Khadija
-
Posts
275 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Help Articles
Posts posted by Khadija
-
-
I'm from Toronto, but it has been about five years since I last lived there. I'll be back in the city for a conference and some visiting with family and friends in a couple of weeks, and I've been thinking about where to have casual meals (especially lunches). Every time I go to Toronto these days, I can vaguely remember some of the places I like and where they are, but my memory is getting too foggy to remember a lot of specific things, like names, of restaurants. I'm good at saying "there is this Malaysian place on Baldwin St.," and then dragging someone there only to find out that it has been closed for years. And I'm sure there are new places that I don't know about.
In particular, I'm thinking about where to go on a lunch date with an old flame. I haven't seen him in about ten years, and he just recently looked me up. We are both in committed relationships, and not looking to rekindle romance, so things like oysters and candlelight are not necessary. However, given our history, I kind of hope to pretend that I am somewhat
; that is, in the know about where to go for a great casual lunch. We are both grad students, we will both probably be hanging out downtown, in the vicinity of UofT, pre and post lunch, and we will not want to break the bank for this type of occasion. Any ideas? -
I don't really want to drag this out too much further, but... By "white" I don't mean "caucasian". I mean a host of things associated with the idea of neutrality and generic-ness. Whiteness means Anglo or Anglo-European, but it is defined only very loosely by geography and skin tone. Just which people count as white is a question that requires more sophisticated empirical investigation than I can provide. In general, I think that "whiteness" is a certain type of culturally dominant position and it comes in degrees.
I am from Toronto. My mother is Chinese and my father is Canadian-born with English and Scottish parents. My Chinese relatives don't consider me to be Chinese, they consider me to be "white." As I mentioned upthread, I have met other Chinese people who also consider me to be "white." I know Black people who consider me to be white. Is this because I have exceptionally white skin? I don't think so. On the other hand, all my life, people who are whiter than me have asked me "where are you from?" When I tell them that I'm from Toronto, they are never satisfied. They always say, "No, what's your ethnicity?" When I tell them about my parents, I am often told that my background is "exotic." People also tend to ask my mother where she's from or what her ethnicity is. Nobody ever asks my father where he is from or what his ethnicity is. My partner is from Toronto. His parents are English and Dutch. Nobody ever asks him about his ethnicity. Why are people interested in my ethnicity and my mother's ethnicity and not my father's or my partner's? I, in particular, do not have very many interesting stories to tell. I'm from a WASP neighbourhood in Toronto. Even when people know this, some of them continue to believe that I'm exotic. Why do I seem so exotic when my professed ethnic heritage includes just as many different geographical locations as would my partner's professed ethnic heritage (if anybody ever asked him)?
I know people who have gone through life thinking that they're white, only to find out that, in certain circumstances, they're not. For example, a second-generation Greek friend, who I consider to be white, certainly whiter than me, was asked by a British professor about his experiences of discrimination. He replied that, as a white male, he didn't think he experienced a lot of discrimination. She looked at him very strangely and said, "but you're not white."
I don't think that most people think "non-Judeo-Christian" or "not white" when they use the term "ethnic." But people, including myself, do not tend to use categories self-consciously. How people think they use categories, and how dictionaries define the words that refer to categories, is not always particularly revealing of how the categories actually operate. My worries about "ethnic" are not about what people's self-conscious intentions are when they use the term. I am more interested in typically unnoticed problems with the social arrangements that govern ordinary use of the term.
I have no doubt that many well-intentioned people simply mean to say something like "from a foreign geographical location" when they use the term "ethnic." The problem with this, especially in North American contexts, is that whether a person or thing is considered "ethnic" does not always depend on their coming from a foreign geographical location. If that were true, either I would be considered a generic Canadian (not "ethnic" and "exotic") or my partner would be considered "ethnic" and "exotic" (not a generic Canadian). Also, Native Americans and Native Canadians would be considered the least ethnic people around.
-
I can't stand eggs. Not in any form, not even flan. The smell turns my stomach, my husband only gets to eat eggs when he's at a breakfast meeting away from home.
He hates cold cheese (like on a cheese plate) but will eat it if it is melted (like pizza). In fact, if he's served a plate of pasta that has globs of fresh mozzarella that are not fully melted, he'll make them take it back and melt it.
I have always loved all cheese, but I went through a phase as a kid where I decided that unmelted cheese was always preferable to melted cheese. I began to demand "raw" cheese. My parents thought I was referring to cheese made from raw milk, and couldn't figure out how I'd become such a dairy snob.
