Nosrat teaches four basic elements of cooking

The Netflix original series “Salt, Fat, Acid, Heat,” starring Samin Nosrat, is an artful culinary journey through the the four basic elements and flavors of cooking. As she travels the world, Nosrat explores the countries she deems have mastered these elements that can make or break a dish — fat in Italy, salt in Japan, acid in Mexico and heat right here in Northern California. Adapted from the best selling cookbook of the same title, the goal is to encourage and inspire home cooks.

The now celebrity chef was one of the many great chefs to come out of Chez Panisse — the original farm-to-table restaurant in Berkeley, Calif. run by Alice Waters and Paul Aratow. Built on a strong French foundation, it was the first of its kind to source local, organic and sustainable ingredients that has morphed into what is now known as California cuisine. Despite this professional training, Nosrat’s style is far from snobbish. Good food shouldn’t be exclusive, good food shouldn’t be difficult to make, it is for everyone. The words “anyone can cook” from “Ratatouille” echo in my head.

The food is mouthwatering and the cinematography is awe inspiring, but it’s Nosrat’s passion and child-like giddy excitement for food that stands above all. Her raw love for food is expressed by her bug-eyed, eyebrow-raising amazement when she tastes food and her eagerness to learn from her interviewees: grandmothers, butchers, salt masters and beekeepers. You instantly fall in love with Nosrat when she dives into not two, not three, but five different gelatos in a row, expressing pure bewilderment of the flavors on her palate, truly embodying a kid in a candy store. To say she loves food would be a severe understatement, an unhealthy obsession rings closer to the truth.

What do olives, pigs and cheese all have in common? Fat. We begin in Italy.

A word often carrying a negative connotation, fat in this series is presented as the cornerstone of flavor, as “fat makes food delicious.” Traversing the hills of Liguria, Nosrat first explores the art of olive oil, butchers some hogs, then collapses in a parmesan cheesery. My three takeaways:

• Olive oil is essentially a fresh pressed juice that has an expiration date. There is no heat or chemicals used in the process, just squeezing. This means that olive oil can go bad — keeping it too long causes it to go rancid.
• The fat used sets a path for the dish by defining and shaping the essential flavors. The French use butter. Southern cooking relies heavily on bacon fat and lard, and for Italians it’s olive oil. Fat enhances flavor, so don’t be afraid of it.
• When cooking, it’s imperative to heat the pan before you add the oil. There seems to be controversy about this one on the internet, but Nosrat says it with such gusto and veracity, that I’m going to side with her on this one.

Several times throughout the tetralogy, Nosrat alludes to the fact that Americans seem to be clueless in our knowledge of food and flavor. Initially, I was offended to be lumped in with an entire culture that is ignorant to crafting good tasting food, but as she proceeded to explain (for example, that olive oil goes bad or that not all salt is created equal) I was confounded. I consider myself an avid home chef, but was not taught by my parents. Cooking was a voyage I embarked on when I moved away for college. I’m self-taught from YouTube videos, cooking shows and recipe following — but not even Bobby Flay had taught me these basic concepts.

Next, Nosrat travels to Japan for salt. Japan produces over 4,000 different kinds of salt, each differing by location and production method. Though all salt comes from the sea, there are many different ways to add salt when cooking. Nosrat sets out to sea, boating to gather seaweed — one method of harvesting salt — and learns traditional methods of making soy sauce and miso paste. Salt enhances flavor, making it taste “more like itself.”

• Not all salt is created equal. Size, source, flavor. Smaller crystals dissolve fast and give off a saltier taste, whereas larger flakes dissolve gradually, giving a more delicate taste.
• When you salt matters — for example, salting meat in advance. Nosrat seasons meat on the bone as soon as she brings it home from the store to give it time to “do its magic”.
• There are many sources of salt and there is an art to layering it. Olives, cheese, pickles, etc. are all sources of salt.

It seems very obvious to taste your food as you go and to check whether it needs adjustments. But attuning your tastebuds to know what adjustments need to be made takes skill, and taste is just one way to understand your food. Nosrat preaches the importance of using all five senses in order to cook a good meal. She calls this a sensory experience, one that she feverishly projects.

Citrus, salsa, chocolate and oddly enough honey, are all essential forms of acid in Mexico. Acid brightens and adds contrast to dishes, doing the “necessary job of balancing”. My personal favorite episode of the series begins in the Yucatán Peninsula at a citrus market where Nosrat walks around with “La Abuela” tasting sour oranges — her lips puckered and her face scrunched before bursting out in a joyous yet uncomfortable laugh.

