Split Pea Soup
We like to add a ham bone to this. If you do, add it with the ham.
When you're done, remove the bone. Cut the pieces of meat off the bone
and return them to the soup.
We serve this with red wine vinegar, Maggi, and seasoned salt on the
table.
We like to use a light rye bread instead of white bread, but I think
most folks prefer the white bread with this.
The brown sugar gives this a sweeter taste without overpowering the
other flavors.
Serves 6.

2 large slices of ham
1 sliced onion
bacon fat
1 turnip
1 large carrot
4 outer stalks of celery
1 leek
3 quarts hot water
1 pint split peas
salt and pepper
flour
cold milk
4 slices white bread
1 tsp brown sugar

Soak the peas in cold water overnight.
Dice the ham.
Fry the ham and onion in bacon fat until they are lightly browned.
Cut up the vegetables into small pieces.
Add the vegetables to the ham and onion.Soup
Let them simmer for 15 minutes.
Add the hot water and the peas.
Boil gently until the peas are tender, stirring constantly.
Season with the salt and pepper to taste.
Add the brown sugar.
Remove the soup from the fire and rub through a sieve.
If the soup is too thin, add a few ounces of flour mixed with some cold
milk.
Return the soup to the fire.
Allow to simmer for 30 minutes.
Cut up the bread into small pieces.
Fry the bread in very hot fat until nicely browned.
Remove the bread and drain it.
Add a few pieces of bread to each bowl of soup.

--
Mike
http://www.facebook.com/groups/mikes.place.bar/
http://forums.delphiforums.com/mikes_place1/start
My Amazon.com author page: http://tinyurl.com/695lgym

On Jan 8, 11:22*am, Mike Muth > wrote:
> Split Pea Soup
> We like to add a ham bone to this. *If you do, add it with the ham.
> When you're done, remove the bone. *Cut the pieces of meat off the bone
> and return them to the soup.
> We serve this with red wine vinegar, Maggi, and seasoned salt on the
> table.
> We like to use a light rye bread instead of white bread, but I think
> most folks prefer the white bread with this.
> The brown sugar gives this a sweeter taste without overpowering the
> other flavors.
> Serves 6.
>
Another old one, it appears. Are all that you plan to post like
this?

> 2 large slices of ham
> 1 sliced onion
> bacon fat
> 1 turnip

I'd make that optional.

> 1 large carrot
> 4 outer stalks of celery

1 or 2 small ribs would be more than enough for me.

> 1 leek

Optional, too.
> 3 quarts hot water
> 1 pint split peas
> salt and pepper
> flour

No.

> cold milk
> 4 slices white bread

substitute your favorite croutons.

> 1 tsp brown sugar

Definitely optional.
>
> Soak the peas in cold water overnight.

Completely unnecessary. Besides the ingredients, the tipoff that the
recipe is old.

........
> Remove the soup from the fire and rub through a sieve.

Nowadays pretty nostalgic. Food mill or wand blender or blender, or
omit the step.

> If the soup is too thin, add a few ounces of flour mixed with some cold
> milk.

Not. If peas have cooked enough it won't be thin whether or not
pureed. Flour and milk are not good additions.

just my personal comments. ymmv. So far, all your recipes seem more
like old starting places rather than tried and adjusted and improved.
Okay it that's your intended style, but not especially interesting to
me. -aem

aem > wrote:

> Another old one, it appears. Are all that you plan to post like
> this?

I'm sure it's been around for a while in some form. We used this recipe
just last week.

>> 2 large slices of ham
>> 1 sliced onion
>> bacon fat
>> 1 turnip

> I'd make that optional.

Everyone should vary recipes to suit their own tastes. We like the
blend of flavors.

>> 1 large carrot
>> 4 outer stalks of celery

> 1 or 2 small ribs would be more than enough for me.

>> 1 leek

> Optional, too.

>> 3 quarts hot water
>> 1 pint split peas
>> salt and pepper
>> flour
>
> No.

Yes.

>> cold milk
>> 4 slices white bread

> substitute your favorite croutons.

We don't buy croutons. We use as little in the way of pre-packaged food
as possible. It's all that added sugar and chemicals...

>> 1 tsp brown sugar

> Definitely optional.

