders thin (Rhode Island style), and then thicken with
>>today's version of "ship's bisquit", which is unsalted matzoh. Crush
>>it up and put it into the pot, or in the bowl, and go. That's the way
>>they did it then, with SB, so I follow as closely as I can. Sprinkle
>>with salt pork cracklings, and you're done. NO lemon, no chicken, no
>>orange, just potatoes, salt pork, clam broth and meat, mebbe some
>>parsley, certainly some onion. Then if you want thickening, add ships'
>>bisquit (Matzoh) and you still have a pretty authentic dish. No flour
>>taste.
>
>A chowder does not need any thickening, but it should have a very
>high ratio of non-broth ingredients to broth.
>
>The starch that naturally comes out of the potatoes as they
>cook is all the thickening it needs.
>

True, True! I forgot to mention that the potatoes are natural
thickeners. You are correct to point this out.

BUT: Some people want this to be more like mush. TBHonest: I make it
both with and without bisquit.... I usually put the matzoh into it in
winter, to increase the carbos. In summer, I usually leave it out.
Either way, it's good eats. I normally serve with a pat of butter and
a couple grinds of white pepper. To this day, many cannot eat a
chowder without topping it with a pat of butter and a handful of
oyster crackers. Tradition dies hard.

If I'm feeling really racy, I drop a piece of blade mace into the
broth when I'm doing the potatoes. Recipes from about 1810 mention
this, and it really works. Non-intuitive, but there it is.

Enjoy, even if you *must* used canned clams and bottled clam broth.
It's still better than the canned stuff.

Alex

On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 15:46:29 -0700, JL <[email protected]> wrote:

>A Moose In Love wrote:

>Isnt the whole post just one, big, extended non sequitar?

Um, the term is "non sequitur", which means "it does not follow".
Latin, you know. So what doesn't follow what? We're talking a logical
structure here, so I don't understand your comment.

>"I decided to make" followed by "my boss" presumes "you assholes"?

Now *that's* a non sequitur. Definitely non-linear thinking, unless
you consider a ping-pong ball's travel linear..... I would more think
free association...

>The only thing worse than null content verbiage is its ever more popular
>cousine pornographic null content verbiage.

Cousine? Is that something like cuisine? Poutine? Cousin? Cooze?
Perhaps the clue is in your usage of the word pornographic....? Yeah,
it's all about cooze, those clams, you know. But I never heard a cooze
talk, so "verbiage" makes no sense to me. Oh, they make some weird
sucking sounds now and then, but talk, content null or not, no I don't
think so.

Ah! I have it! It's "cousin"! "null content verbiage" and its
cousin(!) "pornographic null content verbiage".

Have you ever noticed that pornography is mostly non-verbal?
Hm. Thought not.

I thought the OP had a legitimate Q, whether you liked it or not.
I responded, as his beef is understandable. Be he drunk or sober
matters not to me. Orange lemon and fennel go in Bouillabaise, but not
into clam chowder of any type. Mace and BP, yes.

Go get another Scotch, take your meds and chill for a while. It'll all
look better in the AM. After all, tomorrow is another day.*

Smooches,

Alex, singing "I love you, tomorrow! You're only a day away!"*

* Do I really need to quote a reference?

Chemiker wrote Mere punditry:

> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 15:46:29 -0700, JL wrote:
>
>
> >A Moose In Love wrote:
>
>
> >Isnt the whole post just one, big, extended non sequitar?
>
>
> Um, the term is "non sequitur", which means "it does not follow".
> Latin, you know. So what doesn't follow what? We're talking a logical
> structure here, so I don't understand your comment.
>
>
> >"I decided to make" followed by "my boss" presumes "you assholes"?
>
>
> Now *that's* a non sequitur. Definitely non-linear thinking, unless
> you consider a ping-pong ball's travel linear..... I would more think
> free association...


Do what thou wilt.....

>
>
>
> >The only thing worse than null content verbiage is its ever more popular
> >cousine pornographic null content verbiage.
>
>
> Cousine? Is that something like cuisine? Poutine? Cousin? Cooze?
> Perhaps the clue is in your usage of the word pornographic....? Yeah,
> it's all about cooze, those clams, you know. But I never heard a cooze
> talk, so "verbiage" makes no sense to me. Oh, they make some weird
> sucking sounds now and then, but talk, content null or not, no I don't
> think so.
>
> Ah! I have it! It's "cousin"! "null content verbiage" and its
> cousin(!) "pornographic null content verbiage".
>
> Have you ever noticed that pornography is mostly non-verbal?
> Hm. Thought not.


