"Corey Richardson" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 21:55:50 +0000 (UTC), (Steve
> Pope) wrote:
>
>>Andy <q> wrote:
>>
>>>>>"Steve Pope" > wrote in message
>>
>>>>>> WRONG.
>>
>>>I break my spaghetti in half. Takes too many twirls otherwise.
>>
>>Why not just use ziti or rigatoni if you don't want to
>>twirl spaghetti?
>>
>>Seriously, I wish spaghetti were even longer.
>
> You want spaghetti longer than "long" spaghetti?!
>

Okay, hoss, you're making this up.

cybercat > wrote:

>No, one should do whatever one wishes. I never make regular spaghetti any
>more, I make angelhair. And I might try *not* breaking it in half just
>because I have never *not* broken it in half.

I have less experience with angelhair, just standard spaghetti
and vermicelli. But I suspect angelhair is easier to twirl,
regardless, since it tends to mass together into a lump anyway.

However, with typical gauge spaghetti, it seems to me obvious
that for a given amount of spaghetti twirled onto a fork, there
are going to be twice as many loose ends flopping around if
it has been broken in half. I can't see how it could not be
sloppier.

Steve

"Steve Pope" > wrote in message
...
> cybercat > wrote:
>
>>No, one should do whatever one wishes. I never make regular spaghetti
>>any
>>more, I make angelhair. And I might try *not* breaking it in half just
>>because I have never *not* broken it in half.
>
> I have less experience with angelhair, just standard spaghetti
> and vermicelli. But I suspect angelhair is easier to twirl,
> regardless, since it tends to mass together into a lump anyway.
>
> However, with typical gauge spaghetti, it seems to me obvious
> that for a given amount of spaghetti twirled onto a fork, there
> are going to be twice as many loose ends flopping around if
> it has been broken in half. I can't see how it could not be
> sloppier.
>
My fork skills are excellent. It runs in my family. We yield them with a
rapier-like swiftness and grace.

Steve Pope said...

> cybercat > wrote:
>
>>No, one should do whatever one wishes. I never make regular spaghetti
>>any more, I make angelhair. And I might try *not* breaking it in half
>>just because I have never *not* broken it in half.
>
> I have less experience with angelhair, just standard spaghetti
> and vermicelli. But I suspect angelhair is easier to twirl,
> regardless, since it tends to mass together into a lump anyway.
>
> However, with typical gauge spaghetti, it seems to me obvious
> that for a given amount of spaghetti twirled onto a fork, there
> are going to be twice as many loose ends flopping around if
> it has been broken in half. I can't see how it could not be
> sloppier.
>
> Steve


That's why they (whoever THEY are) invented fettuccine!

Andy

> wrote in message
...
> Frequently, when I cook spaghetti (standard method; bring water to
> boil, break noodles, put in pot, boil for X time, and drain) the
> noodles wind up sitting in the bowl/strainer with a sort of film on
> them. It manifests itself as a sort of 'bubble' (not globular- just a
> flat film) stretching from one noodle to another, and the whole lump
> of pasta crackles.
>
> I have been eternally wondering which is true:
> - It happens because my pasta is low grade
> - Spaghetti does that
> - There is dried soap sticking to the bowl/stirring instrument
> - Something ... Else ... (dramatic sound effect)
>
> I am hoping it's not the last one! I try to rinse it off, but I hate
> cold pasta and it's hard to keep it warm when dunking it in water!
>
> Thanks for your input.

If you are breaking the pasta the pot you have is too small.

As a rule of thumb you should at the very least use a Dutch Oven, A large
stock pot is preferable. A pasta pot is the best investment.

Dimitri

merryb wrote:
> On Aug 12, 1:56 pm, "cybercat" > wrote:
>> "Steve Pope" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> > wrote:
>>>> Frequently, when I cook spaghetti (standard method; bring water to
>>>> boil, break noodles,
>>> WRONG.
>> Okay. Why NOT break "noodles?"
>
> That's what I'm wondering!

This is a good question. There are a few folks have trouble with the act
of spooling spaghetti onto the fork. This is caused by several factors.
Poor eyesight and lack of control of the wrist and arms mostly. Also
they really love spaghetti - a lot! Their aim is to get a big ole ball
going on that fork. You'll notice that these folks will typically have
sauce all over themselves and a big grin on their puss. If you have one
of these sauce-soaked, hideously grinning goofballs in your family or
if, for God sake, you're one of them, please do everyone a favor and
don't break that spaghetti in half! And always remember to wear a bib. I
mean always... like 24/7.

