This is not a pie at all but a cake ... . ...and for some reason the addition of chocolate brought the word 'cream' into play. - Nigella Lawson 
Unusual or substituted ingredients: Just Nigella's usual fat-free fare of double cream, milk, chocolate, eggs, sugar and butter (and a few other bits and pieces. Nigella uses her victoria sponge recipe for the cake bit. Who knows if this is traditional, but it works fine - a fairly plain solid-ish cake is probably best I suspect.
Special utensils or cookware: I made the Victoria sponge part using the food processor - last time I made it I did it the traditional way, but I figured I'd try the magimix this time.
Repeatability: This cake is pretty fussy to make - you have to do the cakes, then the custardy bit (creme patissiere) and then the chocolate ganache - the ganache part is done in a saucepan, using an electric hand mixer - optional is the grooving part described above - and so it does require you to set aside some time for the baking etc, and then the construction. But it's an impressive looking thing (or at least, it would be if the filling didn't all run out) and so is a good choice for impressing non-baking guests!
Sauciness: C'mon, anything with chocolate ganache (with plenty left over) is bound to be a bit saucy!
Overall pleasure level: Hmm, 6.5 out of 10 for this. Would have scored higher but for my disappointment after the construction phase.
Yes, this is a cake. And it doesn't have cream in it (well, not really). But it does have chocolate, and it does have a custardy filling. And it's a layer cake. What more could you want?
The verdict: It's pretty good in the eating, although the construction failure left me disappointed. The picture in the book shows a very thick, very yellow custardy filling, with thick chocolate ganache just oozing slightly over the side of the cake.
The verdict: It's pretty good in the eating, although the construction failure left me disappointed. The picture in the book shows a very thick, very yellow custardy filling, with thick chocolate ganache just oozing slightly over the side of the cake.
Yeah, my version didn't quite go like that. I guess I didn't cook the creme patissiere filling enough, and even though I was rocking on the chocolate ganache making to 'Born Slippy' by Underworld, I probably didn't beat it enough either. Hence the filling and icing ran right off the cake onto the cake plate. And the table. Sigh. It still tasted good!
Unusual or substituted ingredients: Just Nigella's usual fat-free fare of double cream, milk, chocolate, eggs, sugar and butter (and a few other bits and pieces. Nigella uses her victoria sponge recipe for the cake bit. Who knows if this is traditional, but it works fine - a fairly plain solid-ish cake is probably best I suspect.
Special utensils or cookware: I made the Victoria sponge part using the food processor - last time I made it I did it the traditional way, but I figured I'd try the magimix this time.That might explain why the cakes turned out somewhat flatter than I would have liked?
Repeatability: This cake is pretty fussy to make - you have to do the cakes, then the custardy bit (creme patissiere) and then the chocolate ganache - the ganache part is done in a saucepan, using an electric hand mixer - optional is the grooving part described above - and so it does require you to set aside some time for the baking etc, and then the construction. But it's an impressive looking thing (or at least, it would be if the filling didn't all run out) and so is a good choice for impressing non-baking guests!
Sauciness: C'mon, anything with chocolate ganache (with plenty left over) is bound to be a bit saucy!
Overall pleasure level: Hmm, 6.5 out of 10 for this. Would have scored higher but for my disappointment after the construction phase.
|