When you write a recipe, you want to feel like you're talking to your reader (or cook or baker), talking them through the recipe, in language that's easy to understand and follow along with. There's a way (and a reason, for some) to write dry, formulaic recipes without any hoopla. Magazines and newspapers often do it, where space is a consideration, and will write; Step 1: Combine (or mix) the eggs, sugar, butter, flour and salt in a bowl. Step 2: Add the remaining ingredients. But I think most readers like it when they hear the author's voice while they're making a recipe, whether it be Rose Berenbaum or Ina Garten, who both write different kinds of recipes, but who also both have plenty of fans.
Very sensible response. Just adding articles makes recipes a little longer. Not every recipe needs voice, I guess. But it’s important to me, as an editor and writer.
"In a bowl, combine . . ." always sounds to me like a bad translation from some other language, maybe German or Russian. I stet it, however unhappily, if it is the predominant wording or the house style; if not, I suggest making it sound more like something a real person would say.
And btw: you cannot add ANYTHING to a pot or bowl or other vessel made of metal, glass, ceramic, or other inert material. You can, however, add something to the ingredients that are already in the vessel. (I know this is a lost cause, but I try anyway.)
Yeah, you and I are both pushing lost causes, Suzanne. But it gives us satisfaction. At least you are in a position to suggest change, as a copy editor. And I do so with my clients and students.
The comment I get the most from my readers is about how helpful the writing and explanations are. I've never considered if it is too long or too short. My headers are usually long and I often include more in the instructions. Why can't we just let people write the way they want and find their audience instead of trying to stuff everyone into a mold? My first intention is to teach baking and pastry. As the owner of a wholesale bakery for 25 years and currently a pastry chef in a high end restaurant, I like to incorporate a lot of what I have learned (I'm self-taught) in both fields in my writing. That along with a lot of photographs seems to be what my readers appreciate. We all have different audiences so it seems logical that there would be different styles of writing. Good for anyone who puts themselves out there.
Obviously you are a clear recipe writer, and for that, I congratulate you. That is a huge skill. As for "why can't we just let people write the way they want?" those people who want to do so can feel free to self-publish or create a blog. For the rest of us, there are rules, standards -- and editors!
I trust you are not deprecating self-published books and blogs. My standards are as high as anyone's and my main rule is that the recipes have to work or they don't get published. Many of us work much harder due to the fact we trade a publishing house for the ability to publish a book that we think (rightly or wrongly) will be most helpful to readers. My book, Craving Cookies, The Quintessential American Cookie Book is such a book. It was professionally designed and corrected by 3 editors. I found it interesting that on Rose Levy Beranbaum's blog, the page for The Bread Bible lists 29 corrections to the book......and she had multiple editors. By the way, mine has 3 errors which were corrected in the book and ebook as soon as they were reported to me. There isn't a right or wrong way to publish but whether the information is valid. Rose's books are always valid. I used several of her cake recipes in my bakery. Good information is good information no matter where it comes from. FYI I didn't submit my book to IACP awards for the self published book category because of the errors. I thought that would be a disqualification. I guess I thought wrong.
Helen, no I did not mean to deprecate them -- sorry for not putting it well. My point was that not all self-published books have editors. Authors who want to create a professional product are sure to spring for a professional editor. In fact, IACP has a self-pubishing category for its annual award, so that is some kind of recognition that self-published books should be taken seriously.
Re errors, it happens to just about everyone. My second cookbook had a mistake in one of the recipes. I'm still not sure how it happened. I didn't even know about it. When someone was reviewing the book and testing a recipe, he found it. So embarassing. I wrote about it here: https://diannej.com/2016/reader-finds-cookbook-recipe-error/
Love the post. It's so true. I like Rose's method of putting the corrections on the blog with the book so they can be found. I just want you to know that I very much appreciate your posts and particularly that you get back to your readers. At 82, I'm still seeking perfection in my writing. I think I may ease up a bit when I'm 83. Have a great weekend!
I'm torn! I appreciate the clarity that accompanies recipes that start with a key utensil. At the same time, I could read Nigel Slater's recipes over and over again as if they were poems (I do read them over and over, his books reside on my bedside table).