Community or local standards vary. Epistolary porn is common here in the
net

My chronic and increasing inability to spell the simplest words, i have
been informed, and that on more than one occasion, pornographicaly, are
as bad or worse than any other vulgarity i might sloppily spell out here

>
>
> I thought the OP had a legitimate Q,


"Whats with the chicken stock anyway?"

> whether you liked it or not.


Nothing wrong with the "question" elementry as it seems to me to be, and
that espicaly for some one who apears to be a working cook.

Many people like the combonation of the chicken and seafood flavor. One
of my favorite pasta dishes is a saute of chicken and shrimp in butter,
garlic and white wine.

I often make a chicken and shrimp ground meat mix and clams, oysters,
mussles & etc are equaly good this way.

>
> I responded, as his beef is understandable. Be he drunk or sober
> matters not to me. Orange lemon and fennel go in Bouillabaise, but not
> into clam chowder of any type. Mace and BP, yes.

De gustibus non est disputandum?

BP? no worchestershire sauce? nutmeg? but i will make any recipe any way
i want to and call it any thing i like, if you dont like it thats your
problem, but i wont call you an asshole for that or your previous
comments, as i could probly be more precise in a description of what
seems to me very poor social skills. If i cared to be, which i dont.

>
>
> Go get another Scotch, take your meds and chill for a while. It'll all
> look better in the AM. After all, tomorrow is another day.*
>
> Smooches,
>
> Alex, singing "I love you, tomorrow! You're only a day away!"*
>
> * Do I really need to quote a reference?


http://www.artofeurope.com/smith/smi5.htm

--

Mr. Joseph Paul Littleshoes Esq.

Domine, dirige nos.

Let the games begin!
http://fredeeky.typepad.com/fredeeky.../sf_anthem.mp3

On 2010-07-21, Chemiker <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 21:50:12 +0000 (UTC), [email protected]
> (Steve Pope) wrote:

>>The starch that naturally comes out of the potatoes as they
>>cook is all the thickening it needs.

> True, True! I forgot to mention that the potatoes are natural
> thickeners. You are correct to point this out.

I was wondering when someone was gonna mention potatoes. Aren't they
de rigueur for cream-based chowders? Potato flour would be better
than wheat flour. Why anyone would want a spoon to stand up in
chowder is beyond me, unless they planned on wallpapering the bill to
the customer. :\

nb

A Moose In Love wrote:
> One time, oh about 25 years ago, I decided to make a top end clam
> chowder. Man it was good. I didn't poison it with thickness; orange
> zest, lemon zest, strong chicken stock(i know, it's cheating) etc.
> Well my boss came up to me and said THICKEN IT! So I did. I
> thickened it with some flour and water. Horrible. I put it back in
> the steam table; he tried it and said THICKEN IT AGAIN!. So I did. I
> made sure that the flour taste came through. He tasted it again and
> put a spoon in it which almost stood up straight, he tasted it again
> and pronounced it fit for human consumption. Good. I hope you
> assholes like your clam chowder real thick and tasting like flour.
> That's what it's all about. Never mind real half assed flavour.
> What's with the chicken stock anyway?



Cheaper than making shellfish broth from scratch?

gloria p

notbob <[email protected]> wrote:

>I was wondering when someone was gonna mention potatoes. Aren't they
>de rigueur for cream-based chowders?

To be called a chowder, it must include potatoes. So far as I know.


Steve

Steve Pope wrote:

> notbob wrote:
>
>
> >I was wondering when someone was gonna mention potatoes. Aren't they
> >de rigueur for cream-based chowders?
>
>
> To be called a chowder, it must include potatoes. So far as I know.
>
>
> Steve

Chowder, it's etymology is one of those food names that originaly
refered to the vessal it was cooked in. Chowder from the French
chaudiere pot, kettle.

--

Mr. Joseph Paul Littleshoes Esq.

Domine, dirige nos.

Let the games begin!
http://fredeeky.typepad.com/fredeeky.../sf_anthem.mp3

(Steve Pope) wrote:
>
>To be called a chowder, it must include potatoes.

Wrong.

chowder
A thick, chunky seafood soup, of which clam chowder is the most well
known. The name comes from the French chaudière , a caldron in which
fishermen made their stews fresh from the sea. New England-style
chowder is made with milk or cream, Manhattan-style with tomatoes.
Chowder can contain any of several varieties of seafood and
vegetables. The term is also used to describe any thick, rich soup
containing chunks of food (for instance, corn chowder).

© Copyright Barron's Educational Services, Inc. 1995 based on THE FOOD
LOVER'S COMPANION, 2nd edition, by Sharon Tyler Herbst.