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 19:59:22 -0400, "cybercat" >
wrote:

>No, one should do whatever one wishes. I never make regular spaghetti any
>more, I make angelhair. And I might try *not* breaking it in half just
>because I have never *not* broken it in half. But I bet it's be a one-time
>thing.

I have to say I'm not in love with regular spaghetti either. I buy
"thin spaghetti". Broken spaghetti is good for slurpers, not
twirlers.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:03:41 -0400, "cybercat" >
wrote:

>
>"Corey Richardson" `R> wrote in message
.. .
>> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:59:28 -0400, "cybercat" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"George" > wrote in message
.. .
>>>> cybercat wrote:
>>>>> "Steve Pope" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Frequently, when I cook spaghetti (standard method; bring water to
>>>>>>> boil, break noodles,
>>>>>> WRONG.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Okay. Why NOT break "noodles?"
>>>> They are already cut to the correct length to eat with a fork.
>>>
>>>I break mine in half because my mother broke hers in half.
>>
>> Single or double length spaghetti?
>
>The kind in the regular box bought in regular US grocery chains. I have
>never seen or heard of "double length spaghetti."
>
It's better known as "long or extra long spaghetti".
http://www.dkimages.com/discover/pre...772/124386.JPG


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 19:59:22 -0400, "cybercat" >
wrote:

>No, one should do whatever one wishes. I never make regular spaghetti any
>more, I make angelhair. And I might try *not* breaking it in half just
>because I have never *not* broken it in half. But I bet it's be a one-time
>thing.

I use thin spaghetti, but the folks who eat it usually cut it with
their fork and shovel it in like it was any other kind of food. Not a
twirler in the bunch. Doesn't seem to matter if I break the noodles
first or cook them whole.
--
EZ Larry from St. Louis

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:48:59 -0700 (PDT), "
> wrote:

>Thanks for all the input!

Next time you have a problem, just tell us your real circumstance.
There's nothing like playing a guessing game with no monetary pay off.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

(Steve Pope) wrote in news:g7t26f$9um$2
@blue.rahul.net:

> Corey Richardson > wrote:
>
(Steve Pope) wrote:
>
>>>Seriously, I wish spaghetti were even longer.
>
>>You want spaghetti longer than "long" spaghetti?!
>
> I'm not sure I've had longer than standard. I've seen really
> long spaghetti once or twice. I'll have to try it.
>

Get ahold of a pasta maker?

Saerah

Corey Richardson > wrote in
:

> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 15:06:55 -0700, sf wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 22:55:53 +0100, Corey Richardson
`R> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:40:59 -0400, George >
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>cybercat wrote:
>>>>> "Steve Pope" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Frequently, when I cook spaghetti (standard method; bring water
to
>>>>>>> boil, break noodles,
>>>>>> WRONG.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Okay. Why NOT break "noodles?"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>They are already cut to the correct length to eat with a fork.
>>>
>>>Even "long spaghetti"?
>>>
>>>Or should one use a modified fork to eat it?
>>
>>No, one should twirl fewer noodles. Sheesh, do I have to explain
>>everything?
>
> Seriously, it's really difficult with "long" spaghetti.
>

If eating spaghetti in a normal fashion is *that* hard for you, you
should seriously give up and just blenderize all your food...

Saerah

"cybercat" > wrote in
:

>
> "Steve Pope" > wrote in message
> ...
>> cybercat > wrote:
>>
>>>No, one should do whatever one wishes. I never make regular
>>>spaghetti any
>>>more, I make angelhair. And I might try *not* breaking it in half
>>>just because I have never *not* broken it in half.
>>
>> I have less experience with angelhair, just standard spaghetti
>> and vermicelli. But I suspect angelhair is easier to twirl,
>> regardless, since it tends to mass together into a lump anyway.
>>
>> However, with typical gauge spaghetti, it seems to me obvious
>> that for a given amount of spaghetti twirled onto a fork, there
>> are going to be twice as many loose ends flopping around if
>> it has been broken in half. I can't see how it could not be
>> sloppier.
>>
> My fork skills are excellent. It runs in my family. We yield them with
> a rapier-like swiftness and grace.
>
>

I dunno about you, but my forks look like forks, not knives. Easier to
eat the pasta that way.

