It's that time again; time for a 30-Day Blogging Challenge. Though I fully admit I'm going to cheat a little on this one. This started out as a message board post -- a question & answer survey post of a (roughly) alphabetical list of questions about travel experiences.
Since I'm never one to answer in one word when I can with many more, I thought rather than answer each question on the message board with one or two words, I would use the questions as a basis for blog posts, where I can ramble on to my heart's delight as I answer the questions.
And because it's an alphabetical listing, it's only 26 questions, rather than 30, but I'm still going to call it a 30-day challenge. Every week day for the next 26 week days, I'll be posting an answer to the following questions:
Day 1 -- Age you went on your first international trip
Day 2 -- Best foreign beer you’ve had and where
Day 3 -- Cuisine (favorite)
Day 4 -- Destinations – favorite, least favorite and why
Day 5 -- Event you experienced abroad that made you say wow
Day 6 -- Favorite mode of transportation
Day 7 -- Greatest feeling while traveling
Day 8 -- Hottest place you’ve traveled to
Day 9 -- Incredible service you’ve experienced and where
Day 10 -- Journey that took the longest
Day 11 -- Keepsake from your travels
Day 12 -- Let-down site – why and where
Day 13 -- Moment when you fell in love with travel
Day 14 -- Nicest hotel you’ve stayed in
Day 15 -- Obsession – what are you obsessed with taking pictures of while traveling
Day 16 -- Passport stamps, how many and from where
Day 17 -- Quirkiest attraction you’ve visited and where
Day 18 -- Recommended site, event or experience
Day 19 -- Splurge, something you have no problem forking over money for while traveling
Day 20 -- Touristy thing you’ve done
Day 21 -- Unforgettable travel memory
Day 22 -- Visas
Day 23 -- Wine, best glass while traveling and where
Day 24 -- eXcellent view and from where
Day 25 -- Years spent traveling
Day 26 -- Zealous sports fans and where
Monday, June 30, 2014
Sunday, June 29, 2014
Basically Good
Tonight's dinner was one of those amazing creations from basic ingredients. It was Chicken Spoon Bread. I discovered the recipe some years ago, when flipping through one of my mother's favorite cookbooks. She had made many of the recipes in the book, but never this one. As I remember, the day I found the recipe was late in the month which meant, even though we planned meals and got all the necessary ingredients, we were down to basics. For whatever reason, I did not really want to fix what we had planned that day. So I went searching for a recipe using the basic recipe we had on hand. It was an instant hit and has been one of my standard recipes since.
It's not really a traditional spoon bread, if only because of the whipped egg whites mixed in with the basic cornmeal batter. But I prefer the lightness the meringue brings to this version over the heavier, denser, more traditional versions. I once described the dish to my dearest as a cornmeal soufflé, and that's not a bad description, though it does not rise the way a traditional soufflé does. The end result is still much lighter than a more traditional cornbread-like spoon bread.
This version is simply flavored, so it's perfect for those nights when you just want something mild for dinner. I recommend serving it with a green vegetable rather than something like corn or cauliflower, if only because yellow or white vegetables will make for a rather mono-chromatic plate. Tonight I served it with peas & carrots, but I really prefer to serve this dish with spinach or steamed broccoli.
Chicken Spoon Bread
½ cup cornmeal
1 tablespoon all-purporse flour
¼ teaspoon salt
1 cup chicken stock
1 cup milk
2 tablespoons butter
2 eggs, separated
2 cups cooked chicken, cut into bite-sized pieces
Source: Better Homes & Gardens Good Food on a Budget, 1971
My Observations:
It's not really a traditional spoon bread, if only because of the whipped egg whites mixed in with the basic cornmeal batter. But I prefer the lightness the meringue brings to this version over the heavier, denser, more traditional versions. I once described the dish to my dearest as a cornmeal soufflé, and that's not a bad description, though it does not rise the way a traditional soufflé does. The end result is still much lighter than a more traditional cornbread-like spoon bread.
This version is simply flavored, so it's perfect for those nights when you just want something mild for dinner. I recommend serving it with a green vegetable rather than something like corn or cauliflower, if only because yellow or white vegetables will make for a rather mono-chromatic plate. Tonight I served it with peas & carrots, but I really prefer to serve this dish with spinach or steamed broccoli.
Chicken Spoon Bread
½ cup cornmeal
1 tablespoon all-purporse flour
¼ teaspoon salt
1 cup chicken stock
1 cup milk
2 tablespoons butter
2 eggs, separated
2 cups cooked chicken, cut into bite-sized pieces
- Preheat oven to 375° F.
- Grease a 1 Quart Casserole Dish.
- In medium bowl, beat eggs whites until stiff stiff peaks from; set aside.
- In medium saucepan, stir together cornmeal, flour, salt, stock and milk.
- Cook over medium heat, stirring frequently until thickened and bubbly.
- Continue to cook, stirring constantly for 2 minutes.
- Remove from heat and stir in butter and chicken.
- Cool slightly. Beat egg yolks and stir into cornmeal mixture.
- Fold beaten egg whites into cornmeal mixture.
- Turn mixture into prepared dish.
- Bake at 375° F for 50-60 minutes.
- Serve immediately.
Source: Better Homes & Gardens Good Food on a Budget, 1971
My Observations:
- The original recipe calls for mixing the cooked cornmeal and egg yolks in a separate bowl, and then folding in the eggs whites. I don't do that, as it only makes an additional bowl to clean up. I mix everything in the saucepan and then just have the egg white bowl, saucepan and a 1 cup measuring cup to clean up.
- I use ½ of a store-bought rotisserie chicken for this recipe, but it is a perfect use for leftover cooked chicken.
- I have made this as a side-dish by substituting 2 cups of whole kernel corn for the chicken (if frozen, thawed completely; if canned, drained). Makes 6 to 8 side-dish servings.
- This is best served the day it is made. It will become denser as it sits. Leftovers are more the texture of polenta or grits than the light, airy soufflé of the dish straight from the oven.
