http://www.democraticunderground.com/115725097Oh my.
By the way, here it is, circa 3:00 p.m. central time, 2:00 p.m. mountain time, and Her regal Ladyship Lu hasn't lit her daily "what's for supper?" campfire yet.
rhett o rick (26,137 posts) Wed Apr 24, 2013, 08:56 AM
Is it sacrilegious to use a dry roux?
I tried it and liked the results in my gumbo.
JayhawkSD (333 posts) Wed Apr 24, 2013, 10:02 AM
1. May not be sacreligious, but
You are kidding yourself if you think you are actually making a roux. A dry roux is not a roux, it is toasted flour. No recipe for gumbo ever called for toasted flour. Seriously, think about the difference between fried fish and baked fish. Between fried bread and toasted bread.
I have, of course, never tried a "dry roux," that is to say I have never tried toasting flour and never intend to insult any of my Southern dishes by doing so, but the flavor cannot possibly be anything even close to the unique flavor of a properly prepared roux.
Are you trying to make gumbo healthy by leaving out one tablespoon of oil? Don't be silly.
Cracklin Charlie (529 posts) Wed Apr 24, 2013, 10:46 AM
2. I had never heard of "dry roux"
So, I went and looked it up.
Oh, My! I think you better leave that alone! I don't know if a dry roux is a sacrilege or not; but, as a former Southerner, I would never use that roux as a substitute for a true roux. That is just all kinda wrong!
I do declare, I'm gonna take to my bed, 'til the bad cloud passes! I'll get up directly, and whip up a mess'a gumbo!
<<<has never heard of "dry roux" either.
supernova (39,124 posts) Wed Apr 24, 2013, 10:58 AM
3. No but why would you want to?
The fat that you use also is a flavor carrier in the dish, moreso than any other molecule in the dish. A traditional roux is only about a couple of Tablespoons of roux for an entire pot of sauce or gumbo, so you aren't saving anything caloriewise and tamping down on the flavor.
Disclaimer: I do low-carb nutrition and I support the consumption of fats, not wheat products. So there is that. Many times, instead of adding a roux, I just let whatever it is cook down or use tapioca starch if I'm pressed for time.
rhett o rick (26,137 posts) Wed Apr 24, 2013, 02:06 PM
5. Convenience. I like to use roux in lots of my dishes and having the dry roux available is very convenient. I dont have to spend 20 min stirring each time I want a roux. Dont think that I would substitute convenience for quality but I need to understand how the quality of my dishes are effected differently with one vs. the other. I cant tell the difference.
Some one above said that dry roux is just "toasted flour", which is partially correct. There are different ways to prepare a dry roux besides toasting. But that's not the point. A dry roux is cooked flour as is a roux. The difference is that in a roux the flour is cooked with oil. So the only difference I see is that a dry roux does not have the oil. I am not cutting calories to the point of worrying about the oil so I can easily add oil to the dish. Or actually if one wants, one could stir the dry roux into some hot oil and you have your nice nutty brown roux.
flamin lib (5,060 posts) Wed Apr 24, 2013, 02:00 PM
4. Yes, I have used it and contrary to the other replies it was quite good in my chicken & sausage gumbo. Is it exactly the same as traditional roux? No but still quite good.
You still need a tbs to cook down the trinity and for that I use either bacon fat or smaltz (chicken fat) to add some flavor back. I also tend to use less of the brown flour.
It cuts calories by almost 1000 per recipe for 6-8.
Obviously Creole or Cajun or Lousianan cookery, this dry roux and gumbo stuff.
