slkinsey

This just happened, right? So...?! Inquiring minds want to know.

Perhaps that's a "Bloodhound in the Sand?"

I think someone here needs to design a drink called "I Dropped the Baby" for Ned. Ned? What do you like?

jgarner53, the general perception of Nancy Silverton among sourdough types can be summed up as: great bread recipes, possibly the worst starter advice of any book in publication. There are two real problems with Silverton's starter advice: 1. The amounts of material she calls for are ludicrously oversized. If you follow her starter recipe, you will end up with something like seven pounds of starter. Unless you are planning on baking something like 300 pounds of bread, this is way too much. 2. One of her main premises (that the grapes supply beneficial sourdough microorganisms) is incorrect. This was discussed to some length not too long ago. To briefly summarize: there is no reason to use grapes or any other fruit; just use flour and water. I personally recommend acquiring a stable sourdough culture from a friend, or purchasing one from Sourdoughs International However, some people do enjoy the challenge of creating their own starter. If this is you, I'd recommend the following procedure: Mix 50 grams of white wheat flour with 50 grams of filtered water using your hands. Place the mixture in a glass jar with a loosely fitting lid. Leave it out on the countertop. Wait 12 hours. Remove the flour and water batter with a soup spoon, leaving a small amount (around 10 grams) stuck to the side of the jar. Don't bother cleaning the spoon, just leave it in the jar. Discard the batter you just removed. Put in another 50 grams of flour and 50 grams of filtered water. Stir it up with the spoon. Continue doing this every 12 hours until you see that bubbles are forming in the batter in between feedings. At this point, decrease the feeding interval to 8 hours. Keep this up for a day or two and you have an active sourdough culture. To store the culture, close the jar tightly and put it in the refrigerator approximately 1 hour after feeding it as described above. To reactivate the stored culture, remove it from the refrigerator, leave it out for an hour or so until it comes up to temperature and shows some signs of activity (usually around an hour). Then feed as outlined above (not forgetting to remove most of the batter first). When the newly fed starter comes up to full activity, it is ready to use. I recommend reactivating and feeding a stored starter at least once a week. The feeding procedure above has a very good advantage in that it enables you to bake from any sourdough recipe. All sourdough recipe authors keep starters that are slightly different. Some may have more water, some may have less, etc. So, unless you are making their starter recipe, you have no idea what to put in when the recipe only sais "use one cup of starter." Using my method, you are only using the starter to maintain the culture. When you want to make an actual recipe from, say, Nancy Silverton's cookbook, all you have to do is look at her starter recipe to see how much water and flour she uses. Then you can mix up some batter to her starter specifications, "infect" the batter with a tablespoon of your storage culture, wait around 8 hours for the batter fo froth up, and you're off to the races. When you want to make a recipe from someone else's cookbook, repeat the pricess making a batter from their starter formula. The other advantage of keeping a 50 gram starter is that you don't have a big bucket of starter taking up room in your refrigerator.

Okay, this is awesome:

Like jsolomon I am also very sceptical that this device will eliminate, or even mitigate a hangover resulting from overconsumption of alcohol. There are several components to a hangover, and several contributing factors. As jsolomon correctly points out, dehydration is a major factor and the dehydrating effect of alcohol is directly proportional to the amount of alcohol in the bloodstream. There is also some evidence that the presence and amount of congeners (non-ethyl alcohols like amyl alcohol, propyl alcohol, isopropyl alcohol, etc.) contributes to the headache component of a hangover. As for the idea that direct-to-bloodstream delivery of alcohol leads to less stress on the organs and fewer "residual toxins," I don't see how this can possibly be true. The organs of the human body only process alcohol to the extent that the alcohol is able to enter the bloodstream. If alcohol doesn't enter the bloodstream, it doesn't get processed by the liver, etc. In fact, it would pass right through you like the olestra from a bag of no-fat potato chips. I should point out, by the way, that one of the big advantages of drinking alcohol, as opposed to injecting or breathing it, is that there is an enzyme in the stomach called alcohol dehydrogenase that breaks down a lot of the alcohol before it enters the bloodstream. This means that if someone drinks 1 ounce of 70 proof vodka, only a small percentage of that alcohol will actually enter the bloodstream (the percentage varies according to how much alcohol dehydrogenase that person produces). If, on the other hand, someone injects an equivalent dose, all of the alcohol will go straight into the bloodstream. The AWOL's aerosol delivery to the lungs probably lies somewhere between drinking and injection in terms of alcohol making its way into the bloodstream. Other than that, it sounds like a modestly interesting novelty. According to their web site the customer selects a spirit, one shot (1.5 oz, I assume) is placed into the device and is nebulized with oxygen over the course of 20 minutes. Their materials also say it shouldn't be used more than twice in a 24 hour period. Given those parameters, it seems unlikely that people who use this device are getting drunk -- and if using the device is in any associated with lessening of hangover effects, it is likely due to the relatively small amount of alcohol consumed. The claimed "euphoric high" I am guessing is more related to breathing pure oxygen than the alcohol mist. Although I see this device mostly being used by the club set, it does sound like it might be an interesting way to really experience the aromatic components of some liquors. Unfortunately, when I think of some of the liquors that might be most interesting to try this way -- say, Bookers bourbon or Lagavullin scotch -- I'm not sure I'd want to be putting a lot of that stuff on the inside of my lungs.