Saturday, June 28, 2014
Cruising By the Complaints
I'm a cruiser. In the past 16 years, I have taken 12 cruises and have a thirteenth booked for next year. I like cruising. I like it as a way of vacationing, and I like it as a controlled way to see the world. (Yes, I realize that an 8-hour port stop is hardly "seeing the world" at the ports, but that is a discussion for another time.)
Most of my cruises have been with Holland America Line, mainly because my first travel agent knew both my family and me well enough to know that we would not really enjoy our time on any of the other cruise lines. Also, Holland America travels to the places I want to go. That first cruise was a Canada/New England itinerary and at the time, only one other line was doing that route, and it was priced out of my budget. As it turns out, the travel agent was not wrong. I did enjoy that first cruise, and the eleven that have followed it. I like Holland America for its relatively small, quiet ships. I know this will not come as a surprise to anyone, but I am really not a loud person and prefer to read quietly alone, even on vacation, than to be in large, active, loud social groups. In short, Holland America is the perfect line for me.
Holland America is a US-based company, based in Seattle, Washington, though its ships are foreign-flagged vessels, most of them Dutch-flagged. The officers and crew of the vessel are mainly Dutch, Indonesian, and Filipino. And while the general atmosphere of the ships is American-ish, it is decidedly not America, despite the company name. Additionally, like most cruise lines, Holland America sources its food and beverage supplies from wherever the ships are in port, which means it is feasible to source products from the US, or in fact with US-based companies or brands. These are important facts to remember. Even US-based cruise company's ships are not the US. They are, essentially, other countries.
Enough background. On to the real reason for this wall of text.
I read and post on a cruise message board. Today's rant is a reaction to those people who cruise, allegedly because they want to see and experience the world, but then complain that the cruise ships and/or port stops are not their hometowns. Today there was a discussion where the original poster complained that she (I'm assuming based on the user name) can't get real cream for her coffee, instead only what is known as half & half in the US or coffee cream in other parts of the world. She proclaims that she is "extremely picky" about her coffee and the pseudo-cream "just won't do!"
Another poster complained quite loudly to anyone who will listen (or read) that the wine list on the ship does not include her favorite chardonnay. Her favorite local diner has the readily available wine, why can't the ship?! She did note that she spoke to ship services and enquired about getting the wine for her upcoming cruise and was told that was an option, though she would have to buy the entire case of 12 bottles, whether she intended to drink all the bottles on her 7-day cruise or not. (As an aside, I felt that was entirely reasonable compromise on the part of the cruise line. It was after all, a special request for her and how is the cruise line to know if anyone else wants that particular vintage? She did not share my opinion and abruptly cancelled her cruise over the lack of her favorite wine.)
Still another poster complained that the shampoo provided was not the brand she uses and objected to having to bring a supply of her preferred brand. And yet another complains that the butter on the ship is not of the quality he finds at home, and often the yogurt is not the kind he can get at "any supermarket in the US."
These types of posts leave me wondering about people. They claim they want to see and experience the world, but then object (and quite often complain) because the world is not their home town. I am honestly confused as to what they expected to find in the world and why, if they are as picky as they are portraying themselves, they want to leave their secure habitats in the first place. Surely they can watch documentaries and see the same things from the comfort of their homes with the right selection of cream, wine, shampoo, and yogurt.
Look, I'm from New Orleans. It is far and away more individual than anywhere else I have ever been. And while I would love for everywhere else I go to have exactly what I can get in New Orleans, that would mean that everywhere else IS New Orleans. But I know that to see and experience the world first hand and in person, I have to leave New Orleans, and unfortunately that means doing without some of my favorite things. On the whole, I think I'm a better person for this understanding.
I'm not sure the complainers really want to "experience the world." I'm pretty sure they just want to have the world come to them, or at the very least, the world to be exactly what their limited experience has led them to believe it should be. To everyone who is that picky and that opinionated, I can only offer this advice: STAY HOME! SEND THE MONEY INSTEAD! Everyone will be better off, and happier, in the long run.
Most of my cruises have been with Holland America Line, mainly because my first travel agent knew both my family and me well enough to know that we would not really enjoy our time on any of the other cruise lines. Also, Holland America travels to the places I want to go. That first cruise was a Canada/New England itinerary and at the time, only one other line was doing that route, and it was priced out of my budget. As it turns out, the travel agent was not wrong. I did enjoy that first cruise, and the eleven that have followed it. I like Holland America for its relatively small, quiet ships. I know this will not come as a surprise to anyone, but I am really not a loud person and prefer to read quietly alone, even on vacation, than to be in large, active, loud social groups. In short, Holland America is the perfect line for me.
Holland America is a US-based company, based in Seattle, Washington, though its ships are foreign-flagged vessels, most of them Dutch-flagged. The officers and crew of the vessel are mainly Dutch, Indonesian, and Filipino. And while the general atmosphere of the ships is American-ish, it is decidedly not America, despite the company name. Additionally, like most cruise lines, Holland America sources its food and beverage supplies from wherever the ships are in port, which means it is feasible to source products from the US, or in fact with US-based companies or brands. These are important facts to remember. Even US-based cruise company's ships are not the US. They are, essentially, other countries.
Enough background. On to the real reason for this wall of text.
I read and post on a cruise message board. Today's rant is a reaction to those people who cruise, allegedly because they want to see and experience the world, but then complain that the cruise ships and/or port stops are not their hometowns. Today there was a discussion where the original poster complained that she (I'm assuming based on the user name) can't get real cream for her coffee, instead only what is known as half & half in the US or coffee cream in other parts of the world. She proclaims that she is "extremely picky" about her coffee and the pseudo-cream "just won't do!"
Another poster complained quite loudly to anyone who will listen (or read) that the wine list on the ship does not include her favorite chardonnay. Her favorite local diner has the readily available wine, why can't the ship?! She did note that she spoke to ship services and enquired about getting the wine for her upcoming cruise and was told that was an option, though she would have to buy the entire case of 12 bottles, whether she intended to drink all the bottles on her 7-day cruise or not. (As an aside, I felt that was entirely reasonable compromise on the part of the cruise line. It was after all, a special request for her and how is the cruise line to know if anyone else wants that particular vintage? She did not share my opinion and abruptly cancelled her cruise over the lack of her favorite wine.)
