> but I think too often give a universal mushiness to many cuts
Lots of people like that, especially with sub-par cuts (blade roast anyone?).
Lots of people like that, especially with sub-par cuts (blade roast anyone?).
Even something like short rib is 'premium' compared to much of the carcass. So slow-cooking is great to turn a blade or round roast into something that doesn't suck. And definitely, a huge part of every food culture is cooking these subpar cuts.
The old animal meat (from milk cows and goats, and egg hens) that I ate as a kid would probably horrify someone like you lol
In one of his books, Escoffier explained that in making beef stock get better flavor starting with the meat of old animals.
Soooo, I considered that, and in NY thought of retired dairy cows so called around. I got to a packing house in PA where I got an explanation "think fast food". So, maybe McDonald's, Burger King, etc. are serving the beef the Escoffier liked for making beef stock!
Broadly speaking. Some meat is so lean (bison, e.g.) that is must be cooked rare lest it become as dusty as the rest of Utah (the best bison I ever had was this fantastic place in southern Utah, hence the reference) and some meat is so fatty or gristly it must be slow cooked or braised or otherwise managed.
And consider that how tough is a cut depends on its use: various fowl favour standing on one leg so the other is ceteris paribus more tender; cf also the reference above to the front legs of red deer.
So “shitty meat” basically says “this animal did not lay about on fluffy cushions but scrambled for a living, except for this little bit here”.
Some people rave over tenderloin aka filet mignon. I love it, if properly larded and cooked. Otherwise, I much prefer rib eye: juicier, more flavourful, even if a little gristlier.
When I’m hungry, I don’t much care. When I have time and/or spare cash, a good starting piece well prepared is a joy.
Even then the cuts in the back legs vary in usefulness.
And venison is notoriously lean, hence a lot of methods of cooking it involve larding to prevent it ending up a dry lump of chewiness.
But you do have to cook it for a long time - or pressure cook.
It's definitely a large list! every culture imaginable has a whole range of dishes specifically for elevating "basic" and "cheap" cuts of meat.
Calories used to be a lot more scarce than they are now.
Eh? You cut it into pieces, throw on some really basic sponge cake, bake for 30 minutes = delicious rhubarb cake. Or put it in a pan with some water and like a glass of sugar, boil for 10 minutes = rhubarb compote. Am I missing something?
Go read about California during the gold rush, where an influx of people without appropriate food infrastructure pushed people to eat bears, cougars, songbirds, etc.
Those “chewy” kinds of meat would be ok when slow cooked I’d wager, perhaps in a Hungarian goulash [0].
I suspect the local pig farmers send the best cuts of meat to the big city, to sell for higher prices.
At least the chicken meat is good.
—-
*at least to the bbq legends/mythos of bbq in texas
(KC used to be a major stockyard and slaughterhouse as it sits both on the Missouri river and on a rail line.)
Bonus: you can drain the liquid and put in in the freezer. Keeps good for a week or so. Wonderful gelatine and works with almost anything else as a base.
Thanks for spotting it.
Calling a blade roast sub-par because it doesn't make good steaks makes about as much sense as calling tenderloin sub-par because it doesn't make a good braise.