Mjx

We're in temporary quarters, now, but when we were living in our own place, the counter had sitting on it: electric kettle, the Silvia, coffee mill, two cutting boards resting against the wall behind these, knife block. Other things (e.g. the slicer) were sometimes camped out on a temporary basis, but these were the permanent residents. I have a bit of a fetish for keeping down kitchen clutter.

If there's a registry it must be an American agribusiness construct, if the USDA, let alone Japan, does not acknowledge the existence of 'Wagyu' as a breed. The article noted more than once that the quality of the US beef was not being questioned, but the ethics/honesty of the use of 'Kobe' [and 'Wagyu'] outside of Japan, not to mention the use of the terms to inflate prices with what are apparently lies.

But that's silly of them, to say the least. You'll recall the passage of the article that notes (after a detailed discussion of what lies behind this statement): 'The gist of it seems to be that in order to be labeled Wagyu under USDA rules – rules that apparently apply only to specific brands and not to all domestic or imported “Wagyu,” – the meat in question can come from the breeding of a cow whose grandparents were both 94% “Wagyu,” even though there is no such breed.'

I really hate the voice over. The script is cack. It annoys me every time. How many times was "molecular chef" said. Mayhap it was a wee cheffie?!

Is the consistency at all like that of polenta?

Fair enough. But it is certainly possible to nicely and politely decline to permit the public to use the loo; I've been to a few places where I was told 'I'm really sorry, but it's for staff only', and that was just not a huge deal.

What on earth is that?! I'm fascinated...

Wait, if being open to the public means you should be expected to allow the public to use your facilites, why aren't more people going into government offices, hospitals, physician's offices, and so on, to use the loo? My asking this goes pack to the opening post in this topic, rather than more recent ones, because it seems to me that something has been lost sight of, here. Accepting that people are annoying doesn't mean that a restaurant or shop owner should be expected to allow the public to use the loo; it's a nice touch, a courtesy. But saying no seems perfectly reasonable to me (barring evident emergencies).

Would someone please remind me why restaurants or shops should be obligated to provide loos to the public?

Quinua... something. Or 'something' quinua. The 'something' providing the appropriate descriptor (I wouldn't imagine you could get that consistency from quinua and liquid alone, though, since you have to rinse it, and there goes any external starch, too). But if rice isn't the predominant ingredient, it wouldn't be regarded as risotto by most Italians.

Although risotto does involve a basic technique – keeping the starch (rather than rinsing it off) and long cooking in liquid, so the starch gelatinizes, making for a creamy consistency – if it doesn't involve rice, it isn't risotto, but 'risotto' (in Italy, anyway).

Here is an image of the rava: I left it in the bag, since the size of the price label (these seem pretty universal in size) is likely to give a better idea of the size of the grains than if it was in a bowl or in my hand.

@Jenni: Brilliant, I had a hunch you'd have great suggestions! The Kuzhi paniyaram are something I definitely want to try. I'm hoping the æbleskiver pan is not currently being used to start seedlings, or something. I'm going to take a picture of the rava, and post it. It looks about the coarseness of semi-refined sugar, coarser than plain sugar, but not so coarse as turbinado. @bague25: Thanks! I'm thinking of using it on the chops I have marinating for dinner tonight; I have high hopes.

Hmmm. When you consider the thickness of most of the meat on a chicken, you have to figure that ten minutes in the oven is going to have some sort of effect beyond crisping the skin. I'm really happy with the approach of roasting a brined chicken 15 minutes per side at 190°C, followed by 20-25 minutes on its back at 230°C, which I got from 'Cooks Illustrated' (yields deeply flavourful, moist, tender meat, and skin that is deliciously browned and crisp, not greasy), or I'd be tempted to do a side by side of my usual approach and the Blumenthal one.

The rib eye may be terrific low and slow, but chicken... eh. I've made a couple of low temperature braised chicken dishes that use legs/thighs with the skin surface above the level of the braising liquid the entire time, and they're excellent. Roasting a whole chicken at a low temperature conjures up images of lots of flabby skin; even at the lower end of standard temperatures, I've been underwhelmed by the results (I guess you could torch it, though). If the chicken was so athletic that only low temperature cooking is going to make it tender, I'd go with a strightforward braise, not a low temperature roast.

Hushpuppies are the three tasty-looking items in the upper part of the polystyrene tray: I've never eaten them but have heard they're extremely tasty (maize is involved); they certainly deserve a proper explanation from someone who know them well! In the US 'cider' is generally a non-alcoholic beverage, essentially cloudy apple juice; 'hard cider' is alcoholic (but not very).