Still another poster complained that the shampoo provided was not the brand she uses and objected to having to bring a supply of her preferred brand. And yet another complains that the butter on the ship is not of the quality he finds at home, and often the yogurt is not the kind he can get at "any supermarket in the US."
These types of posts leave me wondering about people. They claim they want to see and experience the world, but then object (and quite often complain) because the world is not their home town. I am honestly confused as to what they expected to find in the world and why, if they are as picky as they are portraying themselves, they want to leave their secure habitats in the first place. Surely they can watch documentaries and see the same things from the comfort of their homes with the right selection of cream, wine, shampoo, and yogurt.
Look, I'm from New Orleans. It is far and away more individual than anywhere else I have ever been. And while I would love for everywhere else I go to have exactly what I can get in New Orleans, that would mean that everywhere else IS New Orleans. But I know that to see and experience the world first hand and in person, I have to leave New Orleans, and unfortunately that means doing without some of my favorite things. On the whole, I think I'm a better person for this understanding.
I'm not sure the complainers really want to "experience the world." I'm pretty sure they just want to have the world come to them, or at the very least, the world to be exactly what their limited experience has led them to believe it should be. To everyone who is that picky and that opinionated, I can only offer this advice: STAY HOME! SEND THE MONEY INSTEAD! Everyone will be better off, and happier, in the long run.
Friday, June 27, 2014
Corny Meanings
As I mentioned before, I have been drawn into this season of MasterChef Australia. In retrospect it was a mistake. But now I have invested too much to not stick it out to the end to see who wins.
Today's episode was an challenge for a "power apron" to control the challenges for the nest week. The contestants had to make an serving for each of the entreé (appetizer), mains (entreé), and dessert course. There were not other restrictions save time for the dishes.
I like to see the creativity of the contestants in using the ingredients, but today I was not-so-quietly seething throughout the challenge. Not because of the ingredients used in the dish, but what one of the contestants called his dish.
This particular contestant called his dish a succotash. Now I love succotash. It's one of my favorite side dishes. I prepare mine in a traditional style, with whole kernel corn, lima beans and cream. I know others may add tomatoes to their succotash, and I will grudgingly agree to that, but still think the addition of tomatoes makes the dish more a macque choux than a succotash. But either way, the dish has corn and beans, more often than not, specifically lima beans.
This contestant's dish contained freekeh, which I had to look up to learn is a roasted green wheat berry, and red and yellow capsicums (bell peppers). There was no corn or beans in sight, save 6, and yes, he counted them!, shelled snap-pea peas as garnish. This dish bore no resemblance to any variation of succotash ever.
And this is where I'll get all over ugly American on the Aussies. Sorry folks, succotash is a Native American dish, that was, at least apocryphally, served at the first Thanksgiving celebration. It is at the very least, a traditional Thanksgiving side dish. The name succotash comes from a Native American word for broken corn. Corn is an integral part of the dish.
The abomination of the contestant didn't even use corn oil! No corn anywhere.
I'm sorry, but the alleged judges, who are themselves either master chefs or food experts, should have known better and should have called him out for the gross misnomer of his dish. I don't care how good a dish it was, it was not succotash.
I complained about this to dearest over my own dinner tonight and he made the comment that the dish was succotash in the same that our dessert was pie -- a pie without pastry, not baked, and served cold from the individual bowls in which it was set, in other words, not pie at all. We had chocolate pudding (a variation on blancmange) for dessert.
Words have meaning. As Horton repeats in the Dr. Seuss book, Horton Hatches the Egg, "I said what I meant / I meant what I said / An elephant's faithful one-hundred percent." Name your dish what it actually is, not simply a word that sounds good.
Today's episode was an challenge for a "power apron" to control the challenges for the nest week. The contestants had to make an serving for each of the entreé (appetizer), mains (entreé), and dessert course. There were not other restrictions save time for the dishes.
I like to see the creativity of the contestants in using the ingredients, but today I was not-so-quietly seething throughout the challenge. Not because of the ingredients used in the dish, but what one of the contestants called his dish.
This particular contestant called his dish a succotash. Now I love succotash. It's one of my favorite side dishes. I prepare mine in a traditional style, with whole kernel corn, lima beans and cream. I know others may add tomatoes to their succotash, and I will grudgingly agree to that, but still think the addition of tomatoes makes the dish more a macque choux than a succotash. But either way, the dish has corn and beans, more often than not, specifically lima beans.
This contestant's dish contained freekeh, which I had to look up to learn is a roasted green wheat berry, and red and yellow capsicums (bell peppers). There was no corn or beans in sight, save 6, and yes, he counted them!, shelled snap-pea peas as garnish. This dish bore no resemblance to any variation of succotash ever.
And this is where I'll get all over ugly American on the Aussies. Sorry folks, succotash is a Native American dish, that was, at least apocryphally, served at the first Thanksgiving celebration. It is at the very least, a traditional Thanksgiving side dish. The name succotash comes from a Native American word for broken corn. Corn is an integral part of the dish.
The abomination of the contestant didn't even use corn oil! No corn anywhere.
I'm sorry, but the alleged judges, who are themselves either master chefs or food experts, should have known better and should have called him out for the gross misnomer of his dish. I don't care how good a dish it was, it was not succotash.
I complained about this to dearest over my own dinner tonight and he made the comment that the dish was succotash in the same that our dessert was pie -- a pie without pastry, not baked, and served cold from the individual bowls in which it was set, in other words, not pie at all. We had chocolate pudding (a variation on blancmange) for dessert.
Words have meaning. As Horton repeats in the Dr. Seuss book, Horton Hatches the Egg, "I said what I meant / I meant what I said / An elephant's faithful one-hundred percent." Name your dish what it actually is, not simply a word that sounds good.
Thursday, June 26, 2014
Sailing, Sailing
Wednesday, October 16, 2013 (Fleuve St.-Laurent, Gulf of St. Lawrence)
It was a sea day, so there was nothing pressing on my time and I had nothing to get done and nowhere to be. I wish I could say I slept late, and I guess I did, as it was 8:30 before I was fully awake and about, but that’s hardly really late. I’m not really a late sleeper on a regular basis. It’s rare that I’m in bed later than 9, and vacation is not really different than other times.
