In article >,
Goomba > wrote:

> A ribbon slut wannabe I'm thinking.
>
> Although unusual flavor combos, eh??
>
> http://www.chow.com/blog/2010/02/thi...oler-than-you/

:-)
I always find it interesting that some people put a lot of stock in the
absence of commercial fruit pectin in their concoctions. I don't. The
recipes that do not include it, while they use less sugar, require a
longer cook time which, to my taste, results in a "heavier" taste‹I
don't know how else to describe it. And some fruits, when cooked
without pectin, just get thick and sometimes gummy. That's not really
"jam" as I understand a commonly-acknowledged definition of the product.

I know a guy who looks upon popular American recipes for jams
(typically requiring the addition of pectin) with extreme disdain.
Tiresome. He has a commercial, small-batch company and markets
commercially. I tasted one of his "jam" products and was quite
underwhelmed. "Sauce" would have been a more honest labeling of the
product.

The interesting combinations are. . . . interesting. :-)

It's too bad that the Gedney jams are not distributed nationally; they
really do make a fine product with three or four ingredients: Fruit,
sugar, pectin, citric acid. And the pieces of fruit are actually
identifiable!
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://web.me.com/barbschaller; new entries posted 2-2-2010