Friday, August 08, 2008

Guest post: Making those cookies from the New York Times

So, a recipe whose primary feature is waiting for 36 hours posed a few problems for me at first. Here is a list of some of them:

1. You have to wait!
2. You can't make them in the middle of the week (well, you can't bake them in the middle of the week).
3. You have to wait!
4. Also, chocolate discs? No.

It says you can store the dough up to 72 hours, which would fix problem 2, but only makes problems 1 and 3 a bit worse!

Still, I had recently made some cookies with the 'old reliable' recipe on the bag of chips, and they were NOT good. For some reason, the recipe had been changed, REMOVING THE SALT. And they were pretty terrible. As this new recipe insists, salt is key. I concur.

So, basically I was in the chocolate chip cookie desert when this recipe oasis appeared, and I had to check it out! What if it solved all of my problems? What if I gained a new solid move that yields one of my favourite things?

Making a half recipe, which I did, involved a few 1/8 teaspoons and things like that, but I think my math is solid because THESE COOKIES ARE SOOOOOOOOOOOOO DELICIOUS.

I did deviate from the recipe a bit. It calls for a hilarious amount of chocolate discs. I used nice chips (Ghiardelli milk chocolate), but no discs in sight. I think I might have used half of the called-for amount. I also made these a bit smaller than I think the recipe calls for. Five inch cookies seemed a bit too big to me.

This being said, I didn't deviate with the two types of flour as many have in their experiments, since cake flour does have a magical ability to make things delicate. Also, the salt really is great. It's fun to sprinkle on top before you bake, and if you miss a bit it just goes on the parchment paper and gets baked into the bottom of the cookie, which to me is a great feature.

They are delicious warm, and I made small batches right away, at 24 hours, and at 36 hours. I haven't eaten one cold, or even cool, but I'm sure they are good too.

I have to say, the second and third batches were better, in that they did seem to have that toffee-ish thing they claim the rest time provides. The only real difference between these two later batches was that I baked the second batch a little less, ie, they weren't (the tiniest bit) burnt. A good feature for sure.

Make these. They are worth it. And if you can't wait, Michael says that the dough is a cut above as well.


zoe said...

Oh, I am so glad you made those. I was wondering. So they're worth it, huh? Well, I have never met a chocolate chip cookie that I didn't like (aside from ridiculous faux-chocochip cookies, like with carob, or added raisins) but still, always good to have a recipe for one of the basics that really goes the extra mile to impress.

So is "chocolate disc" just another term for chocolate chips, or are they really their own thing?

Jen said...


Ya. Not sure about the discs. I suspect they are big round flat chips, made of fancier chocolate. Maybe one day I'll make some cookies with discs if I walk past some, you know?

This recipe isn't that different from what I'm used to, aside from the waiting. It's actually really nice just to 'whip up' a few cookies by taking dough out of the fridge!

Erin said...

Nice work Jen! I have fond memories of the salty goodness on those cookies!

Also: I'm excited for an entire post on the benefits of parchment paper.

Also: Hello from Dublin!

Jen said...

Update! These cookies are great cold too. Undercooking slightly is richly rewarded.

Lydia said...

Oh I don't know. I want to make them, but I don't want to commit to that time. I believe you that they're excellent. Maybe Erin can make me some when I go visit next month.