I had 10 days of antibiotics, so I needed to be up in time to get some yogurt at breakfast, so sleeping truly late wasn't really an option anyway. I got up and dressed for a quick breakfast of yogurt, freshly squeezed orange juice, and pain au chocolate, before a day of strenuous resting and relaxing. I did want to make to to at least one of the ship's trivia contests, so we planned that, made a team of just us and did fairly well. I think we came in fourth. It was the one time I managed to get to trivia on this cruise. My mother is ultra-competitive and if she can't win, she doesn't want to play, so coming in fourth was not great in her opinion and she decided not to go back to team trivia. In some ways I can see her point, because even though the rule is "Seattle is always right!" Seattle, via at the answer sheet, isn't always right. One cruise we were joined by a couple from Canada to make up our team and the husband wrote what could have been accurately called a dissertation summation in answer to a question about the significance of the "11th Hour of the 11th Day of the 11th Month." He was correct in every point he made, but the Seattle answer sheet said the correct answer was that it marked the end of WWI. Another time with the same couple, the answer Seattle provided was flat out wrong and the husband knew that because he was a researcher who disproved what was listed as the correct answer. We fought for our point for that one, and finished first in that round. But there trivia contest today was hardly that intense. It was a fun way to while away an hour or so on a sea day.
After trivia, and a quick bite for lunch, followed by ice cream an meringue cookies, naps were had on the gently undulating seas. I read my book in between naps and relaxing, but really didn’t do much else. It was a formal night for dinner and that meant getting all gussied up. I had attempted to shave my legs in the morning -- and generally succeeded, but I did nick myself a couple of times and I am sure I missed a few spots. I have never been good at shaving and doing it on a moving ship in a shower does not help my overall ineptness for the task. But I did make myself fairly decent for dinner and my own opinion is that anyone who is close enough to notice my poor job and snarky enough to comment can have the pleasure of the re-doing it for me. Dinner was in the main dining room and because it was a formal night, the chairs were dressed. I despise dressed chairs! I don’t really like to get myself formal if I can avoid it, but I certainly see no point in my furniture appearing in formal dress. Honestly I can't remember what was had for dinner, but I'm sure it wasn't terrible and I know there was ice cream and the really good cookies for dessert. The wafer cookies that come with the ice cream desserts in the main dining room are one of my absolute favorite things about cruising.
Ohh, I do remember something about this particular sea day. It was was the second night the ship would be passing in good position to see the Aurora Borealis, so for the second night I stayed up late to see if I could catch a glimpse, but once again it was not to be so. It was too cloudy to see anything, so my dream of seeing the Northern Lights in person remains unfulfilled. Disappointed, I headed to bed and the promise of Charlottetown tomorrow.
It was a sea day, so there was nothing pressing on my time and I had nothing to get done and nowhere to be. I wish I could say I slept late, and I guess I did, as it was 8:30 before I was fully awake and about, but that’s hardly really late. I’m not really a late sleeper on a regular basis. It’s rare that I’m in bed later than 9, and vacation is not really different than other times.
I had 10 days of antibiotics, so I needed to be up in time to get some yogurt at breakfast, so sleeping truly late wasn't really an option anyway. I got up and dressed for a quick breakfast of yogurt, freshly squeezed orange juice, and pain au chocolate, before a day of strenuous resting and relaxing. I did want to make to to at least one of the ship's trivia contests, so we planned that, made a team of just us and did fairly well. I think we came in fourth. It was the one time I managed to get to trivia on this cruise. My mother is ultra-competitive and if she can't win, she doesn't want to play, so coming in fourth was not great in her opinion and she decided not to go back to team trivia. In some ways I can see her point, because even though the rule is "Seattle is always right!" Seattle, via at the answer sheet, isn't always right. One cruise we were joined by a couple from Canada to make up our team and the husband wrote what could have been accurately called a dissertation summation in answer to a question about the significance of the "11th Hour of the 11th Day of the 11th Month." He was correct in every point he made, but the Seattle answer sheet said the correct answer was that it marked the end of WWI. Another time with the same couple, the answer Seattle provided was flat out wrong and the husband knew that because he was a researcher who disproved what was listed as the correct answer. We fought for our point for that one, and finished first in that round. But there trivia contest today was hardly that intense. It was a fun way to while away an hour or so on a sea day.
After trivia, and a quick bite for lunch, followed by ice cream an meringue cookies, naps were had on the gently undulating seas. I read my book in between naps and relaxing, but really didn’t do much else. It was a formal night for dinner and that meant getting all gussied up. I had attempted to shave my legs in the morning -- and generally succeeded, but I did nick myself a couple of times and I am sure I missed a few spots. I have never been good at shaving and doing it on a moving ship in a shower does not help my overall ineptness for the task. But I did make myself fairly decent for dinner and my own opinion is that anyone who is close enough to notice my poor job and snarky enough to comment can have the pleasure of the re-doing it for me. Dinner was in the main dining room and because it was a formal night, the chairs were dressed. I despise dressed chairs! I don’t really like to get myself formal if I can avoid it, but I certainly see no point in my furniture appearing in formal dress. Honestly I can't remember what was had for dinner, but I'm sure it wasn't terrible and I know there was ice cream and the really good cookies for dessert. The wafer cookies that come with the ice cream desserts in the main dining room are one of my absolute favorite things about cruising.
Ohh, I do remember something about this particular sea day. It was was the second night the ship would be passing in good position to see the Aurora Borealis, so for the second night I stayed up late to see if I could catch a glimpse, but once again it was not to be so. It was too cloudy to see anything, so my dream of seeing the Northern Lights in person remains unfulfilled. Disappointed, I headed to bed and the promise of Charlottetown tomorrow.
The Shells of a Paper Town
Tuesday, October 15, 2013 (Baie-Comeau)
I woke up refreshed! It was the first good night’s sleep I had had in a week or longer and it was just what I needed. My cold was still hanging around, and in some ways was a bit worse -- especially in the need for kleenexes, but the sleep was just what I needed.
