Brownies

I don't understand why people don't make brownies all the time - Nigella Lawson

Perhaps it's because your version asks for 500g (or 17 ounces) of caster sugar, Nigella! No one in their right mind would eat that much sugar too often, would they? I mean, some of us might LIKE to, but would we do it?

I'm not an experienced Brownie maker, so this was only my second foray into their chocolatey goodness. My first foray was with the exact same recipe. So it must be a good one, except for that not so small amount of sugar issue...



The Verdict

Unusual or substituted ingredients: None. Nigella says the walnuts are optional. I added them but I didn't chop them so they were really big. I think I'd chop them next time.

Also, as already mentioned, there is way more sugar than needed in this recipe. 500g/17 ounces, when you consider there's already nearly 400g of sweet cooking chocolate in it, is just absurd. There was no way I was doing that.


Special Utensils or Cookware: None at all. This is the best kind of recipe. Open your cupboard. You're bound to find everything you need already, if you already bake.

Repeatability: No problem. I'll do these again any time. I'm particularly keen to try Nigella's suggested variations, like adding other kinds of nuts, or substituting half the nuts with dried cherries, or white chocolate chips, or shredded coconut. I like the sound of all of those!

Sauciness: I think 2 huge blocks of chocolate and a bunch of nuts and then stacking a big pile of them up on your best Villeroy and Boch blue glass plate with candles makes for a decadent and beautiful treat. Thumbs up from me.


Overall pleasure level: I'm giving them a 7. I do like them a lot and will continue to experiment.

Lest any of you worry about how Sean and I are going to get through that enormous stack, rest assured most of them are gone, but not into our tummies. No, I sent loads of them to work with Sean so that a bunch of public servants could have a calorie fix at morning tea. I believe they went down a treat.