Less so if you leave in all the stuff you would take out.

>> Soak the peas in cold water overnight.

> Completely unnecessary. Besides the ingredients, the tipoff that the
> recipe is old.

Yet, we did it this way. Yes, we use a lot of old recipes here. We
also use newer recipes. Old/new has little bearing on whether a recipe
produces a good end product. We happen to like how this one turns out.

>> Remove the soup from the fire and rub through a sieve.

> Nowadays pretty nostalgic. Food mill or wand blender or blender, or
> omit the step.

We have a relatively gadget-free kitchen. We could use our blender for
this, but choose not to. It's not that hard to use the sieve. The
effort saved by using a blender is mostly lost during set up and at
cleanup time. (we rarely run our dishwasher.) In this recipe, using
the blender homogenizes the flavor. We prefer the way it blends when
done the old way.

>> If the soup is too thin, add a few ounces of flour mixed with some
>> cold milk.
>
> Not. If peas have cooked enough it won't be thin whether or not
> pureed. Flour and milk are not good additions.

It would not be a good addition after leaving out all the ingredients
you would omit. On the other hand, it would then be a completely
different recipe which tastes nothing like this one. For the recipe as
written, it works - although you don't usually need *that much* flour
and milk.

> just my personal comments. ymmv. So far, all your recipes seem more
> like old starting places rather than tried and adjusted and improved.
> Okay it that's your intended style, but not especially interesting to
> me. -aem

Many of my recipes are developed from older ones. I think that's pretty
common. I grant you that it is uncommon that we tend to do things using
older methods and avoiding much of the packaged food which is out there.
You'll not find too many meals being made with "cans of this, packages
of that" type recipes in our house.

All the recipes I've posted have been one's we cooked at home. We tend
to use a basic recipe and vary it as our whims dictate. That's why I
like to discuss variations at the beginning. We also don't do "fancy"
all that much. Simple is also "hard to mess up". We like simple, but
good recipes.

Besides, every recipe is a starting point for many people. No matter
how refined the recipe, folks will want to change it, to experiment, to
make it suit their tastes - and they should do so. A recipe is just a
starting point on the journey to a good meal.

Today's evening meal is made entirely from a German cookbook which is at
least 100 years old. Some of my family's recipes have been passed down
with little or no change (except to accomodate changing kitchen tools)
for 250 years. We know folks here whose recipes originally came over
from Germany and Switzerland in the mid 17th century. They still make
them the old way except that some now have gas stoves.

"If you always do what you always did, you'll always get what you always
got" is not always a bad thing.

--
Mike
http://www.facebook.com/groups/mikes.place.bar/
http://forums.delphiforums.com/mikes_place1/start
My Amazon.com author page: http://tinyurl.com/695lgym

Sqwertz > wrote:

<Nothing really. Just trying to be annoying>

We had a wedding in the church today. These are a bit different from what
most folks experience. Among the differences is the meal and reception
which follow.

The servers left the sanctuary early. They were almost all members of the
church youth group. Most of them had nothing to do with serving a meal but
would circulate through the room serving tea and coffee.

Row by row, folks were sent to the basement (which serves as a fellowship
hall). After signing the guest register, they got in line.

As people entered the hall, they were give a disposable plate with a
sandwich (ham, salami, turkey, and cheese), some chips, and a slice of
cake. More sandwiches were on plates at each table.

The servers, after allowing time for everyone (400 or so people) to finish
their meal, served up ice cream to go with the cake.

That's pretty much standard for Holdemann Mennonite weddings.


--
Mike
http://www.facebook.com/groups/mikes.place.bar/
http://forums.delphiforums.com/mikes_place1/start
My Amazon.com author page: http://tinyurl.com/695lgym

Sqwertz > wrote:

<nothing much>

In Germany, there is a tradition called "Kaffee und Kuchen." It's similar
to English Tea. Basically, one invites friends over in the mid-afternoon.
Then, over a cup or two of coffee and a slice of Kuchen (cake), pie,
pastries, or other sweet baked goods, the friends share some time together.
It's a relaxing way to break up the afternoon, which has become less common
as careers pre-empt the time. Sundays, and often Saturdays, still find
Germans gathered around the Kaffeetisch (Coffee table).