Steve Pope wrote:
> Chemiker <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hey, I feel your pain. Flour is an abomination.
>>
>> I make my chowders thin (Rhode Island style), and then thicken with
>> today's version of "ship's bisquit", which is unsalted matzoh. Crush
>> it up and put it into the pot, or in the bowl, and go. That's the way
>> they did it then, with SB, so I follow as closely as I can. Sprinkle
>> with salt pork cracklings, and you're done. NO lemon, no chicken, no
>> orange, just potatoes, salt pork, clam broth and meat, mebbe some
>> parsley, certainly some onion. Then if you want thickening, add ships'
>> bisquit (Matzoh) and you still have a pretty authentic dish. No flour
>> taste.
>
> A chowder does not need any thickening, but it should have a very
> high ratio of non-broth ingredients to broth.
>
> The starch that naturally comes out of the potatoes as they
> cook is all the thickening it needs.
>

That's how we prefer it.

The Pacific Northwest serves a disgusting mess of clam-flavored
wallpaper paste and they call "clam chowder" Ivar's in Seattle and a
place on the Oregon Coast called Moe's were touted to us as "the best
clam chowder" YUCK!!

Give me a real northeastern chowda any day over that goop.


--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south Texas
Spelling doesn't count. Cooking does.

On Jul 21, 5:48*pm, Chemiker <prussianblu...@verizon.net> wrote:

> . I normally serve with a pat of butter and
> a couple grinds of white pepper. To this day, many cannot eat a
> chowder without topping it with a pat of butter and a handful of
> oyster crackers. Tradition dies hard.
>
It's really good that way.
>
> Alex

--Bryan, who is VERY happy to have discovered his new favorite
taqueria in the part of town where his son's football team has their
practices.

Janet wrote:

> The Pacific Northwest serves a disgusting mess of clam-flavored wallpaper
> paste and they call "clam chowder" Ivar's in Seattle and a place on the
> Oregon Coast called Moe's were touted to us as "the best clam chowder"
> YUCK!!
>
> Give me a real northeastern chowda any day over that goop.

I happen to like Mo's chowder. I'd feel cheated if I got served thin clam
chowder in a restaurant; I thought the thin stuff was only served to the
elderly and the effete.

That being said, I recognize that people's tastes vary across a huge
continuum, and there is no one true clam chowder. If you like a bowl of
watered-down skim milk with clams, then seek it out and eat all you like.

MO'S CLAM CHOWDER

1 lb. Bacon, diced
Salt and pepper
1/4 lb smoked ham, diced
6 cups minced clams, drained
6 cups chopped onions
1/4 cup all-purpose flour
5 cups water
6 cups whole milk
12 cups diced potatoes
Butter and paprika

Serves 12-14

Saute bacon and ham together, add onions and saute until limp. Set this
mixture aside, but do not drain.

In 5 cups of water, add potatoes, salt, pepper and any collected clam juice.
Cook until potatoes are tender. Set aside and do not drain.

To the bacon, ham and onion mixture add the flour and make a roux. Mix the
roux into the potato mixture, bring to a boil. Stir down when the boiling
point is reached and add the milk and clams.

Do not allow the chowder to boil again once the milk is added. Garnish with
a dollop of butter and add a dash of paprika.

BOB'S NOTES:

1. Russet potatoes work best here.
2. The paprika is mainly for a garnish; you can add other herbs or spices
instead for flavor. Try smoked paprika, tarragon, lavender, thyme, or Old
Bay instead. Or you could garnish with gremolata, which is a mixture of
chopped lemon zest, garlic, and parsley.

Bob

On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:13:16 -0500, Chemiker wrote:

> On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 15:46:29 -0700, JL <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>A Moose In Love wrote:
>
>>Isnt the whole post just one, big, extended non sequitar?
>
> Um, the term is "non sequitur", which means "it does not follow".
> Latin, you know. So what doesn't follow what? We're talking a logical
> structure here, so I don't understand your comment.
>
>>"I decided to make" followed by "my boss" presumes "you assholes"?
>
> Now *that's* a non sequitur. Definitely non-linear thinking, unless
> you consider a ping-pong ball's travel linear..... I would more think
> free association...
>
>>The only thing worse than null content verbiage is its ever more popular
>>cousine pornographic null content verbiage.
>
> Cousine? Is that something like cuisine? Poutine? Cousin? Cooze?
> Perhaps the clue is in your usage of the word pornographic....? Yeah,
> it's all about cooze, those clams, you know. But I never heard a cooze
> talk, so "verbiage" makes no sense to me. Oh, they make some weird
> sucking sounds now and then, but talk, content null or not, no I don't
> think so.

well, there was a french tale from the mid-13th century, called 'The Knight
Who Made ****s and Assholes Speak':

<http://www.oocities.com/paris/5339/voices.html>

it starts out slow, but stay with it. it's a long way from sir lancelot.

your pal,
blake