Talk:Crème brûlée

Update:Crème brulée

In 1990 the Académie française approved of new simplified spelling for French words and among those changed was Crème brûlée. The official alternative spelling is now Crème brulée. Mike Hayes (talk) 20:58, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't we ask the folks on fr: to change the name of their article first? The Wednesday Island (talk) 21:05, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Spelling

This should be crème. Or US write crême to make it look more French ?

Both spellings: "crème" and "crême", are present in the Wikipedia index for this dessert. I do not know which is more common in the U.S. Perhaps, since the Creole people speak French, the latter is preferred.JSF 15:18 Jan 22, 2003 (UTC)

English speaking writers will often leave out French accents when writing French names 'creme' (without an accent) occurs frequently but Crème brûlée is french french, not an anclicised word and professional food writers would not omit the accents as a rule. It looks sloppy if you are not consistent with the accents in a printed publication. The web is not a printed publication, so don't depend on it as an authority on spelling.Mike Hayes (talk) 18:21, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

"Crème" is the French spelling. (some of the stray ^s might well be due to me. *kicks self*) -- Tarquin 15:00 Jan 22, 2003 (UTC)

Delia Smith (veteran TV cook in UK) spells it crème brûlée (note the circumflex on the u), but the Oxford Dictionary for Writers and Editors (OUP, 2000) spells it without the circumflex. OED2 records crème as the main spelling with crême as an alternative, and shows examples of brulée with and without a circumflex. So take your pick. -- Heron

Correct French spelling (Petit Larousse) is crème (accent grave). - Montréalais

Can we all agree that the spelling is Crème brûlée? The Anome

The Dictionnaire de l'Académie française, neuvième édition spells it crème brûlée.Mike Hayes (talk) 18:02, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

It is in dispute. You should have moved the talk. Now one will have to be deleted. Mintguy

The previous talk has now been moved here (see above). The Anome 00:36 Jan 25, 2003 (UTC)

Well, brûlée is completely wrong French. Google don't make it right. I protest at yet another move. -- Tarquin 00:24 Jan 25, 2003 (UTC)

Google test:

site:fr brûlée = 10,800

site:fr brulée = 1040

What other options are there. i'm confused now. Mintguy

brûlée looks 100% correct to me, native french speaker. Of course I'm not infallible, but the nearest dictionary (which happens to be a French-English one) thinks like me. --FvdP 00:32 Jan 25, 2003 (UTC)

More importantly, "brulée" looks wrong both to me and to my dictionary. --FvdP

Various other online dictionaries also seem to confirm "brûlée": can we have a cite for your paper dictionary, just to have a cite? The Anome

Dictionnaire Français-Anglais par Jean Mergault, Librairie Larousse, 1973. --FvdP 00:52 Jan 25, 2003 (UTC)

The Dictionnaire de l'Académie française, neuvième édition spells it crème brûlée.Mike Hayes (talk) 18:02, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Stupid accented letters makes me glad of English's esoteric spelling and it's inconsistent pronunciation. At least I don't have to try to figure out how to get a grave accent on a letter. Mintguy

Simple: û = Alt+0251 (under Windows). ;-) --FvdP

yeah but what's that on my UK keyboard?

You don't have an Alt key ? Press it and keep it down. Press successively 0, 2, 5, then 1. Then release the Alt key. For the other letters, look at Start|Programs|Accessories|System_Tools|Character_Map. Select the wanted letter and search for "keystroke" on the bottom line of the window. I agree it's a tad annoying. --FvdP

There are many different keyboard encoding systems. The Unicode system is still not used universally, especially for non-Roman alphabets and the standard Unicode ALT + codes will not work for those systems. You can change which system your keyboard uses in Control Panel if you want to. To find out what will work with your keyboard, go to <start>, <run> and type 'charmap', a box will open with all the characters in your encoding system, click on the character you want and it will tell you in the lower right corner what the ALT + keycode is Mike Hayes (talk) 18:02, 14 June 2008 (UTC).

