Stone

'>http://www.epinions.com/content_17577840260

Try more lighter fluid.

This is begining to remind me of a conversation I had at a bar watching football games during the baseball playoffs. I, a football fan, commented to the guy next to me that baseball fans seem so terribly obsessed with statistics (not that football doesn't keep an absurd amount). He said to me, "if you had to justify the amount of time you spent watching grass grow, you'd need something to talk about also."

Do you think poaching the before, and then letting the chicken marinate overnight in fresh buttermilk would work?

One of my favorite restaurants in Chinatown used to be the Ju Hsiang House of Noodles on Doyers street. One time I brought a friend, and as he was raving about the food, a family of cockroaches (about 4) walked by us on the wall. We stayed. The next time I tried to bring a group of peple only to find the place shut down by the Board of Health. ####, I miss that place.

I've got a silly question -- I'll be cooking this on my kettle grill. Is there an easy way to add charcoal and chips during the cooking, or do I have to take the pork off to lift up the grate?

There an article on summer rolls in this mont's Cooking Illustrated. (Oddly, they refer to the unfried version as spring rolls. I had always thought that spring = fried, summer = fresh.) They suggest the rice wrapper as superior to wheat or tapioca.

I assume the basil they're talking about is not sweet Italian basil, but hot basil or Thai basil (Bai Kaprow in Thai; Paiso in Chinese). It's easy to find in NY Chinatown, and can be found in SF in the Southeast Asian shops in the Tenderloin (not many places in Chinatown have it). When I lived in D.C. years ago I took some stalks home after a lunch of Pho and stuck them in a glass of water in the sun. They sprouted and, when replanted, grew fast and furiously. They have great flavor. Perfect to finish off stir-frys.

I'm not sure I understand either, but let me try some thoughts. First, there is the common "evening news" observation -- After WWII, food processing seemed to pick up at the same time as general welfare and work productivity. (Productivity is the wrong word, I mean people are working more, not necessarily more productively.) In the 70s (the first decade of which I have any meaningful memory), commercial food processing flourished -- what used to come in tins, now came wrapped in foil. T.v. dinners cooked faster and were, or seemed to be, better quality. Then came the 80s with microwaves, two income households and 70-hour per week jobs. We, at least in the states, lost stay-at-home-wife (I'm not being sentimental) who created good home cooking. We got, at least in the cities, take-out, 30-minute entrees, etc. Now we have protein shakes, slim-fast, Cliff bars, etc. Lost in all this was the growth of fast food and how it branched out from McDonalds, to cover all cuisines (think of the mall food-court) and faux restaurants (Benigans). I think we lost touch with food. Recently, however, people like eating again. I think maybe it was spawned by "Californian Cuisine," but as we ate more junk and bad take-out, we seemed to reserve a night here and there for some real good restaurant food. Or maybe because we have so many new cuisines and fusion (how I hate it.) The only ethnic foods my Dad eats are Italian and Chinese. I can't imagine why he wont eat Thai or Vietnamese, except when my Mom points out that growing up in the Mid-West he had Chinese restuarants and nothing else. With all the new cuisines, new ingredients, and new ideas, it's gotten much more fun. I think we've also started cooking more. But I've noticed something strange -- most of my male friends (mid-30s) cook quite well, enjoy it, and are proud of it. Most of my female friends make macaroni and cheese. (Of course, I know many exceptions in both categories.) And then there's FoodTV. When I first heard of an "emeril," I laughed -- even though I love to cook. But whooda thunk it would be what it is today. I remember a large group dinner filled with alcohol where one person said "best show on t.v." and three people who never met before simultaneous said "Iron Chef". Is the increased availabilty of ingredients? The fact that I have no artistic talent whatsoever, but I can make a mean Thai dinner? The fact that I realized that I do better with women by cooking than by speaking? I don't know. Just rambling because it's 5:00 and I'm bored. (Edited by Dstone001 at 5:08 pm on Jan. 17, 2002) (Edited by Dstone001 at 5:12 pm on Jan. 17, 2002)

I remember reading that when Al Copeland opened his first Popeyes, he was warned that the chicken was too spicy to appeal to a wide audience.

how about this: i'm eating one right now!! do i win something!?!?! i find it interesting that judging from the tone of these posts, most of us are actually somewhat *proud* of the crap we put down out gullets!! I have to agree -- BK Double-Whopper (I skip the cheese) is high on my fast-food list. Popeye's Spicy Fried Chicken, however, gets my vote as the best fast food -- and I'm not ashamed that I eat ti.

And in defense of beer -- While the "terrior" of wine may be interesting, I don't know why that leads to the conclusion that wine is an "art" and beer only a "craft." When I was visiting vineyards in Tuscany and asked about the process, one of the guys said, "well, we have tractors that pick the grapes, a machine that pulls them off the vines and mashes them, and they go into the big casks. That's about it." O.k., maybe he was a slacker. But the art of crafting a good beer is quite complex and, given the broader range of ingredients (even if sticking to the four ingredient requirement of the German purity laws) I would think more interesting. Choosing between hop varieties, different ranges of toasted malts, top/bottom fermentation, water-additives, spices, etc., gets very interesting. And the flavor ranges are, would expect, at least as pronounced as in wines -- from the creamy, chocolately stouts, to the fruity trappist ales, crisp-bitter pale ales and so on. So, I really don't believe that one is "superior" to the other. On other hand, what I was trying to get at with the question is culture. For example, is there a wine equivalent to the German beer-hall, where people gather to drink, sing and dance? I remember first thinking of the question while reading Frances Mayes's, "Under a Tuscan Sun", and getting to the passage where she shared a cold beer with the day-workers. They didn't speak the same language, but the sharing the beer was enough.