• Acidity cuts through other flavors — fatty, salty, starchy or sweet — but spice enhances it. For example, salsa.
• Browning, or cooking, produces acidity. The process of cooking brings out flavors that didn’t exist before. Think roasting peppers. More on this for heat.
• Marinating meat in acid and cooking meat in acid yield two different results. Marinating tenderizes the meat. Acid essentially begins the cooking process. Think ceviche, the acid essentially cooks the raw shrimp or other seafood used, but it’s important not to leave meats in the marinade too long before cooking, otherwise it will overcook and toughen.

Cooking is a balancing act between layering flavors to elevate each other and letting each element speak for themselves.

As a native of Northern California, Samin returns to her roots to embark on the last element: heat. Heat is described as the transformation phase, where flavors are changed, developed and created. Heat is a spectrum: intense heat browns and crisps while leaving a tender inside, whereas slow and gentle heat utilizes time and liquid makes foods tender and juicy.

• Ovens aren’t as precise as we may think. Heat isn’t evenly distributed nor is it stable. Ovens work like a thermostat, fluctuating up and down to regulate the set dial temperature. There are also “zones” in the oven: the front is much cooler because of the door, and the center and rear are hotter than the sides. Because of this, you have to use your senses to gauge whether the food is cooking properly or evenly. Samin demonstrates this by roasting whole chickens, rotating them and flipping them to get an even color and doneness.
• You don’t have to have expensive ingredients to make good food. Nosrat recommends always getting quality staples like fresh citrus, herbs — the biggest bang for your buck in terms of flavor — grabbing “everyday vegetables” — getting comfortable with year round veggies like spinach, broccoli and carrots, and learning how to make them taste good.
• Cooking takes time and patience. With the roasted chickens, for example, let the refrigerated meat rest and rise to room temperature prior to cooking, and let the cooked chicken rest afterwards for the juices to redistribute and the flavor to settle.

Nosrat concludes the series with a paradoxical, yet heartfelt message: cooking is not about the food, it’s about what happens at the table. Good cooking is within reach for everyone.

I find irony in the recent increase in food related docu-series and cooking videos flooding social feeds — what I like to think of as the “wave of Chef’s Table”, or the “food porn” social media trend. We are watching and consuming more and more food related media, but we are cooking less and less. This paradox suggests that we are interested in good food, we want to be consuming good food, but we don’t take the extra step in the kitchen.

Is it laziness? Is our desire to cook satisfied by watching others? Do we not have the time? — I would argue the latter can not fully explain this because if we have the time to watch from the couch, we have the time to do in the kitchen. Nosrat achieved her goal by inspiring me, and probably others, to step into the kitchen and elevate home cooking through remembering salt, fat, acid and heat.

Written By: Grace Simmons — arts@theaggie.org

Manetti Shrem Museum stands as glimmer of hope for architecture on campus

UC Davis can be quite the dreary location if you fancy yourself an architectural enthusiast. Among the stucco and concrete box-like structures that riddle the campus, students are hard-pressed to find a building that evokes anything but a shrug. In the midst of this overwhelming mediocrity, however, one building rises above the rest. Located on the South East side of campus, the inviting and thoughtful design of The Manetti Shrem Museum of Art may be more than enough to inject the university with some much needed architectural life.

Since the museum opened its double glass doors to the public in November of 2016, it garnered widespread notoriety from national media outlets and architectural critics alike. Christopher Hawthorne, an architecture critic for the Los Angeles Times, wrote the Manetti Shrem is a building “to boost your faith in the future of American architecture.” In addition to Hawthorne’s praise, CNN’s Lifestyle Division listed the museum in its top 12 buildings that transformed cities around the world.

Initial steps for the Shrem were taken in 2011 when UC Davis introduced a program detailing a “high level vision” for building the school’s first art museum. A committee of carefully selected UC Davis faculty took on the task of turning this dream into reality. The process was fully set in motion when the school received a ten million dollar donation from the Manetti Shrem family to fund the endeavor.

Mark Kessler, a professor of design at UC Davis who closely followed and participated in the museum’s design process, noted the importance placed on the museum’s execution.