Saerah

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 01:52:49 GMT, sarah gray >
wrote:

(Steve Pope) wrote in news:g7t26f$9um$2
:

>> I'm not sure I've had longer than standard. I've seen really
>> long spaghetti once or twice. I'll have to try it.
>>
>
>Get ahold of a pasta maker?
>
>Saerah

Steve, I have seen really long spaghetti in Berkeley Bowl....

Christine

" > wrote in news:cca90c63-639c-
:

> Thanks for all the input!
>
> It probably *is* due to lack of water. Now that I think about it,
> it's most pronounced when there's almost no water left (either from
> boiling too long or not enough water to start- I don't measure it out)
>

I use about 4 quarts of water for a pound of pasta, probably more. You
shouldn't ever have "almost no water left". Angel hair pasta only takes
about 4 minutes to cook, regular spaghetti maybe 7.

> As for noodle preference, spaghetti is actually my least favorite, and
> I'm actually cooking angel hair right now, but the concept is the
> same. Why don't I just not buy spaghetti? Sometimes the other kinds
> of pasta are more expensive, and I also make myself get lots of
> different kinds so I don't fall into a rut.
>
> Why do I break spaghetti? I often use a small pot because I cook for
> 1, and even when I don't, breaking means they sink right in and I
> don't have to poke them around. My family also always broke spaghetti
> so it's a habit as well. Picking up the pasta has never proved to be
> an issue, and right now it's a subsistence food more than a fancy dish
> served with wine. (I am a college student) The stereotypical college
> pasta is ramen, but pasta in my local store is actually a tiny bit
> cheaper by weight, more filling, more nutritious and healthy.
>
> p.s. why do I like angel hair but not spaghetti? the spaghetti ALWAYS
> sticks to the pot and burns, while the angel hair never does, cooks in
> half the time, holds more sauce on the noodles, and has a more
> pleasant texture. ^_^ Although angel hair is not fun to strain.
> Loose too many of 'em. (note; the sticking and burning could be due
> to poor quality pots, but I work with what I've got)
>

Get a cheap metal colander/strainer with wire mesh. I am assuming you
are straining the pasta with the lid from the pot here.

> p.p.s. to one of the first posters- I don't actually leave it
> *sitting* in water and come back to it- that was misphrased on my
> part. I like hot pasta as much as the next guy. Which of course,
> leaves me with the dilemma; when I use canned pre-prepared sauce, how
> do I heat it up!? I can't microwave the bowl because the pasta is
> already cooked (and the microwave is broken) and I can't heat the can
> in hot water like I would a can of beans because to repeatedly reheat
> every day would encourage bacterial growth. I am left w/ heating some
> in a pot, and I prefer not to do that because you inevitably loose
> sauce because it sticks to the pot!

I dunno, eat it cold? Heating up the can is a lousy idea for anything.
Invest in a cheap spatula and you won't have problems with the sauce
getting "loosed".

Saerah (The fact that you are a college student but can't differentiate
"lose" and "loose" is frightening)

"Dimitri" > wrote in message
...
>
> > wrote in message
> ...
>> Frequently, when I cook spaghetti (standard method; bring water to
>> boil, break noodles, put in pot, boil for X time, and drain) the
>> noodles wind up sitting in the bowl/strainer with a sort of film on
>> them. It manifests itself as a sort of 'bubble' (not globular- just a
>> flat film) stretching from one noodle to another, and the whole lump
>> of pasta crackles.
>>
>> I have been eternally wondering which is true:
>> - It happens because my pasta is low grade
>> - Spaghetti does that
>> - There is dried soap sticking to the bowl/stirring instrument
>> - Something ... Else ... (dramatic sound effect)
>>
>> I am hoping it's not the last one! I try to rinse it off, but I hate
>> cold pasta and it's hard to keep it warm when dunking it in water!
>>
>> Thanks for your input.
>
> If you are breaking the pasta the pot you have is too small.
>
> As a rule of thumb you should at the very least use a Dutch Oven, A large
> stock pot is preferable. A pasta pot is the best investment.
>
> Dimitri
Agree, use a larger pot, get it to a rolling boil and throw the pasta in.
Stir immediately so the noodles don't stick. Don't use oil. You might want
to try linguini (my favorite for twirling). Or you could use penne,
rigatoni, springs whatever if you just want to use your fork. I hate it
when people cut their spaghetti and shovel it into their mouths!

