Carrot Top

I would guess the right word would be "roasted". You should feel no guilt, about scarfing the skin or about not being able to remember the past tense of a word. Sometimes I forget my kids names and call them "Drewtin" or "Kr-Drew" rather than Kristen and Drew. It's better than it was, though. I used to holler out the dog's name when I meant to holler out their names. I wonder if a lack of roast chicken skin can cause memory loss. If so, I'd better go get some, *now*. So he/she is giving away chicken neck skin and fat? For free? Wow. I'm tellin' ya, Oregon is the place to be.

All of those are good recipes, and I would like each one once in a while, too. Somehow, though, these children that used to eat everything in childhood have become more particular in early teenager-hood and seem to be having a phase where they only eat certain favorite foods and chicken, any way at all (except for the skin) is just not a favorite. Believe me, I've tried. But I've read that phases in this change as children grow as do so many other things. So I wait, and figure that if this is the worst thing that happens, we're all lucky. Meanwhile, it is truly a shame that I can't send all that extra roast chicken meat through the computer screen to you, Ruth. P.S. Speaking of chicken skin, I wish there were a live poultry market near me. I've seen grown adults literally almost start to slaver and drool, with their eyes opening wider and becoming somewhat glazed with desire, after a bite of the roasted skin from a fresh, never-frozen, non-battery bird.

A beautiful photo, Hiroyuki. Happy Spring! (Is there a saying for that in Japanese, I wonder?) I won't ask which of the nimonos you preferred, to preserve family harmony. They both look delicious, and healthy, too!

Ah. I hope everyone knows by now that once in a blue moon I exaggerate the situation for effect. Nevertheless, I could cook six birds and still not have enough crispy delightful chicken skin for this family, though, and really we're not nuts about chicken in general, preferring beef, seafood, or pasta, "with" whatever. Have you had a Cornish game hen recently, Kougin Aman? I can't compare their skins to a chicken's, though the meat is tastier in general for a battery-bred bird. To me, the skin is so much thinner and lighter, delicate . . . it just doesn't give me the rush a good crispy chicken skin does.

I'm waiting for them to develop a chicken that's more skin than meat, Ruth.

I used to do that when I was a secret agent. Every time I got captured by the other side, I'd eat my secret notes with happy lip-licking noises, then stick out my tongue and grin at them, valiant and true. Now, I am engaged in the War of the Chicken Skins. The roast chicken leaves the oven and at that exact moment the hordes descend upon me. They are two in size, yet they are awesome in determination. The noise level alone could leave a woman senseless. Each one wants the chicken skin, for him or herself only. Precise drawing of a map upon the crisp skin of boundary lines (dark soy sauce on the tip of a wooden skewer is my way, though there may be others), followed by gentle disbursement of the skin itself (no time for fanciness here, for we are at war) is the only answer, but it is not a good one. There is never enough skin to go around, and one knows that war will yet again erupt the next time that aroma emerges from the kitchen.

This could end up either great or dreadful but the thought came of the taste a red wine toddy has, which can be similar to prune juice in some way. Here's what I'd try: prune juice warmed (mulled) with lemon peel (or maybe orange would be better with prune?) and good cinnamon. A tad or sugar or not, depending on the balance. Served in a small portion in a demitasse cup with maybe a small square of dark chocolate on the side (I'd guess that the chocolate taste would blend well and minimize the "pruniness" besides adding a touch of elegance that prune juice normally does not hold). Well, really. Add a dram of good brandy to this and it would go down quite easy.

I think at this point some editors should post who are willing to work for food. (As in, "The world of food blogging eagerly awaits your services" )

Here's some blogs I'd like to see - different disciplines viewed through the lens of, of linked to, food . . .food in literature (as written by someone who reads a lot, who knows a lot about both food and critical reading); food in art (written by someone who knows art history, who also knows food); the same for architecture, the same for any number of subjects. Food in cars, anyone? I'd like to see more than recipes, restaurants, and food porn, in other words.

I guess that the idea of a *daily* blog is where this danger lies, Sandy. Thank goodness there is no law that says one has to add to a blog, daily, though. It's a way of ensuring audience involvement, yes - but as noted before many people don't think of their blogs within a specific business model that would require that, for whatever reason it would be required for. A blog can be whatever one wants it to be, really. We don't need to draw a box around it, I hope.

You definitely need to meet andisenji. She probably has many ideas for things you can add.

Why do you not return to them, Sam? What is it that keeps your finger from making that click of destiny?

Happy Spring! Today starts the approach to the Vernal Equinox, where day and night are balanced. This pleases me, as a Libra. There are foods, beyond the upcoming Easter foods, that celebrate this day, in various cultures. Afghan Cooking............................................................... The Old Ways................................................................................ Traditions, Romania.................................................................................. Higan............................................................................. Sham al-Naseem............................................................................ Many good and delicious ways to welcome the season.