-
In order of hate:
1. Mayonaisse. When I was a child, I didn't even like being in the same room as an open jar of mayonaisse, lest I catch a bit of the scent. I've actually made mayonaisse, for my own culinary edification -- less disgusting than from a jar, but definitely not edible. I hate other things in what I identify as the bad side of the "white creamy family": sour cream, ranch dressing, caesar salad with egg (I make mine without egg, probably sacrilege, but I don't care). But there is a good side of the white creamy family: yogurt, cream cheese (formerly on the bad side, but somehow just moved, magically).
2. Spiced, cured meats, like salami. The smell makes me gag. Love things like prosciutto, though.
3. Any fish from a can. I don't care if it's olive oil packed tuna. It's gross to me.
4. Cake doughnuts. Tim Horton's, Krispy Kreme, genuine old-fashioned homeade, whatever. I always thought cake doughnuts were just deep-fried cake. I'm not a big sweets fan, but in theory deep fried cake doesn't sound bad. But no matter who makes them they always have a distinctive cake-doughnutty taste that I hate. I do love fresh, yeast doughnuts with nothing but granulated sugar.
I don't really get the big deal about chocolate, but it does taste kind of nice. The problem is that it is rich and, perhaps because I am not used to eating sweets, even a small bit tends to spoil my appetite. Then I'm always mad at chocolate for preventing me from having something better.
-
Khadija,
Thanks for your clarification. I didn't mean to imply that you were being necessarily simplistic. I was trying to clarify my feelings from my first post - I wanted to be perfectly clear that people in other countries have similar standards to ourselves; in my (humble) opinion it's not the culture that results in the dirty stores, it's other factors. And I just felt that some posts were offering explanations that suggested culture was part of it; and excused it for those reasons....but that was my reaction, and rereading the thread I see that that's not true of any one post; it was my reaction to the thread as a whole. I'm guilty of projecting my own sensitivities! I apologize for misreading things. I also clearly misunderstand the true meaning of cultural relativism, as my understanding of that term was the, er, shallow sense that you described in your first paragraph. So, off to Wikipedia for further reading.
Interesting, about the use of "ethnic" as a term - I used to teach from an ESL book that asked students what their favourite "ethnic" food was - well, this was a completely useless task, as what the book designated as "ethnic" food was to them, simply "food". This chapter drove me batty, and I was angered by the [White, Western] assumptions made. Especially in an ESL text! In the end, I simply taught the students that it meant food from countries or cultures not your own. I'm not sure if that was the best definition, but it got us through the unit. I think I'll go look up that thread!
Turnabout is fairplay, however, and the Koreans and Vietnamese I've talked to at length consider "Western" an ethnicity, and consider Western food to be hamburgers, pizza, spaghetti, cola, and so on; westerners eat this every day; which is why everyone there is so fat. I've had the hardest time trying to tell them that a) the west is very diverse (read: not just America) and b) people in the west eat different things every day. They do not eat hamburgers for lunch and pizza for dinner.
Overall, this thread is very interesting to me, as I have spent a lot of time in ethnic western stores in my years in Asia, and have found them to be in the same condition as similarly themed (imported, hard to find ingredients aimed at recent immigrants or expatriates) food stores in Canada.
No problem, nakji. Like many other philosophers, I think I tend to get too overheated when the subject of cultural relativism comes up.
I think your point about considering "Western" to be an ethnicity is very interesting. Once, I lived in a house with two people from China, who were in Canada for the first time (as grad students). It was a funny experience. My mom is Chinese and my dad British. I usually don't self-identify as white, although I usually don't self-identify as Chinese either. My roomates definitely did not think I was Chinese. They didn't think Canadian-Born-Chinese (CBCs (or ABCs for American-Born-Chinese) were Chinese either, but they did not think I was a CBC. They thought I was Canadian, which meant Western, which meant white. They would regularly observe my behaviour and make comments about "the Canadian way" of doing this and that. Most of their observations had to do with cooking and eating habits, since we usually only saw eachother when we were in the kitchen. A lot of what they observed were my personal habits (the bread I ate was always very heavy German monastery bread). They also observed habits I had in virtue of being a student (I would make a bunch of dishes on weekends and freeze them in individual servings for quick meals). No matter how many times I told them that my eating habits were not representative of Canadians' eating habits, they would not stop referring to the way I did things as "the Canadian way." One of them would always say that "Canadians are fat because they like sweet food, and Chinese are not fat because they don't eat sweet food." She kept boxes of Oreos in her bedroom, and I never touched a sweet. I was thinner than her. She didn't ever stop saying this. Some of them adopted my "Canadian" custom of making homeade frozen dinners, as it turned out to be very useful in their own student lives.