Hmmm... I was going to say "Fried Dumpling," but they also serve sesame pancakes and hot and sour soup (not to mention items on the menu like Lo Mein, which they apparently only serve for breakfast ). Beard Papa only sells creampuffs, right?

I agree with cdh here. Scotch and juice strikes me as a little odd. For me, though, there is also something about orange juice. Unlike lemon and lime which are all extremely acidic, or grapefruit and cranberry, which bring bitterness and astringency to the table, respectively, in addition to the acid, regular old orange juice doesn't typically pack much of a punch and tends to bring a lot more sweetness to the game. Many of us, myself included, would only use sour oranges in an "up" cocktail. This, in my mind, makes orange juice an ingredient that works in an entirely different way from the sour juices. I definitely would have had an easier time accepting the concept of the Blood and Sand had it been made with lemon juice instead of orange juice -- especially when thinking about pairing it with scotch.

Sambuca from Italy. Pastis (Ricard, Pernot, etc.) is basically an absinthe substitute and strikes me as not quite in the same family as ouzo and sambuca, although they are all anise-flavored. The French version of ouzo would be anisette. If I were going to make a gross overgeneralization, I'd say that it tends to be the case that sambuca is better than ouzo is better than anisette. YMMV, of course, and individual examples will contradict this generalization.

Right. #3 was meant to be Smirnoff Ice.

Well, right. I got that, and I have no trouble believing that her arancine are awesome or that her method works when properly implemented. Rather, I've been thinking more from a historical/tradtional perspective. Today, of course, people everywhere use medium grain arborio rice and make stirred risotto-style rice dishes, regardless of where they live. But that doesn't make is a traditional food in all the regions where it is now cooked. It's not surprising that someone living in Sicily today would use risotto to make arancine, because people in Sicily have accesss to medium grain arborio rice, are aware of risotto and make risotto these days. I'm just not sure it has been this way for more than, say, 40-50 years. People in the Val d'Aosta use extra virgin olive oil today, too, but that doesn't mean that evoo is a traditional ingredient of the Val d'Aosta (afaik, it isn't). My understanding of risotto has been that it is a traditional food of the North, which makes it unlikely, I would think, that it is a traditional constituent of arancine all the way down South in Sicily. This is not to say, however, that they aren't actually better made with risotto. It has always been my belief and assumption that they are.

Thanks for the info, Doc. This brings two thoughts to my mind: 1. It strikes me that cookcooks often proceed from the assumption that one is going to make the entire dish from scratch, whereas many Italian dishes were developed specifically to use leftovers. I still wonder whether, historically, rice was made expressly for the purpose of making arancine or whether, as I suspect, arancine were develped as a way to use up leftover rice. 2. We've been proceeding under the assumption that arancine should be made with risotto rice and either leftover or fresh risotto. Except... Arancine are traditionally Sicilian, right? But risotto isn't a Sicilian dish, is it? Do Sicilians traditionally use that kind of medium grain rice? Do Sicilians traditionally make stirred risotto-like rice dishes?

Who are you going to believe, John, Tasca Lanza or me? Seriously, though, it if works for her it must work. That said, her results notwithstanding I can't imagine how it woud work if you did it with warm, fresh risotto. AFAIK, arancini di riso were "invented" to use up leftover rice.

Those are awesome, Janet! You must go out now, get a digital camera and take some pix of those things in use!

Thanks for the report, Gary. For those of us not in the know, what are xiaolong bao? Is there a more common English name by which we might know them? Also, what are the characteristics of first-rate xiaolong bao we should be looking for?

