Carrot Top

Honestly what concerns me most about reading this book is the foreword written by Jack Katz that says: "This is an important book for all theorists of the self." Honestly, my head almost hit the keyboard as I was struck with a sudden, intense urge to take a long nap.

I really wish you hadn't done that. Isn't there some sort of international law which forbids redirecting unsuspecting folks onto pages with photos of cheesecake that give off this terribly awesome aura of desirability first thing in the morning? Yes, my recipe has flour in it, and it is soft and creamy through and through, like the one you showed. The baking time for mine is longer, though - and the top of the cake literally rises above the top of the cakepan and sort of sits there shimmering in a tantalizing sort of way. There is no sense of "undercookedness" yet there is that softness. Downside - again - as with so many fine things in life it must be paid attention to immediately. You wait on it, it does not wait on you. Sigh. Yet this finesse is worth it. It is good, very good - later or even refrigerated and later. But never does the moment return with exactitude of that first bite at the right time. And of course, in a business sense, this translates to not being suitable for a high level of production and/or distribution.

This is an interesting note, and it seems to me to be apt. A book (and here I can think of at least one other example recently discussed that would give rise to the same sort of passionate questionings, definings, and defenses) can be "taken" in different ways by different readers. Just as with all things in life. Your sense of the humor that lies in the book is apparent, Jamie. This is a wonderful thing, for to my mind there is absolutely nothing in the world better than a feeling of being tickled merrily into an appreciation of the subtleties that the world *is*. The funny bone, if well exercised (and with care taken not to offend) is an marvellous tool that can change the world from grey to glorious in a split second. There's always a fine line between being able to enjoy this sort of thing or alternately, having the sense that one is being laughed at, or even more seriously - to feel that the words said might affect life in a negative way. Pah. Yes, I think I'll read the book. Not so much for the "information" presented but to simply feel whatever sense it is that the author does have (for me) - and to assess better how it is that humor perhaps intended can go off the radar. It seems to me as if the core of this question might lay in how the author is dressing him or herself in the process of writing (as Michael has noted above). Interesting.

chili-flavored meringue wrapped round a quail egg which would burst its yolk softly all over the hot meringue as the fork hit it topped with a honey sauce

The only cheesecake I know of that has a similar textural mouthfeel to what you are talking about (but not exactly) through and through the entire cake from first bite to last is a soufleed cheesecake - but it must be served warm, almost directly from the oven. As far as what is marketable, well. . .each client base is different, aren't they. The best way to find out is to ask them directly, if there is any way to do so. . .

Michael - that was a beautiful post.

Probably left over from the summer when it got too hot out? Wasn't it Marilyn Monroe who claimed she always kept her uh panties????? in the freezer?

I guess my point in that rather sarcastic post that I made was to flip the thinking on things over (simply for the exercise of it) and also to attempt to extend the thought process to include some of the ways that we as humans, perhaps do things to ourselves that might be perceived as being hurtful as what we might do to geese. In this discussion, that focus was on the idea of stuffing food into a live thing as being hurtful (or not). Of course, though, humans do have the choice of what they do and finally the geese do not. It was the line that was being drawn that was defining humans as being somehow hurtful to animals in raising geese for food in this manner that disturbed me - my point was that humans have a way of doing whatever things they do to *themselves* as well as to other creatures. Just trying to clear the name of the human race by showing its soft underbelly. No idea why I wanted to do this, ( ) except that to me, when attempting to decide questions that have a moral or ethical part to them, I try to look at the question from each and every angle I can find before finally attempting to come up with an answer that I can live with more than not.

The difference, Stef, is an essential sense of self. In the reality of a child that works, they in some way are being respected. It may be some small respect, and it may not be a lot of money that they get at all, and indeed they may not even be treated all that well in some conditions or places. But to be a slave is to be considered a thing rather than a human being. In a straightforward and direct way. It is demeaning to the core of the essential beliefs most people hold that do make us "human" and therefore of a higher order (or at least most people attempt to aim at this goal). If you are free, the world may not be a perfect place but in every small act you make during the day you are free to change or affect your own reality. If you are a slave, you are not free to do so.

As someone else noted plainly, slavery is wrong. And if it would be stopped, it will take more than a one-pronged attack upon the product that is being sold. Though that is a good start. My first question is: Is slavery actually against the law in the countries where this is occuring? Is it called by the name of "slavery" or by some other term that would shade the act differently for those involved in it? The second question is: Who is selling these children into slavery? Their parents? Or are they being abducted then sold? Are there any laws against this in the countries where this is occuring? Sometimes the laws of different places do allow different things that would seem unacceptable to people from other places. I do wonder if this is truly against the law in these countries, either in either a real or stated sense or in the sense that it is something that a blind eye is cast upon in general. It would seem to me that *if* it is legal or acceptable where it is occuring, then it will continue in some form or manner whether the final product (chocolate in this case) is purchased by outsiders or not. For the real product here, at the core - is not chocolate. It is not merely the bar of chocolate that has profit stamped upon it. Each "slave" has profit stamped upon them - each person that is bought and sold. If the practice is condoned, they will simply be used in another industry. Not to bring too unhappy a note to the discussion, because this is already a difficult thing to have to read about. . .but there are worse industries than the production of chocolate that slavery allows children to be sold into. Children. Not adults. Regardless of where each culture places them in our lives in a sociologic sense, they are still (along with the elderly) the most vulnerable among us. Yes, I think that there should be more discussion about this. It warrants quite an extensive thread. It is just that it might be just plain too difficult for many to look straight in the eye. One wants to run away from these sorts of things. But can we, and remain right with ourselves? I hope not.