Barb

"sarah gray" > wrote in message
. 102...
> "cybercat" > wrote in
> :
>
>>
>> "Steve Pope" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> cybercat > wrote:
>>>
>>>>No, one should do whatever one wishes. I never make regular
>>>>spaghetti any
>>>>more, I make angelhair. And I might try *not* breaking it in half
>>>>just because I have never *not* broken it in half.
>>>
>>> I have less experience with angelhair, just standard spaghetti
>>> and vermicelli. But I suspect angelhair is easier to twirl,
>>> regardless, since it tends to mass together into a lump anyway.
>>>
>>> However, with typical gauge spaghetti, it seems to me obvious
>>> that for a given amount of spaghetti twirled onto a fork, there
>>> are going to be twice as many loose ends flopping around if
>>> it has been broken in half. I can't see how it could not be
>>> sloppier.
>>>
>> My fork skills are excellent. It runs in my family. We yield them with
>> a rapier-like swiftness and grace.
>>
>>
>
> I dunno about you, but my forks look like forks, not knives. Easier to
> eat the pasta that way.
>

You are honest to dawg thick as a ****ing brick. Did you finish high school?

The reference was not to the shape or form of the implement, but to its
speed and grace.

Shave your pits and gain a sense of humor, maybe? That is based upon
something other than ridiculing those more intelligent than you.

<sf> wrote in message ...
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:48:59 -0700 (PDT), "
> > wrote:
>
>>Thanks for all the input!
>
> Next time you have a problem, just tell us your real circumstance.
> There's nothing like playing a guessing game with no monetary pay off.
>
>

You expect a lot out of Usenet.

<sf> wrote in message ...
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 19:59:22 -0400, "cybercat" >
> wrote:
>
>>No, one should do whatever one wishes. I never make regular spaghetti
>>any
>>more, I make angelhair. And I might try *not* breaking it in half just
>>because I have never *not* broken it in half. But I bet it's be a one-time
>>thing.
>
> I have to say I'm not in love with regular spaghetti either. I buy
> "thin spaghetti". Broken spaghetti is good for slurpers, not
> twirlers.

:

I am not a slurper.









Take it back.

"cybercat" > wrote in
:

>
> "sarah gray" > wrote in message
> . 102...
>> "cybercat" > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>>
>>> "Steve Pope" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> cybercat > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>No, one should do whatever one wishes. I never make regular
>>>>>spaghetti any
>>>>>more, I make angelhair. And I might try *not* breaking it in half
>>>>>just because I have never *not* broken it in half.
>>>>
>>>> I have less experience with angelhair, just standard spaghetti
>>>> and vermicelli. But I suspect angelhair is easier to twirl,
>>>> regardless, since it tends to mass together into a lump anyway.
>>>>
>>>> However, with typical gauge spaghetti, it seems to me obvious
>>>> that for a given amount of spaghetti twirled onto a fork, there
>>>> are going to be twice as many loose ends flopping around if
>>>> it has been broken in half. I can't see how it could not be
>>>> sloppier.
>>>>
>>> My fork skills are excellent. It runs in my family. We yield them
>>> with a rapier-like swiftness and grace.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I dunno about you, but my forks look like forks, not knives. Easier
>> to eat the pasta that way.
>>
>
> You are honest to dawg thick as a ****ing brick. Did you finish high
> school?
>

Um, you are the one who says that you "yield" your forks with a "rapier-
like swiftness and grace". I'm not sure how that works, care to explain?
To me, this sounds like "I shit out forks as if they were as graceful as
knives". And yes, I did graduate high school. I was a thorough
underachiever; had a B average but was in the 99th percentile on every
standardized test. If you want I can dig up my SAT scores and scan them
for your perusal


> The reference was not to the shape or form of the implement, but to
> its speed and grace.
>
> Shave your pits and gain a sense of humor, maybe? That is based upon
> something other than ridiculing those more intelligent than you.