-
This thread touches on a lot of very interesting issues. I'd like to return to the question of "cultural prejudice," because I think it is both important and in need of clarification. It strikes me that a number of responses to this question interpret the idea of cultural prejudice as straightforwardly pejorative, and I take issue with this. If one holds an evaluative stance (either positive or negative) towards a type of state of affairs and associates that type of state of affairs primarily with certain cultures that are identified as "ethnic" or "not generic", then it seems pretty obvious that cultural bias is involved. The conventional Western terms "ethnic" and "generic" are culturally biased, because they are meant to distinguish between things that are "not white" and things that are "white."[...]
Agreed entirely, Khadija. And the other thing that the usual(?) usage of "ethnic" does is to lump many almost entirely dissimilar cuisines and peoples together (dissimilar except for being human and being treated as a marked category). You might be interested in a lively discussion we had back in 2003: "Ethnic" food, Useless designation?
For the record, I don't use "ethnic" to refer to cuisine. I find it much more useful to refer to Chinese cuisine, Japanese cuisine, Korean cuisine, etc., or regional subdivisions thereof.
That said, as various people stated in the linked thread, we know what people are talking about when they mention "ethnic" restaurants or grocery stores, and the word is obviously a useful shorthand for many.
Thanks, Pan. I am very interested in the discussion on the thread you mention. I have similar worries about the term "ethnic." I couldn't agree more with your point about how the term "ethnic" tends to eclipse differences between the groups of people the term is meant to designate. Similarly, as I think you point out, terms like "generic" and "mainstream" tend to etiolate the differences, including ethnic differences, between people they are mean to designate. Thanks for the link.
-
I'd like to re-iterate my point here, because I think it's getting lost in cultural relativism. I don't think that there is a pre-disposition in any culture to be more accepting of dirty/dusty/weeping/misordered cans or other food containers. Whenever I travel, I make it a point to search out food stores; I get a kick out of strolling through foreign supermarkets.
I've been in food stores or supermarkets all across Asia, and have shopped regularly in both Vietnam and Korea. The food stores here are full of clean, bright cans and bottles facing forward. Nothing is weeping anything. Nothing is dusty. People care a lot about the cleanliness and order of the products. They do not have lowered standards. They are not "used to" eating this way and are more accepting of it than us in their home countries.
But
When I visit special "western" ethnic markets; that is to say, small stores specializing in western food products that have been imported to Asia, such as cereal; bottled spaghetti sauce; Macaroni and Cheese; corn chips; various cheeses; lunch meats, etc.; these stores have been dusty, crowded, and jumbled full of cans and bottles in various states of disrepair. Are all the Vietnamese people who visit wondering, "Goodness, these foreigners who shop here must be used to such dirty stores! They must have special immunity for eating this stuff"?
So I think it's not where the shoppers are from that matters. It's the fact that
1) The products have come a long way and have suffered in transit and
2) shoppers in these stores have little choice when it comes to purchasing these products, so they must accept them in whatever form they find them in.
So to sum up: [Asian] people do not have lower standards for the condition of the products that they purchase BUT people who are buying products that remind them of home and can't find anywhere else do.
I agree with most of this, but I'd like to make one thing clear. In my post upthread, I spoke to the issue of cultural bias, but I was not making an argument from "cultural relativism" about there being different standards of anything in different cultures, or the possible legitimacy thereof. I also did not mean to say that I endorse the view that so-called ethnic markets are dirtier than so called generic or Western supermarkets. In fact, in my own armchair sociological observation, I tend to associate different types (not levels) of cleanliness and orderliness in markets with different socio-economic conditions (which are surely intertwined in complex ways with ethnicity). But armchair sociological observations are what they are. If there are any worthwhile generalisations to be made about some delineable standards of cleanliness in culturally marked types of food markets, then the issue is an empirical one, which should definitely not be settled from the armchair (or computer desk).
My point was that when we make evaluations about groups of people that we identify in terms of cultural markers, and we are uncomfortable about possible bias in our evaluations, we should not ask the question: "Am I culturally biased?" The important issue is whether cultural bias distorts perception in some relevant and problematic way. To ask this question does not make one a "cultural relativist" in a shallow sense (i.e., someone who believes something like "everything is relative" or "if its your culture, its okay"). Asking the question also does not commit one to accepting that one's initial armchair sociological observations about certain cultures are legitimate. On the contrary, by drawing attention to one's own perspective, the question is meant to force one to reflect critically on where one's folk sociological observations are coming from. This is an armchair activity that I would say is, to some extent, useful.