My tentative guess is that if a writer knows what they're doing, then there won't be a lack of clarity when they choose not to adopt the utensil-first formula... still, just a guess!
Also, not everyone who uses recipes is a "reader" and not everyone who shares recipes is a "writer" ~ different tastes, different expectations?
I don't think the issue is about clarity. For me, all writing, in a perfect world, would be good writing. Clarity is a hallmark of good writing. And "In a bowl combine" is just not good writing.
I don't know about writer versus reader, but it's a good question. When I have to put a bookcase together and read the instructions, I don't think the manufacturer cares who I am other than a "customer!" But I spend a lot of time, as a recipe editor, asking questions like "Will your reader know how to do this?" when a recipe says to "blanch" vegetables, for example.
I guess, for me, regardless of who the reader is or what the writing is about (driving test, recipe instructions, cereal box, writing should be good. That is my expectation.
Congrats on all your wins Dianne. The first part of this newsletter especially caught my eye. As a debut author, I recently realised that while my style is very conversational it also meant my recipes were a lot longer than usual and so I had to work with my editors, following the publishing house style (as mentioned by those who disagreed with JJ’s suggestion/instruction) while trying to make sure my voice & style came across strongly. After polling a number of my followers/readers it was also apparent that when reading recipes, people want straight forward instructions and a bit of direction even for the most ‘basic’ things like peeling the onions. We may not all have the opportunity or power to insist on editorial styles. But I agree that one’s unique voice will set one apart from the rest.
Hi Lerato! Congratulations on your first book. Just including articles (ex. the) will make your instructions a little longer. There's no question that people want straightforward instructions. As you say the challenge is how to get voice in there. For most people, it's in the headnote.
I even got carried away with the headnotes. When you get lost in a story or a memory, it’s hard to cut it down to 2 or 3 short sentences. Thanks to Substack for this space where we can truly be as unique and as chatty as we want. Thank you Dianne and thanks for all the wisdom and experience shared.
Oh, this was thorough and fabulous!! (as usual)
Thanks for saying so!
thanks for sharing this thorough piece - I am a new follower and stoked for more : )
Wonderful! I hope I can live up to your expectations, Jess.
When you write a recipe, you want to feel like you're talking to your reader (or cook or baker), talking them through the recipe, in language that's easy to understand and follow along with. There's a way (and a reason, for some) to write dry, formulaic recipes without any hoopla. Magazines and newspapers often do it, where space is a consideration, and will write; Step 1: Combine (or mix) the eggs, sugar, butter, flour and salt in a bowl. Step 2: Add the remaining ingredients. But I think most readers like it when they hear the author's voice while they're making a recipe, whether it be Rose Berenbaum or Ina Garten, who both write different kinds of recipes, but who also both have plenty of fans.
Very sensible response. Just adding articles makes recipes a little longer. Not every recipe needs voice, I guess. But it’s important to me, as an editor and writer.
"In a bowl, combine . . ." always sounds to me like a bad translation from some other language, maybe German or Russian. I stet it, however unhappily, if it is the predominant wording or the house style; if not, I suggest making it sound more like something a real person would say.
And btw: you cannot add ANYTHING to a pot or bowl or other vessel made of metal, glass, ceramic, or other inert material. You can, however, add something to the ingredients that are already in the vessel. (I know this is a lost cause, but I try anyway.)
Yeah, you and I are both pushing lost causes, Suzanne. But it gives us satisfaction. At least you are in a position to suggest change, as a copy editor. And I do so with my clients and students.
P.S. Do people still know what stet means?
The comment I get the most from my readers is about how helpful the writing and explanations are. I've never considered if it is too long or too short. My headers are usually long and I often include more in the instructions. Why can't we just let people write the way they want and find their audience instead of trying to stuff everyone into a mold? My first intention is to teach baking and pastry. As the owner of a wholesale bakery for 25 years and currently a pastry chef in a high end restaurant, I like to incorporate a lot of what I have learned (I'm self-taught) in both fields in my writing. That along with a lot of photographs seems to be what my readers appreciate. We all have different audiences so it seems logical that there would be different styles of writing. Good for anyone who puts themselves out there.