For one, I don't see how the state of the hair in my armpits (which I
assume has a purpose, or else it wouldn't, you know, grow on 99.9 % of
humans) has anything to do with my sense of humor. If I had no sense of
humor, I wouldn't be laughing so much when I type these responses to
your inanities. For another, I'm not sure I understand your second
sentence. You seem to imply that *something* is based on "something
other than ridiculing those more intelligent than [i]", but you do not
specify what.

TIA

Saerah (A woman who might not be a member of mensa, but can form a
coherent sentence. She also wonders if Cybercat is related to Jerry
Sauk.)

"cybercat" > wrote in
:

>
> <sf> wrote in message
> ...
>> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 19:59:22 -0400, "cybercat" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>No, one should do whatever one wishes. I never make regular
>>>spaghetti any
>>>more, I make angelhair. And I might try *not* breaking it in half
>>>just because I have never *not* broken it in half. But I bet it's be
>>>a one-time thing.
>>
>> I have to say I'm not in love with regular spaghetti either. I buy
>> "thin spaghetti". Broken spaghetti is good for slurpers, not
>> twirlers.
>
>:
>
> I am not a slurper.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Take it back.
>
>
>

I am laughing too hard to even try and come up with some kind of
humorous response. Someone help a girl out?

Saerah

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 23:25:57 -0400, "cybercat" >
wrote:

>I am not a slurper.

OH, you're dainty? Maybe you break it into smaller pieces.




--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 23:21:46 -0400, "cybercat" >
wrote:

>
><sf> wrote in message ...
>> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:48:59 -0700 (PDT), "
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>Thanks for all the input!
>>
>> Next time you have a problem, just tell us your real circumstance.
>> There's nothing like playing a guessing game with no monetary pay off.
>>
>>
>
>You expect a lot out of Usenet.
>
I have high expectations. That's what I'm paid for.




--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 02:06:03 GMT, sarah gray >
wrote:

>Get a cheap metal colander/strainer with wire mesh. I am assuming you
>are straining the pasta with the lid from the pot here.

Who knows? I'm over this guessing game.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

sarah gray > wrote in
. 102:

> (Steve Pope) wrote in news:g7t26f$9um$2
> @blue.rahul.net:
>
>> Corey Richardson > wrote:
>>
(Steve Pope) wrote:
>>
>>>>Seriously, I wish spaghetti were even longer.
>>
>>>You want spaghetti longer than "long" spaghetti?!
>>
>> I'm not sure I've had longer than standard. I've seen really
>> long spaghetti once or twice. I'll have to try it.
>>
>
> Get ahold of a pasta maker?
>
> Saerah
>

spagatinni <sp> is a spaghetti look a like but thinner than spaghetti and
thicker than angel hair...Purfect for those jazzed up at home store bought
spaghetti sauces. I believe it is a minium of 1 gallon of boiling water to
1 lb of pasta and I think you need at least 2 tbsp salt in that water. A
pasta pot is good for pasta cause of the insert...but it is also good for
making stocks as the insert allows you to remove the spent veggies and
bones quite easily. Oher than spagatinni I use linguinni a fair bit
because I feel these are more the 'manly men' pastas.

--

The house of the burning beet-Alan

sf wrote:

>>>> Okay. Why NOT break "noodles?"
>>>>
>>>>
>>> They are already cut to the correct length to eat with a fork.
>> Even "long spaghetti"?
>>
>> Or should one use a modified fork to eat it?
>
> No, one should twirl fewer noodles. Sheesh, do I have to explain
> everything?
>
Exactly right. It is nasty looking (not to mention "dumbed down
looking) than small, broken bits of spaghetti flopping around on the
plate while you try to twirl a few. A longer strand is neater eating,
and more pleasing to look at. I can twirl a few strands into a nice bite
sized package easily because I was raised doing so.

sarah gray wrote:

> Saerah (A woman who might not be a member of mensa, but can form a
> coherent sentence. She also wonders if Cybercat is related to Jerry
> Sauk.)

More Jerry Springer show.

