One of the recipes he raved about was bread that is easy and spectacular. It has flour, a lot of water, salt, and a bit of yeast. You mix (without kneading) the ingredients together and let it rise for 18 hours. Then you form it into a ball, let it rise again, then cook it in a Dutch oven that you've had in the oven while you've preheated it to 450°.
The result is supposed to be a loaf that "is incredible, a fine-bakery quality, European-style boule."
I gave it a try. I wasn't convinced. The dough, batter almost, was probably too wet. It kind of soaked into the towel it was sitting on for the second rising and didn't dump into the hot casserole. I guess it deflated way too much on the way to the pot and ended up a flat, tough loaf.
I was discouraged and never got around to trying it again.
A couple of weeks ago Duck Duck Gray Duck blogged the recipe. I got inspired to try it again.
I had better luck this time but I still think I need to adjust something. The loaf still ended up flatter than I hoped for. For the second rising you're supposed to form the dough into a ball. It was so soft there was no way that it would maintain a "ball" shape. It stayed flat.
But at least this time the dough didn't soak into the towel and easily went into the Dutch oven. The result was a flatish loaf that tastes very nice. And has a crisp crust.
Here's the batter dough after the first rising:
Dumped into the much-too-large Dutch oven (the recipe says to use a 6 to 8 quart Dutch oven, which I did...I'll try our 4 quart one next time):
The baked loaf:
The inside of the flat loaf:
I wonder what I should try next time. A little less water? A smaller Dutch oven? (Yes.) Well, those are about the only adjustments possible. Wish me luck.
The recipe came from The New York Times and the accompanying article tells you about the theory of the process.
I hope everyone out there will give it a try and will tell me what I can do to make it even better.