Go to Google translate, and translate "burnt cream" into French and you get... crème brûlée The Anome

Come on guys! It is the dessert and its recipe that is important here, not its proper spelling. Since the origins of the dessert are in contention we cannot settle on spelling until we settle on origin. At our present state of knowledge lets go with common usage. I vote with Mintguy and Anome. The spelling "crème brûlée" is also common in the US. Too much unproductive energy is being expended on this debate! JSF 08:19 Jan 28, 2003 (UTC)

Oh yeah sure. Spelling in an encyclopedia doesn't matter. Mmmmm. Mike Hayes (talk) 20:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

There's a drop list under the edit box saying "insert". Choose "Latin". Click "û". Easy. It works on any keyboard and any operating system. The Wednesday Island (talk) 20:51, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Turbinado sugar

Que'est-ce que c'est que "turbinado sugar"????? I'm baffled. Does it need a definition or is it just me being iggerant? :) Nevilley 21:37 Jan 18, 2003 (UTC)

A quick googling tells me it's US Equivalent of Demerara sugar. I substituted brown sugar. Mintguy

If you want to substitute, use regular granulated sugar. JSF

I just added a definition to the sugar article. -- Heron

Yum yum, well done and thanks. Deliberately, and contrary to normal practice, I've linked to sugar a second time in the article, to help people like me who might otherwise not have found that definition. ta! :) Nevilley 21:51 Jan 18, 2003 (UTC)

Heron's definition is indeed correct. Turbinado sugar is a blond, raw sugar generally available in major U.S. supermarkets. I do not think that I would care for the stronger flavor of brown sugar in this delicately flavored dessert.

Terbinado is unheard of in the UK, it is virtually the same as Demerara sugar in the UK. Can I suggest - light brown sugar? Or - light brown sugar (Demerara or Turbinado)? Mintguy

What on earth is Demerara or Turbinado sugar ? (I make it with light brown sugar) Anthère

Fahrenheit

Do US recipe books still use fahrenheit? Everything is in Centigrade/Celsius in the UK and Europe. Mintguy

Yes, we still use Fahrenheit in the U.S. Dumb, aren't we!

---

The temperature window is very critical in this recipe. For the benefit of Centigrade users the window should read 77-79°C.

Measures

Hm. we need to convert these values to the international standard. -- Tarquin

I've found out that a US cup is 225ml liquid measure, but what is it in terms of grams for dry measure for sugar!, obviously it varies on whatever you're trying to measure? Also found out that a US tablespoon is 16ml, while a UK tablespoon is 15ml.

Mintguy

See also Cooking weights and measures

Mintguy, I will accept Turbinado or Demerara sugar, but not light brown, dark brown, or brown sugar. They are different sugar products, at least in the U.S. They have a much different flavor and texture than raw sugar. Also, brown sugars tend to lump, especially in a humid environment, so are difficult to spread evenly. I am assuming that Demerara sugar is coarse-grained raw sugar and not fine-grained brown sugar.

I have not mastered the editing protocol yet, so I have destroyed your sugar links in the recipe. You are free to reinstate them, but please don't change my raw sugar choices. Thanks for adding the Centigrade temperature window.

I will edit my recipe to present both the International and the U.S. measures. Thank you Tarquin for your inputs.

JSF 15:48 Jan 22, 2003 (UTC)

Trinity College story

After a bit of research prompted by Heron, and confirming the Delia claim in my own copy, I've found other references to it being invented at Trinity College in the late 18th century (at least 1769).

http://www.n1kp.com/main_menu.html

http://ae.boston.com/dining/recipes/t/trinity_cream.html

http://www.porters.uk.com/menu/default.asp?menuID=14

http://www.eng.umu.se/tt/proj1/recipes.htm

http://www.recipegoldmine.com/desspudd/desspudd49.html

http://www.hwatson.force9.co.uk/cookbook/recipes/desserts/cambridgeburntcream.htm

This site (http://emenus.ca/Victoria_and_Vancouver_Island/dictionary/C.htm) states the following Creme brulee It is a simple custard of nothing more than cream, eggs, sugar, and vanilla that is topped with a caramelized topping. History: The origins of this custard are very much in contention, with the English, Spanish, and French all staking claim. (1) The Spanish have taken credit for this dessert as crema catalana since the 18th century. (2) The English claim it originated in 17th century Britian in Trinity College, Cambridge. It is said that it was born when an English chef accidentally burned a custard he had sprinkled with sugar. The chef then passed it off as an original creation calling it burnt cream. It is also called trinity cream in England. Some old cookbooks even refer to it as Cambridge cream after Cambridge University.

There seems to be little evidence that it's a Creole dish.

Also crème brûlée seems to be more common than other forms.

Mintguy

In a similar vein: The origins of crème brûlée are very much in contention, with the English, Spanish, and French all staking claim. The Spanish have taken credit for this sensuous custard as "crema catalana" since the eighteenth century, while the English claim it originated in seventeenth-century Britain, where it was known as "burnt cream" and the English school boys at Cambridge demanded it. It apparently wasn't until the end of the nineteenth century that common usage of the French translation came into vogue ... Debbie Puente in "Elegantly Easy Crème Brûlée" ( St. Martin’s Press).