On Aug 12, 7:48*pm, " > wrote:

> p.p.s. to one of the first posters- I don't actually leave it
> *sitting* in water and come back to it- that was misphrased on my
> part. *I like hot pasta as much as the next guy. *Which of course,
> leaves me with the dilemma; when I use canned pre-prepared sauce, how
> do I heat it up!? *I can't microwave the bowl because the pasta is
> already cooked (and the microwave is broken) and I can't heat the can
> in hot water like I would a can of beans because to repeatedly reheat
> every day would encourage bacterial growth. *I am left w/ heating some
> in a pot, and I prefer not to do that because you inevitably loose
> sauce because it sticks to the pot!

Cook pasta.
Drain pasta, preferably in a sieve.
Return pasta to pot.
Add sauce to pot, put on stove, heat through.
Eat sauced pasta from pot.
If you're really concerned about losing a few grams of sauce, wipe out
the pot with a piece of bread or your fingers or something. Note:
allow
pot to cool a bit before using fingers.

Cindy Hamilton

On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:03:44 -0400, "cybercat" >
wrote:

>"Corey Richardson" > wrote in message
.. .
>
>> You want spaghetti longer than "long" spaghetti?!
>>
>
>Okay, hoss, you're making this up.

Honestly, I'm not.

Sixth one down on the right-hand side:

http://www.buitoni.co.uk/products/products.asp

Long Spaghetti

"The long spaghetti is nearly twice as long as standard spaghetti – a
great way to add a little bit of interest to a meal!"

"Corey Richardson" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:03:44 -0400, "cybercat" >
> wrote:
>
>>"Corey Richardson" > wrote in message
. ..
>>
>>> You want spaghetti longer than "long" spaghetti?!
>>>
>>
>>Okay, hoss, you're making this up.
>
> Honestly, I'm not.
>
> Sixth one down on the right-hand side:
>
> http://www.buitoni.co.uk/products/products.asp
>
> Long Spaghetti
>
> "The long spaghetti is nearly twice as long as standard spaghetti - a
> great way to add a little bit of interest to a meal!"

WoW! I wonder if you can get one whole strand on a fork?

"Goomba" > wrote in message
...
> sf wrote:
>
>>>>> Okay. Why NOT break "noodles?"
>>>>>
>>>> They are already cut to the correct length to eat with a fork.
>>> Even "long spaghetti"?
>>>
>>> Or should one use a modified fork to eat it?
>>
>> No, one should twirl fewer noodles. Sheesh, do I have to explain
>> everything?
>>
> Exactly right. It is nasty looking (not to mention "dumbed down looking)
> than small, broken bits of spaghetti flopping around on the plate while
> you try to twirl a few. A longer strand is neater eating, and more
> pleasing to look at. I can twirl a few strands into a nice bite sized
> package easily because I was raised doing so.

And there we have the pinnacle of your achievements. Aside from wiping other
people's asses and being a nitpicking fool in Usenet. You must be so proud.

Mark Thorson wrote:

> Exactly! Beats me why pasta does this, but there's
> a certain amount of water needed to cook it properly.
> Below that amount, you get a lot of starch dissolving
> out of the pasta.

My youngest son had this problem when he cooked rice noodles. In his
colander, he had a puddle of starch on top of his noodles.

Becca

cybercat wrote:
> "George" > wrote in message
> ...
>> cybercat wrote:
>>> "Steve Pope" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Frequently, when I cook spaghetti (standard method; bring water to
>>>>> boil, break noodles,
>>>> WRONG.
>>>>
>>> Okay. Why NOT break "noodles?"
>> They are already cut to the correct length to eat with a fork.
>
> I break mine in half because my mother broke hers in half.
>
>
I figure if it is worth my time to prepare something I might as well try
to get the best result possible especially when it only takes trivial
changes or pennies of some ingredient to get there. I tend to use
average/typical ingredients so the process is the main thing that can be
tuned. I question everything and experiment and am never a conformist to
what some family member did or what is familiar. They may have been well
meaning but there is nothing wrong asking "why was it done this way and
how can I make it even better?"

"George" > wrote in message
...
> cybercat wrote:
>> "George" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> cybercat wrote:
>>>> "Steve Pope" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Frequently, when I cook spaghetti (standard method; bring water to
>>>>>> boil, break noodles,
>>>>> WRONG.
>>>>>
>>>> Okay. Why NOT break "noodles?"
>>> They are already cut to the correct length to eat with a fork.
>>
>> I break mine in half because my mother broke hers in half.
> I figure if it is worth my time to prepare something I might as well try
> to get the best result possible especially when it only takes trivial
> changes or pennies of some ingredient to get there. I tend to use
> average/typical ingredients so the process is the main thing that can be
> tuned. I question everything and experiment and am never a conformist to
> what some family member did or what is familiar. They may have been well
> meaning but there is nothing wrong asking "why was it done this way and
> how can I make it even better?"