As I say, I probably agree about there not being worse standards of cleanliness in non-Western cultures. And while I am not deliberately trying to turn the discussion away from food, I think some of the terms of the discussion are so problematic to the extent that they distort the part of the discussion that is about food. Specifically, I don't think the term "relativism" should be brought up unless one's usage is very clearly explained. Otherwise, accusations of relativism generally dismiss some point of view by implying that it is premised on a shallow version relativism that no one actually holds (e.g., the versions described in the above paragraph). From my point of view (I am an academic philosopher), this is very problematic.
-
Okay, to reiterate, I'm not talking about produce here, where "dirt" -- otherwise known as "earth" -- is to be expected. The produce in the Chinatown markets is fresher and cheaper than what's in conventional markets, and I have no qualms about buying it.
What I'm referring to is dented and rusty cans, bottles and jars that are weeping their contents, and other signs that the integrity of previously manufactured products has been breached.
Some interesting points have been brought out in this discussion about imported products not always faring well in transit, and larger markets being able to afford more staff to dust and arrange the merchandise.
But I still get the impression that general grunginess of shelf-stable areas of the store is more acceptable in ethnic markets, and I'm still curious as to why.
This thread touches on a lot of very interesting issues. I'd like to return to the question of "cultural prejudice," because I think it is both important and in need of clarification. It strikes me that a number of responses to this question interpret the idea of cultural prejudice as straightforwardly pejorative, and I take issue with this. If one holds an evaluative stance (either positive or negative) towards a type of state of affairs and associates that type of state of affairs primarily with certain cultures that are identified as "ethnic" or "not generic", then it seems pretty obvious that cultural bias is involved. The conventional Western terms "ethnic" and "generic" are culturally biased, because they are meant to distinguish between things that are "not white" and things that are "white."
HOWEVER, this does not mean that anyone who uses these terms is a bad person. My opinion is that we would be better off if Westerners didn't divide the world up into "ethnic" things and "generic" things. But I am no less guilty of doing this than most people (and I am not white). Moreoever, I don't think that experiencing aversion to the conditions of some "ethnic" markets makes one guilty of racism or some other equally horrible moral crime. The really important question seems to be whether the aversion is unwarranted.
One way to approach the question is to try to discern whether or not "our" standards of cleanliness are better or worse than "their's." I think this is a mistake. A person may be able to change his or her current standards to some extent. But if that person has tried to be open minded by is still really disgusted by things like bottles leaking their contents, and continues to be enculturated in a society in which bottles leaking their contents is typically deemed unacceptable, changing one's own (or possibly someone else's) standards is going to be a pretty frustrating task.
Another way to approach the question is to try to discern how the aversion affects one's attitudes and behaviour towards the people associated with the aversion. Does the seemingly dirty market make the people associated with it seem dirty, less civilised, backwards, etc.? I think this is a more fruitful approach.
I really hope that this post does not offend anyone, because that is not my intention. I think the question of cultural prejudice is extremely important and difficult, and I also think that it is extremely relevant to those of us who want to discuss food culture thoughtfully.
-
Ok, attempted again to do hash browns this weekend, with much more success than normal.
Procedure: I took a slightly older raw Russet, peeled it, and grated. I pressed the grated bits between paper towels to dry them. I added about 3 tsb canola oil to a hot pan, and let the oil heat. I added the potatoes (when one little piece bubbled gently in the oil, I deemed it hot enough) and let them sit (about 1/3 cup shredded potatoes - half a big potato). They were frying nicely, bubbling and crackling etc. AFter about 6 min I flipped the whole thing - nice a brown on the bottom. Gave them 5 min more, and put them on paper towels to drain.
Result: Pretty good. The potatoes were crispy crunchy and tasted good. I did, however, feel that they still soaked up too much oil - not much was left in the pan afterwards. They difinitely tasted "oily", which wasn't bad, but the potato taste was less than I expected. Still, better than I have ever made!
So, if they indeed soaked up too much oil - was the oil still not hot enough when I added the taters?
I squeeze the liquid from the grated potatoes with a potato ricer. This makes the grated potato very dry, and less likely to soak up excess oil.
-
P-Diddy said that cooking is one of the really great "trends" right now.