Obviously you are a clear recipe writer, and for that, I congratulate you. That is a huge skill. As for "why can't we just let people write the way they want?" those people who want to do so can feel free to self-publish or create a blog. For the rest of us, there are rules, standards -- and editors!
I trust you are not deprecating self-published books and blogs. My standards are as high as anyone's and my main rule is that the recipes have to work or they don't get published. Many of us work much harder due to the fact we trade a publishing house for the ability to publish a book that we think (rightly or wrongly) will be most helpful to readers. My book, Craving Cookies, The Quintessential American Cookie Book is such a book. It was professionally designed and corrected by 3 editors. I found it interesting that on Rose Levy Beranbaum's blog, the page for The Bread Bible lists 29 corrections to the book......and she had multiple editors. By the way, mine has 3 errors which were corrected in the book and ebook as soon as they were reported to me. There isn't a right or wrong way to publish but whether the information is valid. Rose's books are always valid. I used several of her cake recipes in my bakery. Good information is good information no matter where it comes from. FYI I didn't submit my book to IACP awards for the self published book category because of the errors. I thought that would be a disqualification. I guess I thought wrong.
Helen, no I did not mean to deprecate them -- sorry for not putting it well. My point was that not all self-published books have editors. Authors who want to create a professional product are sure to spring for a professional editor. In fact, IACP has a self-pubishing category for its annual award, so that is some kind of recognition that self-published books should be taken seriously.
Re errors, it happens to just about everyone. My second cookbook had a mistake in one of the recipes. I'm still not sure how it happened. I didn't even know about it. When someone was reviewing the book and testing a recipe, he found it. So embarassing. I wrote about it here: https://diannej.com/2016/reader-finds-cookbook-recipe-error/
Love the post. It's so true. I like Rose's method of putting the corrections on the blog with the book so they can be found. I just want you to know that I very much appreciate your posts and particularly that you get back to your readers. At 82, I'm still seeking perfection in my writing. I think I may ease up a bit when I'm 83. Have a great weekend!
I'm torn! I appreciate the clarity that accompanies recipes that start with a key utensil. At the same time, I could read Nigel Slater's recipes over and over again as if they were poems (I do read them over and over, his books reside on my bedside table).
My tentative guess is that if a writer knows what they're doing, then there won't be a lack of clarity when they choose not to adopt the utensil-first formula... still, just a guess!
Also, not everyone who uses recipes is a "reader" and not everyone who shares recipes is a "writer" ~ different tastes, different expectations?
Slater's recipes are very beautiful, yes.
I don't think the issue is about clarity. For me, all writing, in a perfect world, would be good writing. Clarity is a hallmark of good writing. And "In a bowl combine" is just not good writing.
I don't know about writer versus reader, but it's a good question. When I have to put a bookcase together and read the instructions, I don't think the manufacturer cares who I am other than a "customer!" But I spend a lot of time, as a recipe editor, asking questions like "Will your reader know how to do this?" when a recipe says to "blanch" vegetables, for example.
I guess, for me, regardless of who the reader is or what the writing is about (driving test, recipe instructions, cereal box, writing should be good. That is my expectation.
Congrats on all your wins Dianne. The first part of this newsletter especially caught my eye. As a debut author, I recently realised that while my style is very conversational it also meant my recipes were a lot longer than usual and so I had to work with my editors, following the publishing house style (as mentioned by those who disagreed with JJ’s suggestion/instruction) while trying to make sure my voice & style came across strongly. After polling a number of my followers/readers it was also apparent that when reading recipes, people want straight forward instructions and a bit of direction even for the most ‘basic’ things like peeling the onions. We may not all have the opportunity or power to insist on editorial styles. But I agree that one’s unique voice will set one apart from the rest.
Hi Lerato! Congratulations on your first book. Just including articles (ex. the) will make your instructions a little longer. There's no question that people want straightforward instructions. As you say the challenge is how to get voice in there. For most people, it's in the headnote.
I even got carried away with the headnotes. When you get lost in a story or a memory, it’s hard to cut it down to 2 or 3 short sentences. Thanks to Substack for this space where we can truly be as unique and as chatty as we want. Thank you Dianne and thanks for all the wisdom and experience shared.
Cudos on your latest national award for "Will Write for Food"!
Thank you Wayne! It's a good feeling.