In our family, we've transplanted this tradition to central Kansas. In the
afternoons, you'll find us on our deck or in the house sharing this time
with our friends. Among our Mennonite community, a Sunday meal is often
followed by coffee and dessert - basically a form of Kaffee und Kuchen.




--
Mike
http://www.facebook.com/groups/mikes.place.bar/
http://forums.delphiforums.com/mikes_place1/start
My Amazon.com author page: http://tinyurl.com/695lgym

aem > wrote:

> On Jan 8, 11:22*am, Mike Muth > wrote:

<snip>

>> Remove the soup from the fire and rub through a sieve.
>
> Nowadays pretty nostalgic. Food mill or wand blender or blender, or
> omit the step.

This is what we use:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_mill

Ours is constructed a little differently, but is essentially the same
thing.

--
Mike
http://www.facebook.com/groups/mikes.place.bar/
http://forums.delphiforums.com/mikes_place1/start
My Amazon.com author page: http://tinyurl.com/695lgym

On 8 Jan 2012 19:22:21 GMT, Mike Muth > wrote:

>Dice the ham.
>Fry the ham and onion in bacon fat until they are lightly browned.
>Cut up the vegetables into small pieces.
>Add the vegetables to the ham and onion.Soup
>Let them simmer for 15 minutes.
>Add the hot water and the peas.
>Boil gently until the peas are tender, stirring constantly.
>Season with the salt and pepper to taste.
>Add the brown sugar.
>Remove the soup from the fire and rub through a sieve.

You rub ham, onion, and veggies through a sieve?

You have no split peas -- or anything else meaningful -- left.

-- Larry

On 08/01/2012 2:22 PM, Mike Muth wrote:
> Split Pea Soup
> We like to add a ham bone to this. If you do, add it with the ham.
> When you're done, remove the bone. Cut the pieces of meat off the bone
> and return them to the soup.
> We serve this with red wine vinegar, Maggi, and seasoned salt on the
> table.
> We like to use a light rye bread instead of white bread, but I think
> most folks prefer the white bread with this.
> The brown sugar gives this a sweeter taste without overpowering the
> other flavors.
> Serves 6.
>
> 2 large slices of ham
> 1 sliced onion
> bacon fat
> 1 turnip
> 1 large carrot
> 4 outer stalks of celery
> 1 leek
> 3 quarts hot water
> 1 pint split peas
> salt and pepper
> flour
> cold milk
> 4 slices white bread
> 1 tsp brown sugar
>
> Soak the peas in cold water overnight.
> Dice the ham.
> Fry the ham and onion in bacon fat until they are lightly browned.
> Cut up the vegetables into small pieces.
> Add the vegetables to the ham and onion.Soup
> Let them simmer for 15 minutes.
> Add the hot water and the peas.
> Boil gently until the peas are tender, stirring constantly.
> Season with the salt and pepper to taste.
> Add the brown sugar.
> Remove the soup from the fire and rub through a sieve.
> If the soup is too thin, add a few ounces of flour mixed with some cold
> milk.
> Return the soup to the fire.
> Allow to simmer for 30 minutes.
> Cut up the bread into small pieces.
> Fry the bread in very hot fat until nicely browned.
> Remove the bread and drain it.
> Add a few pieces of bread to each bowl of soup.
>


That is a lot different from the way I make split pea soup. I use one
one diced onion, one large diced carrot and a couple celery stalks.I
sautee them, add a couple bay leaves. Toss in split peas, a few litres
of water and a smoke ham hock. Bring it to a boil and and then simmer
until the peas turn mushy. Remove the ham hock. Strip the skin from the
hock. Scrape the meat from the bone, chop it and then return it to the
soup mix. Season with freshly ground pepper. There should be enough
salt from the ham hock.

On 1/8/2012 5:45 PM, Mike Muth wrote:

> This is what we use:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_mill
>
> Ours is constructed a little differently, but is essentially the same
> thing.

That's a food mill, lovie, and it's just like most every other food mill
out there. They're widely available, made of a variety of materials and
easy to get. My large metal food mill is identical to my great
grandmother's food mill from the turn of the previous century.

