cakewalk

I was just thinking about this the other day for the first time in ages and ages. Whenever we had leftover noodles of any sort (but usually it would be either spaghetti or Mueller's wide egg noodles) my mother would warm them up by frying them in butter until they browned and got crispy. We LOVED it! It was by far our favorite way to eat noodles, and we would always ask our mother to make extra so there'd be enough for leftovers. I don't remember ever liking the "original" dinner as much.

Sugar, by all means. It will make you feel better. And then later you'll feel all shitty again, at which point you must eat ... more sugar! Go with it. And then, when you're finally able to shake yourself out of that vicious cycle, a good simple veggie stir-fry with bulgar wheat and some tehina will set you on the right path.

Absolutely fascinating. I feel like I'm reading a science fiction story. Is there any way to acquire this mother, other than by accident?

Interesting. For me orange juice falls into that strange category of "foods I just don't care about." There's stuff I love and stuff I hate. Orange juice is neither. I never order it if I go out for breakfast. If it's there in front of me maybe I'll drink it. But I rarely buy a container. I don't dislike it, I don't especially like it, it's just sort of there. I bought some a few weeks ago for I forget what reason, and now a 3/4 full container is going to sit in my fridge until it gets bad. A new topic on "foods that simply do nothing for you"?

I can see this (d)evolve into a very interesting discussion on language and semantics. I'm from NY, and we used to go away for the summer months, and we always had a barbecue. It was before the days of the gas grill, mostly it was charcoal and lighter fluid, hamburgers and hot dogs and steaks (oh my!). I've never heard anybody call it a "cook out," that's an interesting regional difference between NY and Boston, I guess. But there seems to be a crucial difference between having "a barbecue" and having "barbecue."

Do drive-throughs qualify as restaurants? I think this might demand the fourth part of the series. And aside from that, well, what the heck is a tasting menu? What's it all about, Alfie?

It's really why I posted this. It's more important to eat healthy when pregnant than at any other time. While the mother only needs an extra 300-500 calories per day to properly account for the energy that goes into the growing fetus, it has to contain the correct nutrients to allow for the proper development of the fetus. The issue continues during breastfeeding (for those who do it) but where 500-1000 extra calories a day are needed. For the combined 1-2 years of these two periods, the child is wholely dependant on the mother for the fuel needed to grow. The quality of that fuel is directly related to the quality of the fuel that mom consumes. There's also the perspective that, if my assumption that these snacks are typical of what they eat at home holds true, then that's what the kid is going to start in on as soon as he/she starts eating solids. That, to me, is a recipe for disaster. Is the father pregnant too? What I meant was: if this were a yoga class, or a drawing class, or a dance class or a whatever class, and the same scenario unfolded, wouldn't the same questions arise? There have been countless threads on eGullet bemoaning the way "middle America" eats. The basic topic here is a similar one: eating habits. I'm well aware that pregnant women have various different nutritional issues to think about. But your question wasn't "my wife is pregnant, what should she be eating/avoiding?" It was a comparison between what "you're" eating and what "they're" eating. And so, I'm not sure how relevant the pregnancy issue is here. Best of luck to you.

I'm not sure how relevant the pregnancy issue is here.

Beets. I love beets. They are my comfort food, they make me think of my grandmother (she made great borscht), and they're just plain great, any which way you cook 'em. But I know that there are others on this board who very strongly disagree with me (to say the least). But you're wrong. You really are.

It was from Bon Apetit a few months ago. I'll find it. It really was good. From the Feb. 2004 Bon Apetit. Their list of ingredients, my paraphrased instructions. Not sure how to do this, if it violates copyright laws, just tear the page out. Grapefruit, Ginger, and Star Anise Compote (serves 6) 1 C. water 1 C. sugar 1/4 C. thinly sliced ginger 6 whole star anise 1/2 tbs. grated grapefruit rind 3 medium pink grapefruit, sectioned 3 medium white grapefruit, sectioned Bring water, sugar, ginger, and star anise to a boil over high heat; keep stirring until sugar is dissolved. Simmer until it begins to thicken (10 minutes or so). Add grapefruit rind, stir, reduce heat to low and simmer about 30 minutes. Put all grapefruit sections in a large bowl. Remove and discard ginger slices from syrup. Pour syrup over the grapefruit, and let it cool at room temp. for about an hour, giving it an occasional stir. Divide among six bowls, discard star anise, serve chilled or at room temp. My notes: 1) Give it about 24 hours to hang out in the fridge. I was having people over on a Saturday night, I made this on Friday night. Sat. morning I had some for breakfast -- I thought it was good but not great. When we had it for dessert Saturday night, it was great. 2) Next time I make it, I think I'll grate the ginger into the sugar water and leave it in, rather than slice it and then discard the slices. Pain in the neck, and anyway I love ginger. 3) More star anise, possibly a bit less sugar.

It was from Bon Apetit a few months ago. I'll find it. It really was good.

Thanks, JAZ, that does sound workable. Certainly better than what I was doing (removing the membranes of each grapefruit section individually. Oh what a pain-in-the-butt.)

That does look interesting, thanks. But does it also peel off the membranes? That 's the part that really drives me batty.