So I was as bright-eyed and bushy-tailed as a still-sick-but-well-rested-person could be when I met Mom and Dad for breakfast about 9. Normally I do not eat breakfast, but being on antibiotics, I like to have some yogurt just to keep everything happy, and yogurt is only available on the cruise at breakfast, so I needed to get up and get something to eat. Breakfast procured, we headed off to find my brother; he, Mom and I had a shore excursion to the World’s Largest Shell Valley and highlights of the Baie-Comeau region that met at 11:45. My Dad had an excursion to the Baie-Comeau HyrdoQuebec Dam & Electric Plant which I knew he was very excited to visit. Ever the engineer, my Dad is.
Our excursion was very interesting -- it started in a refurbished church that was the interpretative center for the Jardin du Glaciers (Garden of the Glaciers) which had a presentation in three parts on the glaciers that formed the area. It was really a cool presentation, quite literally. The presentation was not only computer generated animation, but also the temperature of the room was cued to the point in the presentation and changed accordingly. There was also a section of the presentation with flowing water, which was ice cold. If I thought the area would get more tourists, I would not hesitate in saying the $9 Million (Canadian) to refurbish the church was well-spent, but I just do not see that many visitors coming to little, out-of-the-way Baie-Comeau, and more is the pity. (Pictures were not allowed in the interpretive center. I respected that, but did manage to get one nice one of the exterior before I re-boarded the bus.)
The next stop was the World’s Largest Shell Valley, which we were quite curious about. We really had no idea what a Shell Valley might be. As it turns out, it is a pocket of seashells along an ancient tidal riverbed. The shells were collected in a rocky pool when the tide brought them and deposited them behind sheltering rocks, so they could not flow back down the river. The shells stayed there for thousands of years until they were unearthed by time and natural erosion. It was an amazing find, and the purest valley of fossil seashells anywhere in the world. It was really like being in a giant sandbox filled with seashells. It was such an interesting place to visit. I can see the scientific importance of the shell valley.
After the shell valley, we had just enough time for a highlights tour of the city, including a bit of history -- it’s a 75 year-old company town built solely because a Mr. McCormick, who owned papers in Chicago and bought some in New York, needed a better and more reliable source of paper for his newsprint. The local highlights were the paper mill (obviously), the local hockey arena (which once hosted a Pro-Am game between the local team and the Chicago Blackhawks), and former Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulruney’s childhood homes -- Mulruney’s father was high up in management at the paper mill and the family lived in couple of the houses provided for Mr. McCormick’s employees.
We got back just in time for sail-away and then had to rush to get to dinner on time. I am sorry we didn’t have any time for souvenir shopping in Baie-Comeau, but I am so glad we visited the little town. I love the little towns that are not quite ready for prime-time visitors and Baie-Comeau is certainly one of those.
After dinner it was back to my cabin for another early-ish night, though not quite so early as the night before. The ship was moving to a new time-zone tomorrow during the sea-day, but since there was was no port to rush to get to or anything particular planned for the day, it was okay to stay a little bit to watch the Tuesday night college football game on ESPN. Even being more awake than the night before I was asleep before the end of the third quarter…
I woke up refreshed! It was the first good night’s sleep I had had in a week or longer and it was just what I needed. My cold was still hanging around, and in some ways was a bit worse -- especially in the need for kleenexes, but the sleep was just what I needed.
So I was as bright-eyed and bushy-tailed as a still-sick-but-well-rested-person could be when I met Mom and Dad for breakfast about 9. Normally I do not eat breakfast, but being on antibiotics, I like to have some yogurt just to keep everything happy, and yogurt is only available on the cruise at breakfast, so I needed to get up and get something to eat. Breakfast procured, we headed off to find my brother; he, Mom and I had a shore excursion to the World’s Largest Shell Valley and highlights of the Baie-Comeau region that met at 11:45. My Dad had an excursion to the Baie-Comeau HyrdoQuebec Dam & Electric Plant which I knew he was very excited to visit. Ever the engineer, my Dad is.
Our excursion was very interesting -- it started in a refurbished church that was the interpretative center for the Jardin du Glaciers (Garden of the Glaciers) which had a presentation in three parts on the glaciers that formed the area. It was really a cool presentation, quite literally. The presentation was not only computer generated animation, but also the temperature of the room was cued to the point in the presentation and changed accordingly. There was also a section of the presentation with flowing water, which was ice cold. If I thought the area would get more tourists, I would not hesitate in saying the $9 Million (Canadian) to refurbish the church was well-spent, but I just do not see that many visitors coming to little, out-of-the-way Baie-Comeau, and more is the pity. (Pictures were not allowed in the interpretive center. I respected that, but did manage to get one nice one of the exterior before I re-boarded the bus.)
(Canada is serious on cracking down on intimidation!)
We got back just in time for sail-away and then had to rush to get to dinner on time. I am sorry we didn’t have any time for souvenir shopping in Baie-Comeau, but I am so glad we visited the little town. I love the little towns that are not quite ready for prime-time visitors and Baie-Comeau is certainly one of those.
After dinner it was back to my cabin for another early-ish night, though not quite so early as the night before. The ship was moving to a new time-zone tomorrow during the sea-day, but since there was was no port to rush to get to or anything particular planned for the day, it was okay to stay a little bit to watch the Tuesday night college football game on ESPN. Even being more awake than the night before I was asleep before the end of the third quarter…
Tuesday, June 24, 2014
Spoiling the War
One of the book-related message boards I subscribe to has had a blow-up fight because one poster posted what many consider to be a "spoiler" in discussing a popular book, without cautioning anyone to that fact. I have no knowledge whether the initial post was, in fact, a spoiler as I have not read the book in question. The fact that I had no desire to do so became a moot point several posts later when she summarized the plot in a retaliatory response to the brouhaha that resulted from her initial post.
This got everyone on the board discussing "spoilers" -- what you consider to be a spoiler, whether you should mark your posts that may include spoilers, even if you do not think you have included spoilers, and whether there needs to be a policy concerning any and all posts discussing any books.
As with most arguments of this nature, feelings are hurt and soon no one can discuss it without becoming incensed.