Over the weekend, I picked up a bag of idli rava (rice semolina). I had no specific plans for it, but I do love my starch, and wheat and potatoes are problems for me, so I enthusiastically seize any fresh iteration of rice. Even if I have no idea of what to do with it. I doubt I'll be making idli, since I haven't seen anything that looks like it will work as an idli pan, let alone the real thing (the wells in an æbleskiver pan seem too small and deep), but I'd love to find other things to do with this stuff. I could experiment, but I'm using someone else's kitchen, which restricts my more flamboyant efforts just a bit. I took a peek online, and there seem to be a quite a few of confident-sounding recipes, but honestly, I'd much rather hear about what you've tried, and how it worked out.

An added two cents from me: Recently had lunch at Osteria Francescana, and did take pictures. I asked first, although the one early arrival from the party at a nearby table already had his iPhone out, and was snapping away. The waiter looked surprised, ever-so-faintly amused that I asked (and this place has three Michelin stars, it isn't a scenester hang-out/packed with Yelpies). We didn't fuss over the pictures, just pointed and shot, so they aren't brilliant images, but they were taken simply as something to reminisce over, to show friends and family, when we were enthusing about the meal. No one showed any sign of being bothered by our taking pictures (I particularly watched staff--especially the chef--for the tiniest sign of even suppressed displeasure, and was cheerfully prepared to stop, should it manifest; it didn't), but then again, three of the four parties present were taking pictures (for those curious about the demographics: all appeared to be between 35 and 55, and were French/Italian speaking), and this was lunch, which tends to be more casual than dinner. The diners' photography behaviour was consistent with their general behaviour: The quiet table was unobtrusively taking pictures of plates, the more exuberant (this is relative, no one was actually making a row) table was a bit more obvious, took more pictures of the members of the party, the decor.

teonzo, thanks! My initial reaction to the eucalyptus+others combination was that it might play out a bit like licorice+chocolate (i.e. interesting, yes, but not altogether satisfactory), but it sounds like the flavours actually harmonized well.

So, question for those of you in a position to comment: How do you feel about/react to people who come in to your establishment, make a small purchase, then ask about the loo... that being pretty clearly their objective when they walked in the door?

A cocktail with a hotdog makes sense to me, because, oh, I don't know, maybe because hotdogs are sort of meat cocktails..? But sparkling wines and hotdogs just don't seem like they'd bring out the best in each other. Obviously, this is completely subjective (and, full disclosure: I prefer hotdogs from a stand, early in the morning, with beer).

You really think? It just seems that hotdogs (not to mention, more than a few of the garnishes) will bring out the thin, sour aspect of a sparkiling wine, hardly a service to the growers being 'showcased'.

Am I missing something, or does this just seem like an off-the mark combination? I can certainly appreciate hotdogs and champagne, but the don't really seem to mesh (I'm thinking, 'Why not port or madeira? Those make sense.'). I'm fine with irony, but this just seems like something you'd have to pretend to enjoy.

Too right! . . . . I think that regional dismissive prejudice is so pervasive and strong that, sadly, it would have carried more weight to say that "He lives in New York City where he is a day laborer" than "He lives in Chicago where he writes for the Times." It also stuns me that, in this day of instant information, when it would have been so easy to discover the credentials of "Marilyn and family" (credentials that include not only a son that writes for the WSJ, but a daughter who was a practicing attorney in Hong Kong and probably fluent in Cantonese, among other lofty and sophisticated and intellectual accomplishments) before sneering and jeering at them, one wouldn't take five minutes to do enough research to know exactly at whom one is sneering and jeering. Oh, please. Enough already the 'us and them' regional nonsense. No one but a hick (by which I mean a state of mind, undefined by place of origin or socioeconomic status) living in a major urban area on one of the two coasts dismisses Chicago as insignificant, and who cares about these people? Regional prejudice and contemptuous dismissiveness of other groups' food preferences are by no means confined to major urban areas. I know heaps of people who reflexively smirk at and mock restaurants that fall into the 'fine dining' category associated with big cities, but attempt to justify it by saying they're 'just folks', they're 'real'. Please. Inverted snobbery is at least as nauseating as straight-up snobbery. Ms. Hagery seems to be an intelligent woman with a keen sense of irony; she must be laughing her head off at the entire brouhaha surrounding her piece on the OG.

Well, there's this: And You Call Yourself a Journalist: Wrestling with a Definition of Journalist in Law. I didn't see anything more recent than this article, although I have trouble believing that this hasn't been formally addressed since 1999 (but haven't done any serious digging, either). There are countries (I believe Denmark is one) where you can only be hired as a journalist if you have received a degree as one in that country.