The New York Times article was great, but…

Many of you saw the November 21st New York Times article that Zoë mentioned below, which put our bread method and our book in front of a broad national audience. Zoë and I are good business people, we love the exposure, and we’re grateful for the exceptional writing and the positive review. But as often happens, the writer just couldn’t fit everything into the short format. So there’s something that the article missed:

It missed Zoë.

Years ago, I had a cool idea about storing plain yeast dough long-term in the refrigerator. But there wasn’t a prayer of turning that idea into a book until Zoë and I met by chance. Zoë’s a pastry chef and baker trained at the Culinary Institute of America, so she was actually qualified to make this thing happen. I’d been leaving out teeny tiny little steps, like, oh, maybe measuring the flour, and writing down the results. Things a scientist might do. But for me, baking was an escape from science. I was no cookbook author (until Zoë taught me how it’s done).

So together, Zoë and I turned the basic idea into a book, one that would actually be useful to very busy people juggling a million responsibilities. And she added in all the dessert breads and brioches, recipes that I had pretty much no role in at all. That’s half the book! The article in the Times did a great job capturing how our basic method works, and why it works so well for busy people who don’t have the time for traditionally made yeast bread. It’s also true that the article seems to have parked our book as the #1 bread book on Amazon.com. But it missed the book’s heart and soul: the partnership between Zoë and me, and in particular, the spark that Zoë brings to cooking and to life. A few people have told us that the fun we had writing the book comes across on the pages. It can be hard to capture that in a short newspaper article, so it’s a good thing there’s blog space to make things crystal clear.

Pin It

If you enjoyed this post, please consider sharing it with others using one of the social sharing buttons above. Thanks, Jeff and Zoë

5 thoughts on “The New York Times article was great, but…

  1. We are so proud of both of you…well said Jeff. The two of you have created such an expressive opportunity to enjoy baking…and eating…Thanks, Barb

  2. The article made your book sound great, and I appreciate your making sure the credit is properly allocated. I’m shopping for it right now.

    One question: the recipe printed in the Times does not specify the type of yeast to use: fast rise bread machine yeast, or the traditional packets? It makes a difference, doesn’t it?

    Thanks.

  3. Hi David,
    The recipe is written for granulated yeast. Having said that we find it doesn’t matter if it is fast rising or traditional. They will both work, as will cake yeast but obviously you have to use a different amount.
    Thank you for buying the book and we hope you enjoy all of the bread!
    Best, Zoe

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>