Someone posted a poll, asking for your definition of a "spoiler." That got me thinking. I think spoilers are anything that will ruin the experience for anyone else. But there is more to it than that. Some things have to be assumed, because sometimes it is simply not possible to discuss a book without ruining the experience for someone.
I thought about the books I have read most recently, as compared to the one I am currently reading. Currently I am reading The Assassination of the Archduke: Sarajevo 1914 and the Murder That Changed the World. I am not sure it is possible to "spoil" this book, as it is all based in historical occurrences. It would not, and should not, be considered a spoiler to tell anyone, when discussing the book, that Queen Victoria died in 1901, or that Archduke Franz Ferdinand was assassinated. These are known facts, and the assassination is even mentioned in the title of the book. Should it should be assumed that prior to reading the book, the reader has a working knowledge of historical events?
On the other hand, telling anyone that a character in a mystery novel I recently finished had a miscarriage would be a spoiler. The event is not mentioned on the blurb or any commercial reviews of the book. (I deliberately did not name the mystery novel in question.) And while the miscarriage is not a major plot point, meaning that it has no bearing whatsoever on the mystery central to the story, it is an important event in the lives of the characters and the story over the series. I could be spoiling someone else's enjoyment of the book to tell them that.
I once inadvertently spoiled a book for someone. I was excited about the book and wanted to share their feelings and their experience. I certainly did not set out to spoil the book, but I did by mentioning an incident that the reader had come not yet to at the time. Since then I have been very careful about spoiling, even inadvertent spoilers.
(And I apologize to anyone who did not know that the Archduke Franz Ferdinand was assassinated in Sarajevo in 1914, or that Queen Victoria died in 1901.)
This got everyone on the board discussing "spoilers" -- what you consider to be a spoiler, whether you should mark your posts that may include spoilers, even if you do not think you have included spoilers, and whether there needs to be a policy concerning any and all posts discussing any books.
As with most arguments of this nature, feelings are hurt and soon no one can discuss it without becoming incensed.
Someone posted a poll, asking for your definition of a "spoiler." That got me thinking. I think spoilers are anything that will ruin the experience for anyone else. But there is more to it than that. Some things have to be assumed, because sometimes it is simply not possible to discuss a book without ruining the experience for someone.
I thought about the books I have read most recently, as compared to the one I am currently reading. Currently I am reading The Assassination of the Archduke: Sarajevo 1914 and the Murder That Changed the World. I am not sure it is possible to "spoil" this book, as it is all based in historical occurrences. It would not, and should not, be considered a spoiler to tell anyone, when discussing the book, that Queen Victoria died in 1901, or that Archduke Franz Ferdinand was assassinated. These are known facts, and the assassination is even mentioned in the title of the book. Should it should be assumed that prior to reading the book, the reader has a working knowledge of historical events?
On the other hand, telling anyone that a character in a mystery novel I recently finished had a miscarriage would be a spoiler. The event is not mentioned on the blurb or any commercial reviews of the book. (I deliberately did not name the mystery novel in question.) And while the miscarriage is not a major plot point, meaning that it has no bearing whatsoever on the mystery central to the story, it is an important event in the lives of the characters and the story over the series. I could be spoiling someone else's enjoyment of the book to tell them that.
I once inadvertently spoiled a book for someone. I was excited about the book and wanted to share their feelings and their experience. I certainly did not set out to spoil the book, but I did by mentioning an incident that the reader had come not yet to at the time. Since then I have been very careful about spoiling, even inadvertent spoilers.
(And I apologize to anyone who did not know that the Archduke Franz Ferdinand was assassinated in Sarajevo in 1914, or that Queen Victoria died in 1901.)
Challenging Television
For reasons I can't quite explain, I have gotten drawn into this season of MasterChef Australia. I really don't know why I have. Perhaps because it's re-run in the mornings when there is nothing else worth watching and I like having the tv on for the noise. From what I can tell, there is nothing about this season to distinguish it from any other season of this series, or any other cooking-competion show. Home and amateur cooks willingly submit themselves to the humiliation of ridiculous "challenges" for a chance of winning a "prize." It's the same formula used the world over for this type of shows.
As far as I can tell the challenges have no basis in reality or skills needed either as a home/amateur cook or a professional chef. Home chefs rarely have a time-clock for a never-been-done-before meal and if it's for dinner, and they realize that the dish has gone wrong, most will just throw in the towel and either do something like scrambled eggs or go for take-out. While running a restaurant is a pressure-filled, time-sensitive venture, most don't try dishes for the first time for service that night. And if a professional chef can't figure out how to (1) remake or (2) change a dish that has gone wrong, he really doesn't deserve the title. Additionally, if there is only a half hour to get a meal on the table, no cook, home, amateur, or professional, would ever attempt a roast! It's just a ridiculous idea. To give the contestants a beautiful roast and allow them only 30 minutes to make something with it, and then complain that the roast was cut and cooked in pieces rather than whole is insane. That's my most common complaint with these shows. The alleged "experts" provide beautiful products and then berate the contestant for not "respecting the ingredients" when they use only part of the whole or cut the whole into pieces that will fully cook in the time allotted. It's not the contestants who are not "respecting the ingredients" in these scenarios, it's the producers, judges, and alleged "experts" who fully expect contestants to cook a 4-pound chicken, whole and on the bone, in 20 minutes. Quoting from the movie My Cousin Vinny, "Perhaps the laws of physics cease to exist on your stove!"
I agree there is no competition without a challenge, and there needs to be some way to winnow the 24 initial contestants down to the final winner. But those challenges need not be designed to fail. Cooking is a skill, but it's also science. Whole chickens on the bone need to roast at least 20 minutes per pound. That means that at a minimum, the whole 4-pound chicken needs 80 minutes. That's an hour and 20 minutes, 4 times longer than the 20 minutes the challenge allowed. I am still at a loss as to how the judges/experts expected the contestants to cook that chicken, whole, with a crispy skin, in just 20 minutes.
