« Home | Say 'bye' to boring veggies » | How to deglaze » | Wining and dining in the kitchen » | California olive oil claims a rich heritage » | Rachael Ray and Victor Palencia » | Chefs Transform the Unlovable Rutabaga » | Thanks, Chicago! » | Kelly's Roast Beef » | Is Kobe Beef Worth the Price? » | How to kick back, relax and have fun entertaining » 

Wednesday, October 26, 2005 

Boneless Perhaps Not Better?

Closer to the Bone

Bones themselves comprise mostly flavorless calcium. It's the fat, collagen and gelatin inside and between the bones that are magnificent carriers of flavor.

"When a dish is cooked with the bones, it literally slides across
your tongue more slowly," Ms. McLagan said. "It tastes better, but also longer, and more."

James Peterson is a cooking instructor and the author of
definitive tomes on soups and sauces. In the French tradition, both take their
fundamental flavors from stock. "You can get good flavor without bones, but the
mouth-feel you get from bones and cartilage is an important component of a dish
- more important than many cooks realize," he said.