“We raised money to make something special, to break the tradition of second rate architecture,” Kessler said. “And in consideration of the fact that it was the university art museum, it was especially important to get this one right, and to pour a little more funds and more attention into the hiring of the architect.”

The architecture duo chosen by the faculty was a collaborative partnership between SO-IL and Bohlin Cywinski Jackson, two internationally-recognized design firms based out of New York and San Francisco respectively.

Rachel Teagle, the founding director of the museum, emphasized the committee’s confidence in their decision.

“SO-IL was a unanimous decision yes for the jury because they took our goals to the next level,” Teagle said.

Designing the campus’s first art museum presented a challenging and unique opportunity for the firms.

“A puzzle for us was that the building was on the edge of campus, said Ted Baab, a senior associate at SO-IL, who is familiar with the project. “It’s an extension of the campus as a whole. It creates continuity to the campus around it to make it a crossroads at intersection of students coming, going and passing through.”

The underlying vision that informed the creative process was the team’s intention to create a structure that was welcoming, adaptive and unconstrained by the museum label.

“One of the key design goals was to not make the museum a closed and hermetic experience but something open, connected, and interactive,” Baab said.

The primary feature implemented to meet this goal is the building’s iconic 50,000-square-foot perforated aluminum grand canopy which looms above the roof and extends over campus.

“Using the canopy for shading space allows the exterior space to be used as an extension of the building,” Baab said.

This extension of shade in the building’s outdoor area invites students to sit, chat and reset as they go about their day.

In addition to addressing their design’s intention, the grand canopy acts as a structural light filter, creating a dynamic exterior.

“We designed the canopy to produce a variety of different lighting types and spatial conditions underneath,” Baab said about the grand canopy’s lighting effect. “Even though it’s one continuous space there are some areas that are narrow and very tall and some areas that are low and more intimate. There are different densities of shading as well.”

Teagle said this relationship with light was one of her favorite aspects.

“I think the building really feels special because of the way it embraces light,” Teagle said. “With the shadows coming off the canopy changing over the course of the day you really can feel the passage of time.”

Although the signature grand canopy has amassed considerable praise, it should be noted that some still doubt whether it has fulfilled its original architectural intention.

“A good proportion of the space is given to a grand canopy that as time goes on will be increasingly viewed as a curiosity,” Kessler said. “Something that quite hasn’t found its reason to be. A kind of no man’s land, a rather overdeveloped no man’s land. It certainly is a kind of cautionary tale for future architects and their clients.”

Kessler elaborated on his position, citing the museum’s location on the periphery of campus as a major reason for why its design falls short.

In spite of his criticism, Kessler also stated that “the campus did a great job. They succeeded in putting UC Davis finally on the map architecturally with a very good building.”

The museum also boasts a LEED Platinum sustainable certification that more than exceeds university standards. This accomplishment puts the museum amongst the best in conserving energy and utilizing sustainable design and materials.

Baab remarked on how the building’s sustainable specs were a byproduct of the museum’s canopy.

“The enclosed portions of the building could be quite efficient, as the expression and identity of the building actually are defined much more by the canopy.”

Whether the Manetti Shrem has met all of its original design intentions or not, it acts as a glimmer of hope for architecture on campus. Teagle summarized the impact of the building when reminiscing on comments of students who frequent the Shrem.

“One of the moments when I feel most proud is when students tell me that they feel special when they’re in the museum,” Tealge said. “That it’s so cool to have a building on campus that feels like a special place and makes them feel good. In our comment book, students write, ‘I feel seen at the Manetti Shrem Museum.’”

Written By: Andrew Williams — arts@theaggie.org

Aidy Bryant’s honest, real comedy pulls the heartstrings of viewers

The Hulu original series “Shrill” premiered on March 15 and enchanted viewers with its quirky and unapologetic representation of women. The series is an adaptation of Lindy West’s novel “Shrill: Notes from a Loud Woman” and focuses on a version of West’s younger self. The show is produced by household names Lorne Michaels and Elizabeth Banks. The first season received a score of 91% on Rotten Tomatoes.  

“Saturday Night Live” comedian Aidy Bryant stars as the series’ protagonist Annie, a 30-something journalist who happens to be overweight. Throughout the first season of the series, viewers watch Annie develop a sense of self-worth and begin asserting herself in her career and her relationships.

The show has been praised for its body-positive message and realistic depiction of fat women.