In all the cooking competition shows I have seen, and I have subjected myself to too many, I have only seen a couple of truly practical-to-the-home-cook challenges. One was a canned goods challenge, when the contestants only had access to canned goods and basic pantry staples to make a meal. This was practical. Sometimes what you have in your pantry are canned goods, dry pasta and basic things like oil and flour. Most of the contestants, and the judges, if I'm honest, balked at this because the canned goods are of a "lower quality" than fresh. In some cases this is true, but in others it's not. And many good dishes can come from just canned goods.
The second challenge I saw that I thought was practical was a challenge to create a full, balanced meal, including dessert, for 800 calories or less per serving. That is practical, and something most professional chefs have problems with, especially if they are not used to accurately measuring things like butter and oil. But it did show a couple of teams that "diet" food can be more than just a large salad. The winning team did tacos, Spanish rice, and a berry sorbet. The judges in that challenge were an elementary school lunch crowd, which may have something to do with the tacos winning, but it was still a good challenge and something that made the contestants rethink the way they cook and the way they consider ingredients.
There are ways to frame the cooking competitions to make the challenges real and practical, rather than pointless and frivolous. I really wish they would consider more of the practical ones, so that the shows could be more than just a spectator sport. The challenges could serve as educational opportunities as well. It would be just as interesting to the audience, but far more informative.
Then again, I could just turn off my tv and take stock of my pantry for my own MasterChef Challenge for tonight's dinner.
As far as I can tell the challenges have no basis in reality or skills needed either as a home/amateur cook or a professional chef. Home chefs rarely have a time-clock for a never-been-done-before meal and if it's for dinner, and they realize that the dish has gone wrong, most will just throw in the towel and either do something like scrambled eggs or go for take-out. While running a restaurant is a pressure-filled, time-sensitive venture, most don't try dishes for the first time for service that night. And if a professional chef can't figure out how to (1) remake or (2) change a dish that has gone wrong, he really doesn't deserve the title. Additionally, if there is only a half hour to get a meal on the table, no cook, home, amateur, or professional, would ever attempt a roast! It's just a ridiculous idea. To give the contestants a beautiful roast and allow them only 30 minutes to make something with it, and then complain that the roast was cut and cooked in pieces rather than whole is insane. That's my most common complaint with these shows. The alleged "experts" provide beautiful products and then berate the contestant for not "respecting the ingredients" when they use only part of the whole or cut the whole into pieces that will fully cook in the time allotted. It's not the contestants who are not "respecting the ingredients" in these scenarios, it's the producers, judges, and alleged "experts" who fully expect contestants to cook a 4-pound chicken, whole and on the bone, in 20 minutes. Quoting from the movie My Cousin Vinny, "Perhaps the laws of physics cease to exist on your stove!"
I agree there is no competition without a challenge, and there needs to be some way to winnow the 24 initial contestants down to the final winner. But those challenges need not be designed to fail. Cooking is a skill, but it's also science. Whole chickens on the bone need to roast at least 20 minutes per pound. That means that at a minimum, the whole 4-pound chicken needs 80 minutes. That's an hour and 20 minutes, 4 times longer than the 20 minutes the challenge allowed. I am still at a loss as to how the judges/experts expected the contestants to cook that chicken, whole, with a crispy skin, in just 20 minutes.
In all the cooking competition shows I have seen, and I have subjected myself to too many, I have only seen a couple of truly practical-to-the-home-cook challenges. One was a canned goods challenge, when the contestants only had access to canned goods and basic pantry staples to make a meal. This was practical. Sometimes what you have in your pantry are canned goods, dry pasta and basic things like oil and flour. Most of the contestants, and the judges, if I'm honest, balked at this because the canned goods are of a "lower quality" than fresh. In some cases this is true, but in others it's not. And many good dishes can come from just canned goods.
The second challenge I saw that I thought was practical was a challenge to create a full, balanced meal, including dessert, for 800 calories or less per serving. That is practical, and something most professional chefs have problems with, especially if they are not used to accurately measuring things like butter and oil. But it did show a couple of teams that "diet" food can be more than just a large salad. The winning team did tacos, Spanish rice, and a berry sorbet. The judges in that challenge were an elementary school lunch crowd, which may have something to do with the tacos winning, but it was still a good challenge and something that made the contestants rethink the way they cook and the way they consider ingredients.
There are ways to frame the cooking competitions to make the challenges real and practical, rather than pointless and frivolous. I really wish they would consider more of the practical ones, so that the shows could be more than just a spectator sport. The challenges could serve as educational opportunities as well. It would be just as interesting to the audience, but far more informative.
Then again, I could just turn off my tv and take stock of my pantry for my own MasterChef Challenge for tonight's dinner.
Sunday, June 15, 2014
Monday, June 9, 2014
Sunday Morning Treats
A while ago, I found a recipe for Fluffy Oat Bran Pancakes, which was really, really good, but left me with the vast majority of a bag of oat bran to use. I could have just made pancakes often, but I was looking for something else to use the oat bran.
Then I wondered, if you can make bran muffins with wheat bran, could I make them with oat bran? A quick search of my cookbooks resulted in a recipe for Bran Muffins, in which any kind of bran could be use. So I made the muffins, according to the recipe, with oat bran. They were good, basic, muffins, but something was lacking. I wanted a bit more flavor, a bit more … something. So I filed the recipe away as useful, but not quite perfect.
This morning, after watching California Chrome finish 5th in the Belmont Stakes (in a failed attempt for the Triple Crown), I decided two things: (1) I missed being home to host Race-Day parties, with interesting nibbles and sharing the race with other people; and (2) 8:30 in the morning is far too early to consider a Race-Day party! But I was still left feeling a bit disappointed and in want of something special.
After much consideration, I decided I wanted muffins. And I wanted bran muffins in particular. Back to the cookbook with the basic recipe. But how could I make them as special and festive as I was craving? Then it hit me! Add berries! I had half a box of frozen berries in the freezer. Frozen berries can be added directly to muffin batter and would bake nicely. That did it. Berry-Bran Muffins it was!
So I whipped up a batch of Berry-Bran Muffins. They were very nice. And just what the plain bran muffins were missing. I will definitely keep the recipe and mix it up a bit more. I'm thinking apples and cinnamon might be a good addition for the next batch.