On 1/8/2012 8:02 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 08/01/2012 2:22 PM, Mike Muth wrote:
>> Split Pea Soup
>> We like to add a ham bone to this. If you do, add it with the ham.
>> When you're done, remove the bone. Cut the pieces of meat off the bone
>> and return them to the soup.
>> We serve this with red wine vinegar, Maggi, and seasoned salt on the
>> table.
>> We like to use a light rye bread instead of white bread, but I think
>> most folks prefer the white bread with this.
>> The brown sugar gives this a sweeter taste without overpowering the
>> other flavors.
>> Serves 6.
>>
>> 2 large slices of ham
>> 1 sliced onion
>> bacon fat
>> 1 turnip
>> 1 large carrot
>> 4 outer stalks of celery
>> 1 leek
>> 3 quarts hot water
>> 1 pint split peas
>> salt and pepper
>> flour
>> cold milk
>> 4 slices white bread
>> 1 tsp brown sugar
>>

>
> That is a lot different from the way I make split pea soup. I use one
> one diced onion, one large diced carrot and a couple celery stalks.I
> sautee them, add a couple bay leaves. Toss in split peas, a few litres
> of water and a smoke ham hock. Bring it to a boil and and then simmer
> until the peas turn mushy. Remove the ham hock. Strip the skin from the
> hock. Scrape the meat from the bone, chop it and then return it to the
> soup mix. Season with freshly ground pepper. There should be enough salt
> from the ham hock.

I make mine the same way as Dave but I use a ham bone instead of the
smoked hock. I've tried the hock and we decided it was too strong
(salty? smoky? I don't remember.) Perhaps it's just not what we were
used to thinking of as pea soup flavor. The croutons sound like a good
addition, but not the turnip, sugar or milk. I've never had to thicken
pea soup. Perhaps soaking the peas does something to lessen their
starch or thickening ability?

gloria p

Sqwertz > wrote:

<well, nothing positive really>

We went shopping late yesterday. Among the things we wanted was fresh
produce. Alas, that is hard to come by in this area. The stuff at Walmart
always seems to go bad after only a day or two. Dillons (a Kroger store in
Kansas) has better produce and the improvement is worth the price.

But, there just isn't anywhere to get a good selection of quality produce.
Even the farmer's markets (in season, of course) are a real crap shoot.
We'd do more "grow your own" but our yard is not shaped well for a garden.
We have a creek running through the back yard and most of the yard slopes
down toward it. If I till that up, I'll have erosion problems. I guess
I'm going to have to terrace part of it - if FEMA will let me do that.

--
Mike
http://www.facebook.com/groups/mikes.place.bar/
http://forums.delphiforums.com/mikes_place1/start
My Amazon.com author page: http://tinyurl.com/695lgym

wrote:

> On 8 Jan 2012 19:22:21 GMT, Mike Muth > wrote:

>>Remove the soup from the fire and rub through a sieve.
>
> You rub ham, onion, and veggies through a sieve?

If your using a cooking spoon and sieve, those things are going to resist
being rubbed through and you can easity sort them back out. We use a food
mill. The larger bits all wind up on top of the blade but a significant
portion of the veggies do go through.

Now, if you had dropped this in a blender, everything would be pureed.

> You have no split peas -- or anything else meaningful -- left.

One would expect a person doing like this to exercise a bit of sense.
Still, yours is a good point and I need to stop assuming that people will
do the reasonable thing.

Perhaps I should indicate the use of a food mill in that recipe.

--
Mike
http://www.facebook.com/groups/mikes.place.bar/
http://forums.delphiforums.com/mikes_place1/start
My Amazon.com author page: http://tinyurl.com/695lgym

gloria p > wrote:

<snip>

> I make mine the same way as Dave but I use a ham bone instead of the
> smoked hock. I've tried the hock and we decided it was too strong
> (salty? smoky? I don't remember.) Perhaps it's just not what we
> were used to thinking of as pea soup flavor.

There are a lot of variations on this theme. We make a couple of
varieties of pea soup, depending on what we have in the kitchen and what
we feel like eating. We're actually more likely to do this by the
wife's family recipe or an Amish recipe. This one is good when you want
something a little sweeter.

> The croutons sound like
> a good addition, but not the turnip, sugar or milk.