Of course there isn't, George. I had actually never thougth about *why* I
break spaghetti in half. I actually do a lot of things different from my
mother in the kitchen. She was an excellent baker, but an aversion to
certain textures and flavors meant she cooked with out a lot of my favorite
things. Onions, garlic, celery, and eggs, for starters. No kidding. She used
powdered forms or salt, i.e., garlic or celery salt. She never ate or cooked
mushrooms because she got sick on them once as a child. And her folks were
German, 2nd generation off the boat, so spaghetti was about the most exotic
thing she made. Except maybe lasagne. Her food idiosyncrasies were tied
to growing up in the depression, but not completely explained by that. We
have discussed this weird thing some people have about certain textures.
There must be a gene for it, as my sister has a child who is the same way
about different things. She cannot eat mashed potatoes, FGS.

So, yeah, I will try unbroken spaghetti!

When I read the subject line, I imagine the OP as an anchorman saying:

"Film on Spaghetti Noodles, news story at 10."

--Lin

cybercat > wrote:

>Of course there isn't, George. I had actually never thougth about *why* I
>break spaghetti in half.

In my experience, other than just doing it out of habit like
yourself, many people who break spaghetti in half do it to limit
the longest possible dangling length of spaghetti from the
fork to about four or five inches, which they then feel okay about
slurping. Without breaking it in half, there might be eight
or ten inches of spaghetti dangling off the fork, which demands
an extended, sort of double slurp.

Steve

Dimitri wrote:

>
> > wrote in message
>
> ...
> > Frequently, when I cook spaghetti (standard method; bring water to
> > boil, break noodles, put in pot, boil for X time, and drain) the
> > noodles wind up sitting in the bowl/strainer with a sort of film on
> > them. It manifests itself as a sort of 'bubble' (not globular-
> > just a flat film) stretching from one noodle to another, and the
> > whole lump of pasta crackles.
> >
> > I have been eternally wondering which is true:
> > - It happens because my pasta is low grade
> > - Spaghetti does that
> > - There is dried soap sticking to the bowl/stirring instrument
> > - Something ... Else ... (dramatic sound effect)
> >
> > I am hoping it's not the last one! I try to rinse it off, but I
> > hate cold pasta and it's hard to keep it warm when dunking it in
> > water!
> >
> > Thanks for your input.
>
> If you are breaking the pasta the pot you have is too small.
>
> As a rule of thumb you should at the very least use a Dutch Oven, A
> large stock pot is preferable. A pasta pot is the best investment.

When I make some for myself, it's about 5 ounces of pasta. That's
enough for a dinner and leftovers for a lunch later. Long pasta is
usually vermicelli. That amount I can do in the three quart sauce pot.
Anything more requires the larger ones.




Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

"Lin" > wrote in message
est...
> When I read the subject line, I imagine the OP as an anchorman saying:
>
> "Film on Spaghetti Noodles, news story at 10."
>
> --Lin

I did too.

(Steve Pope) wrote in
:

> cybercat > wrote:
>
>>Of course there isn't, George. I had actually never thougth about
>>*why* I break spaghetti in half.
>
> In my experience, other than just doing it out of habit like
> yourself, many people who break spaghetti in half do it to limit
> the longest possible dangling length of spaghetti from the
> fork to about four or five inches, which they then feel okay about
> slurping. Without breaking it in half, there might be eight
> or ten inches of spaghetti dangling off the fork, which demands
> an extended, sort of double slurp.
>
> Steve
>

Others don't have a pot the correct size and by breaking the spaghetti
they get it all under the boiling water at 1 go. No putting it in and
stirring several seconds later.

--

The house of the burning beet-Alan

Lin > wrote:

> When I read the subject line, I imagine the OP as an anchorman saying:
>
> "Film on Spaghetti Noodles, news story at 10."

And here it is:
<http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoID=20340 01808>

Victor