A couple of suggestions: 1. Make the arancine from leftover risotto. If you know you want to have arancine, make extra risotto a day or two earlier. The cold storage time seems to firm things up. This is the only time I tend to make arancine: when I want to use up a bunch of leftover risotto. 2. Make sure the risotto is a dense one. No vialone nano rice sull'onda. 3. Make sure that the risotto recipe you use is a mostly-rice risotto rather than one with a lot of chunky ingredients. Risotto alla Milanesa is perfect. This doesn't sound like it was a problem for you, but its worth mentioning. 4. The egg binder is a good idea. I also stiffen the mixture with extra grated parmigiano reggiano and fresh untoasted no-crust bread crumbs. The idea is that the mixture is relatively dry and coherent when you start to form the bals. The use of fresh bread crumbs, in particular, seems to give the arancine structural strength without making them tough or heavy. 5. Don't overfill the arancine. If you're filing with ragu, peas and mozarella, I assume you're only using a tiny bit of each.

I have found Luksusowa to be the least expensive vodka that is good enough to be a premium vodka for mixing.

As always, I cowtow to slkinsey. Hee! Eeeexcellent. My evil plan is working. Now, if only I can get everyone else to fall in line... Beefeater is actually an underrated gin, I think. It's got a nice clean taste and the juniper's right out front iirc. Now that I think about it, once I run out of the huge jugs of Bombay and Gordon's I got on sale, I'm getting a 1.75 of Beefeater.

I hope you three understand that we're expecting detailed reports of the fun upon your return...

Very interesting stuff, David. Thanks.

I have to confess that using something relatively delicate like Plymouth in a G&T seems like a waste of premium booze to me. If I were going to use an expensive gin, I'd want something like Junipero, which has an assertive flavor that's heavy on the juniper.

To follow up a bit on Bux's comments, I think it depends a little on what you're looking for. Certainly, if you're looking for top-end fine dining, I don't think any other American city comes close to competing with NYC. Assuming from your list of NY places you visited, though, I gather that this is not the case for you. So... let's look at the places you went: Lupa: Seems like your main criticism here is that the bucatini all'amatriciana was oversauced. Everything else you described as "outstanding." Lupa is a good restaurant, I think, but I think it is fundamentally a neighborhood osteria that has come to much greater attention due to Mario Batali's involvement. This is to say that I wouldn't expect a "peak Italian experience" at Lupa so much as I would expect competently-executed Roman-style osteria food. And I think that's what you get. As Bux points out, Lupa is no substitute for Babbo and it's not designed to be. Gray's Papaya: The thing about Grays' Papaya and similar places is that it's not about outstanding high quality, not really. I mean, they deliver a quality product... but the deal at Gray's is that you get an incredibly large amount of food for a pittance. It's reasonable that you wouldn't be blowin away by the hot dogs there. I think your NY experience would have been better had you gone to Katz's instead for a pastrami on rye. Les Halles: A nice place, but by no means standing above a large crowd of similar places. I'm guesing you probably wouldn't have gone here had it not been for the attention Tony Bourdain's celebrity brought to Les Halles. Not a place too many of us would have recommended as a "must try place." Lombardi's: Yea, well no wonder you weren't impressed. Lombardi's has seriously slipped and is generally considered the worst, by a large margin, of all the old-school coal-fired NYC pizzerie. A much better choice would have been Patsy's in East Harlem or Grimaldi's under the Brooklyn Bridge or, for a less NYC-centric wood-fired pizzeria, Franny's out in Prospect Heights. As for the prices... there is no getting around the fact that NYC is expensive. A dollar will certainly go farther in Seattle than it will in NYC. On the other hand, for every dollar someone earns in Seattle, the same job is paying a dollar fifty in NYC. In terms of "food bought for hours worked at the same job" NYC is no more or less expensive.

Interesting. I wonder if this isn't reflective primarily of Americans of a certain generation. I've heard about it, generally from people roughly in my parents' generation, but have never known anyone to drink coffee throughout dinner.

CS, AFAIK, the smoking martini is an Audrey Saunders special. Not terribly difficult to spell out, though. You're right that it's a strong drink, but fundamentally no more strong than a martini. Part of the trick is not to make a 5 ounce drink. The one I made had only 2 ounces of vodka.

Dude, there's a Houston's in Citicorp -- excuse me, Citigroup -- center.