A matter of taste. You don't usually wind up adding that much milk.
The sugar isn't really that much (1 Tbsp in 3 quarts), so it sweetens
just a bit.

In my experience, people don't use much in the way of turnips these
days. That's a bit limiting factor for us. We can't use this recipe if
we can't get the ingredients. In that case, we'll do a different split
pea soup recipe.

> I've never had to thicken pea soup. Perhaps soaking the peas does
> something to lessen their starch or thickening ability?

Three quarts of water is a bit much for 2 cups of split peas.

An odd point about that pint/2 cups of split peas measurement. Most
folks these days buy their dried peas in a bag which is marked by weight
and not volume. We tend to buy a lot of our dried goods at an Amish
bulk store and then store them in airtight containers. We keep our
kitchen scale set for metric (for those German recipes), so it's just
more convenient for us to stick with the older measurements which are
found in the recipes. So, we rarely convert the old volume measurements
to weight measurments and I'm likely to go the other way.

Now, I mentioned ounces when measuring the flour. This is really more
of a "toss some into a cup and mix some milk in". How much to use is a
judgement call.


--
Mike
http://www.facebook.com/groups/mikes.place.bar/
http://forums.delphiforums.com/mikes_place1/start
My Amazon.com author page: http://tinyurl.com/695lgym

Pennyaline > wrote:

> On 1/8/2012 5:45 PM, Mike Muth wrote:
>
>> This is what we use:

>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_mill

>> Ours is constructed a little differently, but is essentially the same
>> thing.

> That's a food mill, lovie, and it's just like most every other food mill
> out there.

Well, yeah. That's why I provided the pointer to what I use instead of a
sieve and spoon. I assumed that there were possibly readers who were not
familiar with food mills. IME, most kitchens these days don't have them.

> They're widely available, made of a variety of materials and
> easy to get. My large metal food mill is identical to my great
> grandmother's food mill from the turn of the previous century.

Why mess with a successful design?


--
Mike
http://www.facebook.com/groups/mikes.place.bar/
http://forums.delphiforums.com/mikes_place1/start
My Amazon.com author page: http://tinyurl.com/695lgym

I posted a recipe a short while back. the split pea soup with butternut
squash or sweet potatoes.

Jill just couldn't imagine that. sheldon mentioned not pureeing it which I
did not say to do. It pretty much got shot down or ignored by all here.

I again recommend trying that recipe just as written. It's very very good.
I'll never try another recipe after having this.

It calls for no ham, but you will never miss it. It's a vegetarian meal and
the best one I ever ate. As I stated though, a friend made this once and
couldn't resist adding the ham flavor. It was maybe even better? Maybe,
but you'll never miss the ham if you don't use it.

I've tried it both ways. I prefer using sweet potatoes vs the butternut
squash.

Gary

Gary > wrote:

> I posted a recipe a short while back. the split pea soup with
> butternut squash or sweet potatoes.

Would you be kind as to provide me a link to it or just e-mail it to me.
I'd like to try that with sweet potatoes.

--
Mike
http://www.facebook.com/groups/mikes.place.bar/
http://forums.delphiforums.com/mikes_place1/start
My Amazon.com author page: http://tinyurl.com/695lgym

Andy > wrote:


> She used bacon. So do I.

One of the recipes we use calls for bacon. We dice up bacon from a slab we
get at the Amish butcher shop.


--
Mike
http://www.facebook.com/groups/mikes.place.bar/
http://forums.delphiforums.com/mikes_place1/start
My Amazon.com author page: http://tinyurl.com/695lgym

On 1/9/2012 5:21 AM, Mike Muth wrote:
> > wrote:

>> That's a food mill, lovie, and it's just like most every other food mill
>> out there.
>
> Well, yeah. That's why I provided the pointer to what I use instead of a
> sieve and spoon. I assumed that there were possibly readers who were not
> familiar with food mills. IME, most kitchens these days don't have them.
>

You're not doing a cooking demonstration to a small group in the local
library. This is a food group, honey. We know what food mills are. We
know about these things.




>> They're widely available, made of a variety of materials and
>> easy to get. My large metal food mill is identical to my great
>> grandmother's food mill from the turn of the previous century.
>
> Why mess with a successful design?