Beyond the masculine or feminine determinants of the articles in certain languages, there are vegetables that are considered (based on their individual shapes or some other defining feature as you mention with fennel) masculine or feminine. Eggplant is another example. The "sex" is determined based upon the bottom of the eggplant where the bud would have been before falling off. If the eggplant is more flat there it is one sex, more indented another. It is also believed that one sex is more full of seeds than the other, and the other more solid and meaty. I really don't mind seeds in my eggplants, so I can not remember which is supposed to be which. Perhaps someone else will chime in on this. . . Really I don't know whether this is folklore or "real". Either way, it makes the world a more interesting place. Edited to add this link: Sex and Eggplants

Eh. They'd probably need a lot of massaging or something, first - don't cha think?

Honestly, I think it was very nice (in the best sense of the word) for White Castle to put together something like this, and in the end it really doesn't matter how "fancy" something is, it matters if you enjoy it. And obviously it was fun and the food was good. Can't beat that, really.

If the decision as to moral or ethical finalities comes down to a measurement of anthropomorphism as deductive reasoning, then probably one should bring in the discussion of plants, too. There are several biology professors I know who can argue well and long that plants (even the ones we eat) feel pain. Based on things like stress tests, you know. Personally my own viewpoint turns more often to seeing people who resemble animals (whatever that word would be) or alternately, plants - (people and cornstalks always seem a good comparison to me) in many ways, not in seeing animals who resemble people. Seems a bit self-involved, this anthropomorphism idea.

No, personally I can not think of one. But on the other hand, I think it is just as cruel and hurtful (inhumane?) to see those human beings that inhabit McDonaldland (hmmm. . .Old McDonald had a farm ee ii eii o) shovelling huge double burgers jumbo fries and supersize sodas down their gullets apparently in search of the goal of their own bodies becoming every bit as engorged as any lovely piece of foie gras. What a waste. After all, nobody bothers to make a fine meal out of them.

And it might be even more interesting if what was left for Elijah was this: Aphrodisiac Soda Indeed, perhaps a night quite different from all others.

Sitting in front of me is "Peter Pan No Sugar Added Creamy" peanut butter. Ingredients peanuts, peanut oil, partially hydr veg oils, salt, sucrose. No stirring needed, no separation. It is a new item on the shelves of the market I usually go to (Kroger). The sauce recipe I use is peanut butter (about 1 C); 1 T minced garlic; 1" pc. ginger peeled and chopped; 3/4 C coconut cream; 1 Tbs soy sauce; 1 tsp. hot chili sauce (Chinese). Can't wait to see what you finally come up with!

This menu would suit Bond Girl's vanilla guys she mentioned in her story, don't 'cha think? Sounds sort of like sweet vanilla dreams while floating on a soft toothless cloud. . . Might end up with one seriously enamoured after this meal.

You could always make one of those "porcupine" cakes (individual small oval shaped cake base with buttercream topping and pignolis or slivered almonds stuck in to resemble quills) but instead of just leaving it "au naturel" (looking like a porcupine) make it out of dark chocolate cake, use small dark chocolate slivers to resemble fur, then stencil a white stripe down the back (of confectioners sugar) and add a small tail (of cake). A skunk. Two tiny little evil cinnamon candies for the eyes. . .and a note that says "You stink" and you're set. Hide a ripe durian under the table for extra effect.

I hate to say it, Grub - but the bread does not look bad enough for this thread. However, I LOVE your idea above. Please document it with photographs so that all bakers of hard loaves everywhere will be able to do the same. . .(P.S. Bad bagels might be particularly good for knocking someone out with. . .)

And some fine apron-strings they are. . .Elizabeth David's recipes are mostly firmly ingrained upon my memory - there's something about the form that remains in my mind "just as written" and Jane Grigson, well. . .I'd like to see her and Fergus Henderson together some day. That would be fun. I am curious though, since Onigiri had asked for cookbooks that dealt with "normal" cuisine i.e. mostly American (for Americans, anyway ) since you live in Japan, is there a *normal* Japanese cookbook that you "keep going back to"?

Yes. . .mine is terribly battered also. And yet it soldiers on. . . I am always startled by the encylopedic magnitude of the thing - and his comments often make me do a double-take (which is sort of fun ) It is good to know that the book lives on, on other bookshelves besides my own.

The sauce is put together in the mini-foodprocessor then is poured over the rest of the recipe which is already hot and almost-ready-to-serve in a wok on the top of the stove. Just a few more minutes of heat and some tossing together and all is set. (The rest of the ingredients are previously-cooked noodles and stir-fry veggies. . .oh! with chicken or shrimp or beef sometimes, too.) I've never heated the sauce separately before tossing with the other ingredients - it does seem possible that it might break if brought up to a certain temp, even with the peanut butter shortcut. Yummy stuff. (And thanks, about the story. . . ) P.S. Scubadoo, how do you heat your sauce (if you do?)

Here's my story of a desperate meal: The Moon is Made of Green Cheese (Post #5)

Well - this probably is not what you want to do for it might not be considered "authentic" - but I do a similar recipe but have always used the shortcut of simply using unsweetened peanut butter rather than the peanuts themselves. Not sure about "exact" proportions but I guesstimate as to what the peanuts *would* be in measurement after the intended chopping-up/pureeing then use that amount of peanut butter -probably for 1C peanuts it might be around a little more than a half cup peanut butter? Anyway - it does work. Just an off-the-cuff answer. Probably someone can come up with a much more scientific one that will help, too.