---

Sheesh, Trinity folk aren't "school boys". The Wednesday Island (talk) 20:56, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Clearing the kitchen

1. Good Wikipedia food articles are about the history, sociology, meaning of food, in its context. Recipes are for the recipebook.
2. Do be very skeptical of all recipe-origin tales that involve a "mistake" or an "unavailable ingredient." Some few are authentifiable: pommes de terre soufflés for example. --Wetman 07:14, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Include recipes? (was: why I choose to revert)

Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not - Cookbook entries. For example, when writing an article about fried rice, don't give "A simple recipe for fried rice." That belongs in Wiki Cookbook (http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cookbook). Instead, write an article about what is commonly included in a fried rice recipe, the history of fried rice, types of fried rice, how the Chinese and Japanese versions differ, etc. Gentgeen 18:17, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Gentgeen, we had this discussion many many many times and you are absolute aware that there was no consensus to move all the recipes at all. There was on ongoing discussion about that, and there was NO agreement to do all the deletion you did on the recipe articles. You did it basically alone and boldly and people just gave up out of tiredness in front of your boldness; The ONE thing I would appreciate is that you do not try to pretend there is a policy on that topic, when there is no policy and you do not even have true community agreement to do so. I will doubly say that because I said on the french wikipedia that there is NO policy here on this topic, but only a bold person having a deletionist attitude and now I am accused of having lied. So, please, at least, recognise that pretending there is a policy is totally out of it. SweetLittleFluffyThing

In the category Wikipedia official policy, I find Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. In that article, I find the text above. I did not add that policy to the category, I did not add that text to the policy, and I did not participate in the discussion about that text. It seems that I am not a lone deletionist acting boldly, but an editor simply following the officially established policy of this project. If you'll check the transwiki log, you will find that for a little over a year, several editors (including one of your fellow board members) have been involved in moving recipes to wikibooks, and listing recipes for deletion. To my knowldge, no one has left the project because I moved a recipe to wikibooks, but there is atleast one editor who has left the project because of the abuse you subjected her to because of this issue. Based on just your statement above, I'd have to conclude that you have misrepresented the issue. Gentgeen 19:50, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

who left the project because of me ? As for the rule, I removed it for now, since I could not find where it was discussed and agreed. If you wish to go on removing recipes fine, but it would be nice that it is not made a rule, as it is not supported by all the community. If a rule as reported right now, you would be right to revert or even to block me if I do not respect it. I think that would not be right to do so since there was no clear agreement all recipes should be deleted. I will add that I am pretty mad at this, because this is currently in discussion with a couple of guys on the french wikipedia, and I explained what happened here and that there was no decently agreed rule and many supporting them to stay here, and after your reverted I am accused of having lied. While I recognise your right to be bold, I do not accept well to be told I am lying when not aware of a rule which seems to come from no where. In short, I think that in "What wikipedia is not" there should be only rules that the biggest majority of people support. It is not the case, so ? Come back on irc to discuss this again please Gentgeen SweetLittleFluffyThing

I would like to see recipes for every dish as they serve as basis for defining the food especially when viewed from a vantage of actual pastry chef experience. For example, the line between a flan, a creme brulee and an egg custard are blurred without a recipe. A recipe is a definition in bakery, look online for a recipe for a baguette for instance, the biggest difference in all the recipes is the adjustement for high alititude cooking. In baking at least recipes should be re-added where they can be seen as having little deviation. I am not a cook nor will I ever be because of the myraid ways in which dishes can be "cooked" and still called the same thing. Looking over the chemistry pages I see many examples of preperation methods for things ranging from electrolysis to space age materials. Having recipes that can genereally be agreed upon can help clarify where words cannot. Excluding all recipes is like excluding all graphs, statistics or the like from any other page as they can not be agreed to either. I presume Gentgeen is not in the food industry or he would see how lacking he has made these entries in some self-righteous ignorance that has got out of control.

--Rakista 15:57, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Fluffy seems to have serious control issues. How many readers support your point of view? Have you taken a poll? An encyclopedia contains descriptions of things, not instructions on how to produce them. That, in the simplest language possible, is the criterion. The problem cited by Rakista is already remedied by the link to Wikibooks.

Claim about liqueur

A 1-edit anon added a claim about caramelizing with liqueur. Though you can flambé anything (as one chef said, "the customers like it and it doesn't hurt the food too much"), I don't think that's standard.... --Macrakis 01:58, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Caramelization

The reference to caramelization (in addition to Maillard reaction) has been deleted. Is this accurate? Does this help the Wikipedia reader? If caramelization is not involved, surely this article should state why not. --Wetman (talk) 07:02, 23 June 2008 (UTC)