Your "appeal rating" ranks much much higher, at least in my book, than Martha's does, mizducky. Congrats on the new regime. That soup looked astonishingly rich-tasting.

Those are a fig ment of the imagination, I'm afraid. Figs can have shoulders (like humans) that can have chips upon them. Sometimes the chips get knocked off, or fall off. The figs can then grow larger, more delicious, better in all ways. A chip is what one makes it. And a chip can be well used for excellent purposes, too. But everyone knows that. I've often had it said to me, "Betcha can't eat just one."

(Pig) intestines are used in traditional (French) recipes for sausage, not just as casings but also chopped up and added to the belly meat to make andouille and andouilletes. A Peruvian variation on this sounds delicious, to me. Maybe (if you didn't see sausage around too much) most sausage-making is done at home so that the family can adjust the seasonings to their particular tastes? P.S. Found this, this morning on a South American travel site which it seems impossible to link to:

Okay, yes, I can get that. And agree. I'm not sure, myself, whether what I want to ask for for Christmas would be a live-in editor or a live-in hairstylist. Maybe both. What luxury. But is food-writing only opinion, criticism, journalism, or news? Is it ever fiction? Or do you walk outside the circle when you write fiction that is inspired by, and "about", in ways, food?

I'm curious as to how that statement might be translated . . . i.e. did she mean that folks in foodwriting just stuck to one particular topic that they knew in food? Or did she mean that they wrote the same story over and over just in different words (in that the timbre of the story was the same but the facts fit to the timbre?) or that they stuck to one writing discipline rather than expanding into others that might do similar things in different ways? I hope someone knows what I mean by this question.

I find foodblogs vastly more entertaining than karaoke.

And gosh. The thought just came to me that eGullet itself was started "just for fun" by a couple of guys. So who knows what might happen to some of those happy little bloggers out there just doing it for fun. I guess, really, anything can happen.

What is work to one may be pleasure to another. Again, I'll reference cooking. Not all the chefs in the world cook solely for a "warm feeling".

I'm curious as to what "Serious Eats" is considered to be, by most. A professional blog, or something else? What would you call it? Is it a horse of a different color, or not?

In a sense, I can equate "non-professional" blogs with home cooking. As an activity that is done solely for the pleasure of one's own small group, without any intent to influence or affect the world-at-large. No "late-breaking" news, nothing about "the business world" - just a simple (but often deep, as is evidenced by those who post to eG about their home cooking)pleasure enjoyed by those who do it. In this sense, the "non-professional" blogs are interesting, for as one can not measure the cuisine of a nation by looking solely at its resturants and chefs, one can not measure the real "news" of food in the world by merely examining the professionally produced and shaped efforts.

Yes, but as with that elusive "great meal" at a restaurant that happens serendipitously, without planning, without intent, without focus, a pure and unexpected gift given yet maybe not replicable again, it could be that there are blogs or even posts in blogs that one really enjoys yet the blog does not go on forever. A free-from sort of enjoyment, far from any business-like approach. The very independent nature of blogs allows this, and I feel that I've enjoyed some blogs here and there very much, that finally, are never to be seen again. I'm curious as to what you mean when you use the word "important" in the area of food in the last sentence, Tess, though I agree with the difficulty of identifying "nerve centers". What variety of "importance" do you mean? ...................................................... Personally, I like discussion boards very much (as one might guess ). But I've written things that (although enjoyed by those responding to it) were pulled off a site, deleted by management as not being part of what they do. So those writing that do not fit into the policies and procedures, rules and regulations, that any given discussion board may have, still have the great opportunity for expression (freedom of the press, that much-touted thing?) on a blog, without hands being tied. Whether this is financially profitable or not, it broadens the reader's opportunities or chances for a variety of readings or forms of expression as there is no pattern drawn that the writer has to fit. Each to his or her own.

When I read your question last night, Sam, first I thought (as you did) of how very overwhelming the sheer mass of blogs are, and got slightly tired even thinking of it. But that was last night, and now it is morning, and sunshine brings different thoughts. We're a world of consumers. We consume media in masses, and it is easy on this superhighway (eh. cheap language shot there but whatever ). A click of the finger and we have it before us, whatever it may be. And a lot of it is very good. Some of it is excellent. As markemorse said above, bloggers do this for different reasons. But all of them do it from their heart, and it is a gift to us all when we click on their work. Whether we "like" it or not, it is still a free gift, given from a real live individual who exists, "somewhere", who we might run into on the street, anywhere. For they *are* everywhere - the very essence of "globalization" in real terms, not in reports on paper or in economic studies. I think blogs are going to become like blue jeans. There are never too many, and they come in all styles and varieties. And people love them.