When Fanny Cradock first hit our television screens back in the 1950s and 1960s, she wasn't afraid of looking her viewers straight in the eye while whipping up the batter for her famous doughnuts.
Or French-inspired souffles and eclairs.
Her sidekick Johnnie even wore a monocle, the better to create the illusion that focusing on the audience, and engaging them directly, was the raison d'etre of the cookery show.
Scroll forward to 2013 and the genre is a different kettle of fish altogether. For chefs (as they now always are) no longer address us square-on. Rather, they tend to speak to someone just out of view as they describe how to spatchcock a chicken, marinade a leg of lamb or bake the perfect scone.
This is really annoying, because it creates an uncomfortable sense of exclusion, as if we, lowly hoi polloi, don't matter as much as the cosy – invisible – clique behind the camera.
As far as I can see, it's the male chefs who are most guilty of this. Step forward Jamie Oliver, Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall and – yes – even Paul Hollywood, the dashing Great British Bake Off judge whose new TV series has just started.
Maybe they think it looks arty and informal but frankly I think it's downright rude. After all, it's we who pay the licence fee for the privilege of learning from them. Surely they can pay us a bit of respect.
Delia Smith and Nigella Lawson, who like Cradock are cooks rather than chefs, don't do it. Neither does Gizzi Erskine, one of the freshest faces on the scene.
Why are chefs so hellbent on avoiding eye contact? Is it because they're shy and prefer being hidden out of sight in the kitchen? Or is it because they have something to hide? I think we should be told.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article