I'm curious about terroir. As you can tell, my wine knowledge is very limited. But having recently moved to San Francisco, I've taken a number of trips up to Napa and Sonoma. But my point -- each consists largely of a long valley with one road running down the middle and wineries popping up every few hundred yards. My question is this -- how different can a wine be (assuming its the same type of grape) from one vineyard to the next if the vines are grown so close together? I assume they get the same rainfall, temperature and sunlight? Also, I'm told that the huge Neibaum-Coppola estate was until recently a famous-name producer (who I can't remember) that churned out mediocre to bad wines. If the vines are the same, can the wines be better, just because someone else is bottling them?

Most people partake in both of these ubiquitous beverages. Personally, I'm a greater fan of beer -- I find that the differences in styles, tastes, and textures are far more interesting than the more subtle differences in wines -- at a far cheaper price. I'm sure you know what reaction I get from my "wine" friends. But both drinks are firmly embedded in our culture. There's something about sharing a cold beer that brings people together. And wine is seen by many as a necessary companion to any good meal. What are your thoughts on which is more important? Which has made a better contribution? And why?

"Stock should never even reach the sea-level boiling temperature of water, no less go beyond that." You lost me -- don't you have to simmer the stock?

One of the responses to another post mentioned a pulled-port sandwich. I love pulled-pork, but have no idea how to make it. (Well, I have some idea, but why risk it?) Any recipes out there? (Edited by Dstone001 at 6:08 pm on Jan. 15, 2002)

I have a good friend who's a professor of pharmacology, and her advice is this: "Do you really get enough pleasure out of eating brains to risk the disease? Don't do it." There was also a special recently on Discovery channel (or something like it) on one the last remaining "cannibal" tribes. The tribes ate the brains of their dead. Over the past few decades, however, the tribe has been devasted by Jacob Cruzfelts (I'm not even going to try to spell it) disease, the human equivalent of BSE.

One of the reasons I don't bbq ribs is because they take so long to cook. Someone once told me that the cooking time can be cut in half by par-boiling the ribs. She put on a large, 5-gallon pot of water and when it boiled, dropped in the ribs for about 5 minutes. Supposedly, this not only reduced the cooking time, but loosened the meat from the bones making them easier to eat. Any thoughts on this? Also, would you add salt to the water?

My problem with David Rosengarten was that I was consumed with figuring out how to break into the t.v. set and punching him in the face. I don't know why. It's kind of a Jim Carrey thing. Everytime I see him, I want to punch him. I think Bobby Flay needs to get off the Santa Fe bandwagon. Aren't we done with that? How many ways can you shove a chipotle down our throats anyway? I thought the Iron Chef Masumoto (?) said it best after their little contest when Bobby jumped up onto his own cutting board -- "He's not a chef, he has no respect for his tools." I agree that Mario -- who should spend a little more time studying English rather than Italian -- is probably the best show -- notwithstanding that bufoon he carries around with him. Emeril is good if you need ideas about how to build a bigger pile of food. But a friend of mine sat at the counter on one of his episodes and said that the food was actually very good.

Kraft v. Annies -- it's a major topic of conversation in San francisco. I love Kraft -- it's got that homey orange glow to it. But all my friends swear by Annies. At first I pointed out that they would eat anything out of an un-bleached "earth-friendly" box. (One friend showed up to a party once with some beef jerky she got at a gourmet store for about ผ a pound. I pointed out that one type tasted exactly like a slim-jim and the other was simply spam. We did a blind taste test. Boy, was she embarrased.) Then I looked at the health information, and, if I recall correctly, Kraft actually won. However, when I did the taste test, I have to admit that Annie's was better.

What's the big deal about In-and-Out Burger? I see this as a typical example of Californians not knowing anything about food beyond the ubiquitous seared ahi tuna with mango chutney. Other than the toasted bun (which, I admit, is terrific) the burger, etc., is just not very good. It's too greasy (something that should be a pluse), and the sauce to too overpowering. And the fries are simply awful. Give me a double-whopper any day (the extra patty actually makes it a hamburger).

Can't say I read they whole list, but Nathans, Nathans, and Nathans.

I used to go to Becco a lot, but I thought its pasta selection had gone downhill. (By the way, most people skip the entrees -- don't. They're terrific.) Becco once had a papardelle with wild mushrooms and a pumpkin ravioli (along with the obligatory penne or spaghetti w/ marinara) that were exquisite. Last few time I was there, it's been a seafood risotto. My take on risotto at restaurants -- unless it's a specialty, pass. Usually the restaurant doesn't take the time to make it right, and you get a mealy, oily mess. Becco's wasn't that bad, but no up to its usual standards.

The same people that eat fish eggs because they're given a fancy French name.