Wednesday, July 18, 2012


Lucky number 7?  Doesn’t exactly sound promising. I’m a little over the dates and spice cookies.  Oooo, a little sour cream… that makes it so exciting. Sarcasm, yes?  Poor BH&G didn’t have a very imaginative following if this made it into the “best of the best” from their subscribers. Perhaps they were just trying to make a cookie quota of sorts. I’m sorry to seem so Debbie downer on this one, but I’m just not that excited to get started.

I’ll just keep my little cookie monster nearby. She always cheers me up with her funny ways.

As I’m measuring things out, I remember to always measure brown sugar by packing it firmly in the cup.  As I dump it into the bowl, they makes perfect brown sugar cup castles.  And it got me thinking, the recipes don’t say whether to use light or dark brown sugar. I’ve been using light brown sugar.  Does it make a difference?

Brown sugar is white sugar that has molasses added to it. The molasses gives it a rich, deep flavor and also makes the sugar very moist. Light brown sugar is a little drier and has a milder flavor than dark brown sugar because it has less molasses in it.  Light and dark can be used interchangeably depending on your personal preference, so feel free to play around with both types. I personally love molasses, but will stick with the light brown sugar unless the recipe calls for dark brown.  The milder flavor won’t overwhelm a cookie’s other qualities.
Out of brown sugar (but have molasses by chance)? Then you can add one tablespoon of molasses to a cup of white sugar to substitute light brown sugar. Or add two tablespoons to substitute dark brown sugar.

Looking up this cookie beforehand, I came across this photo of the same recipe from an old BH&G magazine – September issue 1952, the year before the first cookbook came out.  My guess is that this recipe may’ve been in the original 1953 BH&G cookbook. I like how they call them the "perfect afterschool snack," though I don't think that kids would agree today. The only change in the recipe from 1952 to the 1962 edition I'm using, they've added 1/8 tsp more nutmeg. 
The extra nutmeg doesn’t do much for the cookie. The batter doesn’t even taste good, so you know that’s not a good sign.  The final product is bland in flavor, but nice in texture. The cookie is very soft and the walnut on top (a surprise ingredient considering it isn’t listed in the original ingredients) gives it a fun crunch. I’m guessing that the sour cream helped in the moisture department. But the lack of sweetness, plus the fact that I’m tired of spiced cookies, means that this cookie is less like a dream and more like a nightmare. Well, like a boring dream anyway.
PS - Did California put in a bid to market their walnuts in this cookbook??? This is the fourth cookie I've seen call for California walnuts. That means they're in 57% of all the recipes. And its the only ingredient I've seen that is accompanied by a proper noun. Why so specific on the nuts, yo?  
Cookie Grade: D = lacking in flavor, but still moist, so not a complete failure
What I was jammin’ to: the local country station

No comments:

Post a Comment