“The audience never gets an explanation for Annie’s weight, nor is one necessary to appreciate all the wonderful characteristics that make her a heroine worth rooting for,” said Sarah Conley for CNN. “Instead, ‘Shrill’ shifts the focus to Annie’s relationship with her body and how it impacts her relationship with everyone she encounters — a revolutionary move in today’s culture.”

Annie’s struggles are treated with empathy and normalcy, making her a relatable hero that any viewer will find easy to root for. Bryant’s performance is subtle and nuanced, showing the unspoken troubles fat women everywhere face.

Lolly Adefope stars as Fran, Annie’s best friend and roommate. Fran functions almost as a foil for Annie; while Fran is still a fat woman, she never tries to make herself smaller or apologize for who she is. However, she does not fall under the trope of the funny sidekick that many fat women are casted as either. Fran is a self-possessed and intelligent woman who is also a wonderful friend to Annie. Women lift each other up in this series, and the on-screen relationship between these two characters is a perfect example of it.

“Shrill” has also been praised for its diverse characters and cast. Fran is a black woman who is also a lesbian, and she exists as more than just Annie’s sidekick. She has storylines of her own and is a complex character herself. Characters of all walks of life are featured in the series, each treated with respect and integrity.

In an interview with Vanity Fair, Adefope spoke about what she hopes viewers will take away from the show.

“I hope people see it for what it is, which is just a very interesting story of a woman trying to realize who she is in a world that’s telling her that she shouldn’t be the way she is,” Adefope said. “I hope people see that […] it’s not just a ‘fat show.’ It’s so much more than that. Fat people aren’t just fat people; they have so many layers to them, just like anybody else, that I think should be explored.”

Episode four, titled “Pool,” is the series’ stand-out because it encapsulates the positive message of the show. The episode follows Annie covering a story on the “Fat Babe Pool Party,” a body-acceptance event hosted by the local body-positivity community. Annie knows that she will find a great story if she attends the event, but feels the common anxiety around attending a pool party.

The writer of the episode, Samantha Irby, spoke to Vulture about the anxieties she wanted to highlight in this episode.

“It’s not just about being in a bathing suit and having so little between your body and other people,” Irby said. “It’s being in your bathing suit and also having to project that you’re having a good time.”

The shot of Annie sitting on the side of the pool, fully dressed with her jeans cropped slightly to dangle her legs in the water is powerful. Viewers understand that feeling. Many have sat on the outskirts in the very same way. However, the difference was that Annie and the viewers got to watch a diverse group of women be unapologetic in their suits and actually enjoy themselves.

The scenes at the pool party were beautifully shot and featured a variety of body types. The women laughed, danced and enjoyed the space they occupy in the world.

“I wanted it to feel like the best place you’ve ever been,” Irby said. “Because you don’t get that a lot. You don’t get a lot of beautiful fat spaces.”

Annie does get in the water by the end of the episode, and it feels triumphant. The simple shot of her diving into the pool with a huge smile on her face was heartwarming and memorable.

While the show depicts many uncomfortable scenes of fat-shaming and Annie’s struggles with her body, the character and her plot lines focus on so much more than that. It also follows Annie’s career troubles and pursuit of being a journalist, as well as her complicated relationship with an uptight mother and ill father. At the end of every episode, Annie is a complex and unique character who just so happens to be fat.

“It’s a f—ing mind prison, you know, that every f—ing woman everywhere has been programmed to believe,” Annie rants in one episode. “And I’ve wasted so much time and money and energy, for what? I’m fat. I’m f—ing fat. Hello, I’m fat.”

That is the tone the entire series takes, from the pilot episode to the season finale. The show has recently been picked up for a second season, showing that Annie is fat and here to stay.

Written By: Alyssa Ilsley –– arts@theaggie.org

Can documentaries like “Our Planet” advocate for environmental justice?

The United Nations reported that we have a 12 year window to drastically change the state of the environment before catastrophe strikes. A much more urgent tone warrants reevaluation if the strategies currently used to mitigate climate change impacts aren’t enough.

At the same time, nature documentaries like “Planet Earth,” “Blue Planet” and the more recent “Our Planet” can be viewed as a positive mechanism for change. Visually stunning images of our planet’s natural landscapes, combined with warnings of a potentially disastrous future might make these examples of documentary filmmaking just what the planet needs.