-
I don't really expect the bread maker to make better pasta than the traditional hand method -- after all, I've never noticed anyone else on egullet talking about pasta in the bread maker. I don't even expect it to be easier, though it might be.
I did think that perhaps it might be convenient for the reason Anna pointed out -- that sometimes in cooking you want to just "set it and forget it." Stick the stuff in the machine and then make a sauce or something. If the bread maker is really a pain to clean, then maybe it's not worth it. But it does look like there's just one non-stick bowl to deal with. I also thought that the contained environment of the bread maker might provide the advantage of ensuring that the pasta dough doesn't dry during the kneading a resting process. I know that I can do things to avoid dryness when I make the dough by hand, but under certain circumstances it's nice to have one less thing to worry about.
Despite what I say above, I don't find making pasta dough to be terribly onerous, and I don't think I'm a lazy cook. I'm not talking about replacing the hand method with the machine method. Like I say, out of pure curiosity, I'm just interested in how the bread maker does. I guess the best thing to do is to try it myself. I'll report back.
-
Today, I acquired a bread maker from a friend who is moving and needed to get rid of some stuff. I have never used a bread maker, and I haven't particularly wanted one because I am comfortable making bread dough by hand or sometimes in my food processor. However, I am always up for a cooking experiment, so I took the bread maker just to see how it works.
After examining the bread maker, I have found that it has a setting for pasta dough. Has anyone tried making pasta dough in the bread maker, and if so would anyone recommend it? If so, why? If not, why not? As in the case of bread dough, my interest in using the machine for pasta is not motivated by any aversions to doing the work by hand. I'm just curious about different methods of making things, their pros and cons, etc.
-
I have the opposite problem to yours. I buy whole organic chickens and know exactly what to do with the breasts and bones, but the leg and thighs always pose a dilemma for me as I'm not a fan of brown meat. I usually end up braising them for a lunch for my sweetie.
Actually, Khadija, I think I may have solved both our problems; I'll buy the chickens, take off the breasts and deliver the legs and thighs to your door!
Have you ever boned the entire chicken? I have stuffed and rolled it, and roasted it atop potatoes. Yum.
Shaya, we can trade chicken parts anytime
! I have boned the entire chicken before, although I really like using the different parts of the chicken for different applications. Where do you buy your organic chickens? I know Great Ocean (or Planet Organic now, I guess) has them frozen. Do you have a source for fresh? -
Plus, with dim sum, you generally choose from a selection of very traditional dim sum offerings. With a tasting menu, one of the main points is to try original (i.e., non-traditional) dishes. The similarity between dim sum and tasting menus is limited to the small sized portions of food.
-
Sheila, I have roasted the breasts unsplit with the bone in at high temperature for a short period of time, but I find that the meat cooks less evenly (and thus winds up drier) than when I do it with the bone out at a low temperature for a longer period of time.
Mallet, I don't necessarily cook other parts of the chicken at such a low temperature. I do cook legs and thighs at low temperature when I braise them, but that's a different story. Basically, I started cooking the breasts at a low temperature because at higher temperatures, I find it difficult to get the middle cooked through without drying the outer parts.
I came up with this technique as basically part of series of experiments trying to figure out how to make breast meat as "non-dry" as possible. To be honest, I'm probably more interested the problem-solving process than I am in eating chicken breast.
-
My partner and I are not big fans of chicken breast meat. We especially don't like boneless skinless chicken breasts, for the usual reasons (we find that they tend to be dry, bland, etc.)
However, for various reasons, we regularly eat chicken, and we only buy whole chickens. Usually, we cut the chicken up, reserving the thighs and legs for all our favourite chicken dishes, and freezing the backs and wings for stock-making. Then we have to figure out what to do with the breasts. We used to always use the breast meat for stir fries. Sometimes, I will pound them out and roll them up with things in them, but to be honest, I get tired of that kind of thing.
Recently, however, I think I've found the perfect way to use chicken breasts: I make a "chicken breast roast." When I cut up the chicken, I bone the breasts, but leave them unsplit with the skin on. I marinate them briefly in a mixture of lemon juice, honey, garlic, lots of salt, herbs, and olive oil. Then, I use butcher's twine to tie the breasts together very tightly, so they are entirely encased in skin. I "roast" the meat in the oven over very low heat, about 250 degrees (does the low heat mean it's not roasting). I take the chicken out of the oven before it reaches 150 degrees and let it come up after I take it out of the oven.* The result is a kind of cylinder of chicken breast, encased in skin, that is easly sliced (the two breasts get moulded together). Most importantly, the meat is surprisingly moist. I think this is the best method of cooking chicken breast meat I've ever come up with. Chicken breast is still not my favourite, but I now use the "roast" throughout the week, in sandwiches for easy workday lunches, etc.