Does this take you all morning and into the afternoon? Do you have a method to share? I love grapefruit, but echo everyone else's complaints about it. I once made a wonderful recipe of grapefruit, ginger, and star anise compote, it was truly delicious, but I'd never do it again because it took forever to peel those *%$ grapefruit!!

I am shocked, shocked. Cotton candy. Hate it. When I was a kid I would try to like it, I loved to watch them make it in those big vats, but I remember it always made me feel like I was being cheated somehow, putting this stuff in my mouth expecting something good and it just dissolved into nothingness. Pancakes. It's a texture thing. I love the idea of pancakes, so Norman Rockwell-ish, but I just don't like them.

Had some friends over Saturday for dinner. After watching Smarty Jones lose and drinking more than enough Belmont Breezes (the Belmont Race's "official" drink) we had: Chicken w/orange & lemon rind and grated ginger (from Cucina Hebraica) Slow braised leeks Steamed baby artichokes Asparagus w/dijon vinaigrette Quinoa w/sauted onions Salad w/Israeli cucmbers that they had at Fairway (very nostalgic for me) Too much wine Perfectly ripe honeydew with lime juic and mint leaves Everything came out great, but the leeks and the artichokes were amazing. I used the recipe from the Zuni Cafe cookbook (although she doesn't call for baby artichokes, and I left them to simmer on the stovetop rather than put them in the oven), and the Paula Wolfert recipe for leeks that someone put on eGullet a while ago (thank you).

The once simple tomato sandwich has evolved!

This hits on a different article that was featured in the magazine: The Price of Parsimony Yes, that second article was quoted above, and mentioned for comparison purposes to the Grimes article. (An aside: the magazine section of the NY Times didn't arrive with my paper this weekend, so I'm glad to be reading this stuff here. I got the crossword puzzle from a friend who doesn't do them. Not having the crossword puzzle on a Saturday morning is a terrible thing.) But it seems to be a separate topic than why some people complain when others spend "extravagant" amounts of money on dining. The people comlaining aren't necessarily poor. Is it just self-righteousness, or is something else there? I find it interesting, and rather than defend the extravagant spending I'd like to understand the basis of why one "shouldn't" do it. Actually I somehow get the feeling it's past my bedtime.

I'm not sure where the articles in question and the posts on this thread are really going -- they seem to be going in all different directions (not that there's anything wrong with that, since that's what I'm about to do ) But there is a "doth protest too much" tone, and I guess Grimes ticked me off right at the beginning when he pointed to a certain "class" of people who always complain about spending a lot of money on a restaurant meal. Class? I'd like to hear a serious argument against "overspending" on food, but I guess this isn't the forum to find such an argument. We're creating our own arguments and then having fun tearing them to shreds. Food does seem to be in its own category. You can pay a fortune to see a baseball game or a concert, or for clothes and cars or whatever, but it doesn't ever seem to be the same. I think this is partially due to the fact that food really can't ever be shared in the way other things can be shared. Even if you cook for others, eat with others, you never share your own food with others (at least I hope not!). Millions can watch the same baseball game on TV and pay nothing; others can buy a knock-off of your ridiculously expensive Gucci handbag and be just as happy. There's something very solitary about eating. I dunno. Just had a great (relatively inexpensive) dinner and I'm musing aloud. I dined alone. (Like Thomas Jefferson. ) I think that most people who live at bare subsistence levels don't have much experience managing their money, mostly because they've never had any to manage. So often they will not make the wisest choices. I can't see any way of comparing this to the very wealthy people who don't have to bother managing their daily expenditures. This thread keeps bringing me back to "Babette's Feast" and offers some different ways of looking at that wonderful movie.

had he mentioned that it would have taken all of the controversy out of the article. during these types of discussion, what immediately strikes me is that $1000 on dinner to one person is the same as $100 on dinner to someone else which is the same as $20 to yet another person with less money. i don't see any moral issues with spending money on travel, fine dining, cars, homes, or cocaine and strippers. "Quite telling" of what, exactly? I guess Grimes wanted the controversy in his article. I don't see it as a moral issue either. If anyone can spend $1,000 on a meal, then bon apetit, enjoy it fully. But nor do I see the different instances as being "equivalent" in any sense, and I do get the feeling that we're trying to set up some sort of equivalency here. Why?

Last night I made a mango cheesecake, a la Amanda Hesser's recipe in the NY Time several weeks ago. All I can say about it right now is that it looks beautiful. Tonight I'll find out about "the proof of the pudding." Happy Shavuot to all!

I find "regular" peanut butter and "natural" peanut butter to be two completely different animals. I like them both, each for different things. Jif extra crunchy, yum. And the stuff they grind for you from fresh peanuts, I love it. But it's apples and oranges, no?

With Shavuot all but breathing down our necks, this is a crucially important question right now!

Well I'll be darned. It's a wonder I've lived so long. (Kinna hurra.)

Looking through some of these recipes, which call for "graham flour," made me a little curious. I mean, okay, wheat flour is from wheat, rye flour from rye ... and graham flour? Huh? So I never knew there was a Mr. Graham, so shoot me! Anyway, this site had some interesting basic information (and some recipes): http://homecooking.about.com/cs/specificfood/a/graham.htm