“Media and particularly visual media, is a powerful way to portray messages because people can see with their own eyes and evaluate messages,” said Tracy Winsor, an environmental law lecturer.

Fourth-year marine and coastal sciences major Anya Stajner has personally seen the growing environmental concerns expressed by her students because of the documentary “Blue Planet.”

“I completely think that these types of documentaries are a super important tool in at least triggering environmental change,” Stajner said. “I teach at a local elementary schools in Yolo County, and after ‘Blue Planet’ came out and we were going over the ocean ecosystems lesson, all of the kids wanted to raise their hands. They were stoked to participate.”

Despite their praise, however, there may be flaws in these documentaries. Fran Neil, a second-year sustainable agriculture and food system major, attended the “Environment as Freedom: Racial Capital and Environmental Justice” lecture on April 29 which pinpointed a few of these negative repercussions.

“These documentaries are very ‘Oh nature is go great,’” Neil said. “That is important, but it doesn’t go into much of what needs to be done and problem solving.”

Problem solving, however, may not be the purpose of “Planet Earth,” “Blue Planet,” “Our Planet” and others of the like.

“It is important when we look at these documentaries that we have realistic expectations for them,” Stajner said.

These documentaries’ purposes might simply be to act as the first step in climate change mitigation, rather than calling for direct action.

“In the whole advocacy process, there are a lot of steps you can take that have different implications, purposes and meanings,” said Andrew Isaac, a third-year community and regional development major. “When you are trying to convey the importance of something or getting someone to take action is important. These documentaries are a step in the process of advocacy, but it is no means the end of the road. It gets people engaged and thinking about the animals and environment we are impacting. Without that first step, people will not be inspired to make change or have the mental capacity in understanding the crisis we have on our hands. It is reaching a young base of people and maybe inspiring a few to continue or begin environmental advocacy.”

Presenting the issue of climate change in an open manner might then allow the viewer to take steps to better the environment. In fact, according to Winsor, there is a respected phrase in legal writing that emphasizes this point: “if you keep it simple, people are going to get your message.”

“A lot of times an artist has a message that they want to convey, but then the viewer of the art brings everything that is in their background and experience,” Winsor said. “So it may not be the artist’s intention to have a results oriented message, they just might want to share information and interject it into the world of the viewer and make them think about it. If you try to force someone to accept you view, they may react more negatively to it and see it more like propaganda. If someone thinks about it and talks about it, they may arise to the message the artist is trying to convey but in their own way.”

Therefore, “One Planet” and other documentaries separate themselves from the potential gate-keeping phenomenon that can occur in some advocacy methods.

“I really think that a problem with environmentalism is exclusivity — trying to gate keep people, to say that you’re not enough of an environmentalist,” Stajner said. “And while this documentary has not changed any policy, it gets people excited and I think that’s as much as you can ask a documentary to do.”

Indeed, according to Winsor, legitimate change involves a multitude of interacting bodies and industries

“The arts, including documentaries and media, have been very important to reaching critical turning points,” Winsor said. “Causing change is a collaborative effort that crosses science, politics, the law and policy. I think the arts and media and new is important to raising awareness, but itself is not going to force change.”

Despite its simplicity, however, there may be related areas to environmental justice that are missing from the narrative. Neil noted the social implications of environmental justice that these nature documentaries do not cover.

“They often fail to recognize the impacts on certain peoples,” Neil said. “It is a lot of indigenous people who are impacted by not sustainable forestry, for example. It’s really glossed over, and does not look at the starting problems: the industrialized communities.”

In addition, according to third-year environmental science and management major Jazmine Dahi, the documentaries fail to mention that most environmental damage is created by a select few larger industries.

To Isaac, however, recognizing the social implications of environmental degrade in this format may not be effective due to the filming style of nature documentaries.

“I don’t think that is the right place to address the social inequalities and inequities of climate change,” Isaac said. “I think the purpose of ‘Planet Earth’ is to show the beauty, and that type of documentary film technique is not the right way to show inequities among marginalized communities and the social implications in general of environmental justice. But I do think there should be a documentary that does it.”

Although “Planet Earth,” “Blue Planet” and “Our Planet” may not be able to capture the entire complexity and implications of climate change and environmental degrade, they may act as a first step in taking the urgent action recommended by the United Nations. Perhaps the other implications that are part of the greater picture can be mentioned in another documentary.

Written By: Caroline Rutten — arts@theaggie.org