Does anyone else use this method? I've searched and don't see any recipes using this particular method of wrapping unsplit boned breasts in their own skin. Or does anyone know of a better way to prepare breasts for those who don't particularly care for them?
*The reason I cook it at such a low temperature is that it seems to me that at higher temperatures the meat on the outside of the "roast" cooks faster and gets somewhat dry before the inside gets cooked. Similarly, the reason I prefer my method to cooking the breasts on the bone is that when I do this the meat near the bone doesn't cook as fast as the meat near the surface area.
-
Hello--reviving this topic. I'm especially interested in hearing about savory recipes using these babies. I've got a bag of them in the kitchen begging to be used. Thanks in advance.
Add me to the list. I have to admit that I've never tried adzuki beans, but I noticed people talking about them on egullet, and bought a bag when I saw them at the supermarket. But now they keep falling off my ingredient radar, and it would be great to change that!
-
Sometimes raw chicken has yellow stuff on it -- what is it? I have always assumed it has something to do with oxidization. I also notice that, at our local grocery store, if one chicken has yellow stuff on it, all of them do. My partner thinks it's so gross that every time he sees any yellow stuff, he insists on not buying any chicken. I want to know if I'm being deprived of chicken for any good reason.
Can I say that I feel ridiculous asking this question?
-
Thanks, everyone!
I did find a recipe for these on the internet awhile ago, which I downloaded and followed (I forget the source now). The recipe looked very similar to the one from Swisskaese, although it's not exactly the same (I don't have it in front of me now, and it's just too late for me to check, but I will tomorrow!) The piragi I made were very good, although at the time I only had a slab of pancetta, so they tasted like pancetta. They were good -- what's not to like about pancetta? -- but I would like to fool around with the filling a bit. I really like the idea of mixing pork butt with bacon!
Wayne, I will look into pirukad -- I have a good friend who is Estonian, and I hadn't thought about consulting her recipe file.
Tejon, yes the dough is rich and slightly sweet -- a very good foil for the bacon.
Markabauman, I was thinking about adding some garlic. When I made them, I wondered if garlic would be inauthentic, since I associate piragi with my grandfather, and he always says that he does not eat anything with garlic in it. However, since he cooks nothing but his own oatmeal porridge for breakfast, he doesn't realise that he eats garlic at dinner almost every day. So on second thought maybe garlic in piragi would be appropriate after all!
-
In Eileen Yin-Fei Lo's book, New Cantonese Cooking, there is a recipe for Geung Chung Bon Mein or "Noodles with Ginger and Scallions." Basically, you take cooked egg noodles and stir fry them with a lot of ginger and a little bit of sauce made from oyster sauce, soy sauce, sugar, chicken broth, sesame oil, and white peppper. The noodles are then topped with a large amount of scallions. When I was growing up, my (Chinese) mom sometimes made something similar, just a as side dish or as a very quick lunch. Does this sound like what you're looking for?
-
I am so fed up with the Food Network. I like to devote most of my "relaxing time" to learning about things like food and cooking. When I moved to Halifax this summer, I signed up to fork over not just for the basic cable package, but for an additional "Life Style" package in order to get the Food Network. I have never been a "tv watcher," but I make exceptions for a few things, like cooking shows. When I discovered Food Network, I thought it was a dream come true. Now, it seems like I'm just paying to see ads, interspersed with people who give tips I already know, backed up with the wrong explanation. I've basically just stopped watching. I'm going to cancel the Life Style package tomorrow.
-
I thought you might say Great Ocean. I go there a lot, as I live in the neighbourhood.
-
Hi Shaya,
Where did you get the lemons from?
It's always nice to see another Halifax egulleter!
Khadija
-
Thanks Barbara! I'll try the pan frying. Also, the sugar idea makes a lot of sense.
Cool, casual place for lunch in Toronto
in Ontario: Dining
Posted
Thanks for the input!
Hart House is a nice possibility, although I might want to try for something a little "edgier". I might rethink that, though, because it's very nice and dependable and the location is great. I think Splendido is too upscale for my purposes.
I might try Kensington Market is a good suggestion, but I might want to nail down something specific just so I can use the restaurant as a meeting place. Similarly, while Baldwin St. is a standby, I just don't know exactly what is and isn't there. I'll look up the Japanese Place there, as well as try to get some info on what's open in Kensington.