Berry-Bran Muffins
2 tablespoons butter
3 tablespoons sugar
1 egg
3/4 cup milk
1 cup oat bran (not rolled oats)
1 cup flour
2 teaspoons baking powder
1/2 teaspoon salt
3/4 cup mixed berries (no need to thaw if frozen)
Adapted from: Better Homes and Gardens New Cook Book, (reprinted) 1953 Edition
My Observations:
Then I wondered, if you can make bran muffins with wheat bran, could I make them with oat bran? A quick search of my cookbooks resulted in a recipe for Bran Muffins, in which any kind of bran could be use. So I made the muffins, according to the recipe, with oat bran. They were good, basic, muffins, but something was lacking. I wanted a bit more flavor, a bit more … something. So I filed the recipe away as useful, but not quite perfect.
This morning, after watching California Chrome finish 5th in the Belmont Stakes (in a failed attempt for the Triple Crown), I decided two things: (1) I missed being home to host Race-Day parties, with interesting nibbles and sharing the race with other people; and (2) 8:30 in the morning is far too early to consider a Race-Day party! But I was still left feeling a bit disappointed and in want of something special.
After much consideration, I decided I wanted muffins. And I wanted bran muffins in particular. Back to the cookbook with the basic recipe. But how could I make them as special and festive as I was craving? Then it hit me! Add berries! I had half a box of frozen berries in the freezer. Frozen berries can be added directly to muffin batter and would bake nicely. That did it. Berry-Bran Muffins it was!
So I whipped up a batch of Berry-Bran Muffins. They were very nice. And just what the plain bran muffins were missing. I will definitely keep the recipe and mix it up a bit more. I'm thinking apples and cinnamon might be a good addition for the next batch.
Berry-Bran Muffins
3 tablespoons sugar
1 egg
3/4 cup milk
1 cup oat bran (not rolled oats)
1 cup flour
2 teaspoons baking powder
1/2 teaspoon salt
3/4 cup mixed berries (no need to thaw if frozen)
- Preheat oven to 425° F, and either grease a muffin pan line with muffin liners.
- In large bowl, cream butter and sugar until light and fluffy.
- Add egg and blend well.
- Stir in milk.
- Add oat bran, mixing well.
- Sift flour, baking powder, and salt together and add to mixture, stirring just until everything is combined.
- Gently fold in berries.
- Spoon into prepared muffin pan, filling each cup about 2/3 full.
- Bake for 20-25 minutes at 425°F, or until tops are golden brown and spring back when touched.
- Remove from pan and cool slightly before serving.
Adapted from: Better Homes and Gardens New Cook Book, (reprinted) 1953 Edition
My Observations:
- You could certainly change out the fruit used. If you used raisins or apples, I would add a bit of cinnamon to the batter.
- I made a dozen muffins, but the last few were a bit smaller, which was good because dearest only wanted a small muffin, having already had crumpets and Vegemite.
- Muffins are best on the day they are baked.
Thursday, June 5, 2014
They Don't Know Me Very Well, Do They?
I was reading an article titled "Organizing Mistakes That Make Your House Look Messy." I know, I know. I keep my house pretty organized, but I am convinced that stuff accumulates in direct proportion to the amount of space in which to house it. And I'm always on the lookout for tips and ideas to make things look neater, because I am pretty sure I'll never be able to ditch all the stuff that fills my house.
But there were a couple of tips I wondered about:
My collection is mainly paperbacks. If I didn't display the paperbacks, well over 75% of my collection would be packed in boxes. This is bad for several reasons, not the least of which is that I would have to dig through boxes to actually read the books. See, that's the difference between books and wax flowers. Books are meant to be read. They are meant to be handled; it's near impossible to read a book without holding it. Additionally, storing books in boxes is not good for the books, especially if they are stacked flat on top of one another. Much better to have your books nestled safely on shelves where they can breathe.
As for the other point, overstuffing bookshelves. I have 900+ books and then numbers only increase. If I didn't "overstuff" my shelves, I'd never have room for them all. For true readers, and true book collectors, an overstuffed shelf is a beautiful thing. And I love to display my books. I like people being able to peruse my library and check out what I read, even my guilty pleasure books, or the few bestsellers I own. I know people judge others by the books they read, and my library offers plenty of choices for judging.
I'll take advice from many sources, but I positively refuse to listen to anyone who suggests that I either get rid of or hide my books away. Sorry, just not going to happen.
But there were a couple of tips I wondered about:
The Mistake: Displaying Every Book You Own
"Don't put paperbacks or the ones that got wet on vacation out. If you have a good collection of books, you don't need to display paperbacks. You have to be able to let go," says professional organizer Linda Rothschild.
The Mistake: Packed BookshelvesI've mentioned several times that I moved my library of 900+ books with me to Australia. There was not way I was leaving any behind. I worked hard to build up my library. My books ARE my collection and they deserve to be displayed every bit as much as someone else's milk bottles or wax flowers.
Displaying only books you love leaves breathing room and space for decorative accessories. "I always go for balance. I'm fond of telling people when your bookshelf is 80 percent full, it's really full," says professional organizer Nancy Heller.
My collection is mainly paperbacks. If I didn't display the paperbacks, well over 75% of my collection would be packed in boxes. This is bad for several reasons, not the least of which is that I would have to dig through boxes to actually read the books. See, that's the difference between books and wax flowers. Books are meant to be read. They are meant to be handled; it's near impossible to read a book without holding it. Additionally, storing books in boxes is not good for the books, especially if they are stacked flat on top of one another. Much better to have your books nestled safely on shelves where they can breathe.
As for the other point, overstuffing bookshelves. I have 900+ books and then numbers only increase. If I didn't "overstuff" my shelves, I'd never have room for them all. For true readers, and true book collectors, an overstuffed shelf is a beautiful thing. And I love to display my books. I like people being able to peruse my library and check out what I read, even my guilty pleasure books, or the few bestsellers I own. I know people judge others by the books they read, and my library offers plenty of choices for judging.
I'll take advice from many sources, but I positively refuse to listen to anyone who suggests that I either get rid of or hide my books away. Sorry, just not going to happen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)