Precisely, but that wasn't my point. The point is you're acting like a
dewy-eyed newbie over one. It's akin to feeling you have to explain a
telephone to us.

Pennyaline > wrote:

> On 1/9/2012 5:21 AM, Mike Muth wrote:
>> > wrote:

>>> That's a food mill, lovie, and it's just like most every other food
>>> mill out there.

>> Well, yeah. That's why I provided the pointer to what I use instead
>> of a sieve and spoon. I assumed that there were possibly readers who
>> were not familiar with food mills. IME, most kitchens these days
>> don't have them.

> You're not doing a cooking demonstration to a small group in the local
> library. This is a food group, honey. We know what food mills are. We
> know about these things.

But can you say that about the folks who lurk but don't post or those
who may simply stumble across the group? How about those who come here
because they hope to learn something?

For that matter, I know some pretty good cooks who have never used a
food mill. Like I said, most kitchens with which I am familiar don't
have food mills.

>>> They're widely available, made of a variety of materials and
>>> easy to get. My large metal food mill is identical to my great
>>> grandmother's food mill from the turn of the previous century.

>> Why mess with a successful design?

> Precisely, but that wasn't my point. The point is you're acting like a
> dewy-eyed newbie over one. It's akin to feeling you have to explain a
> telephone to us.

Posted a link. Said I provided that link for anyone who might read the
message who isn't familiar with them. That's wrong?


--
Mike
http://www.facebook.com/groups/mikes.place.bar/
http://forums.delphiforums.com/mikes_place1/start
My Amazon.com author page: http://tinyurl.com/695lgym

In article >,
Mike Muth > wrote:

> Pennyaline > wrote:

> > You're not doing a cooking demonstration to a small group in the local
> > library. This is a food group, honey. We know what food mills are. We
> > know about these things.

[snips]

> But can you say that about the folks who lurk but don't post or those
> who may simply stumble across the group? How about those who come here
> because they hope to learn something?

> > Precisely, but that wasn't my point. The point is you're acting like a
> > dewy-eyed newbie over one. It's akin to feeling you have to explain a
> > telephone to us.
>
> Posted a link. Said I provided that link for anyone who might read the
> message who isn't familiar with them. That's wrong?

IMNSHO, this isn't a group exclusively for experienced cooks. It isn't
for newbies, either, but brief explanations of simple things seem
appropriate, and links are always welcome (to me, not all others).

Having said that, I'm not a fan of food mills/immersion blenders/etc. I
gave up baby food long ago. I like my food chunky, whether it is soup
or mashed potatoes.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Dan Abel > wrote:

<snip>

> IMNSHO, this isn't a group exclusively for experienced cooks. It
> isn't for newbies, either, but brief explanations of simple things
> seem appropriate, and links are always welcome (to me, not all
> others).

That was what I had thought the group was about (silly me).

> Having said that, I'm not a fan of food mills/immersion blenders/etc.
> I gave up baby food long ago. I like my food chunky, whether it is
> soup or mashed potatoes.

There's certainly nothing wrong with that. We all have differing likes and
dislikes. IME, life is better when one simply accepts that other people
are different (as you seem to have done).

I have to admit, I'm a bit testy this morning. (The daughter caught a
nasty stomach bug at work (she's medical staff at a nursing home) and none
of us got much sleep last night.) So, I may have been overly sensitive and
less polite than I would like in a couple of messages.

I do owe an apology to a couple of friends who used to post here, though.
I thought they were overstating the level of hostility which *some* of the
people here exhibit. Now, having said that, I'll also say that I don't
think the group as a whole nor even a high proportion of the people here
are anything but positive contributors.



--
Mike
http://www.facebook.com/groups/mikes.place.bar/
http://forums.delphiforums.com/mikes_place1/start
My Amazon.com author page: http://tinyurl.com/695lgym

On 1/9/2012 9:00 AM, Mike Muth wrote:

> But can you say that about the folks who lurk but don't post or those
> who may simply stumble across the group? How about those who come here
> because they hope to learn something?

Lurkers and new stumblees learn by lurking. That is the point of
lurking. That is why a brief lurking interval and the reading of FAQs is
recommended.



> For that matter, I know some pretty good cooks who have never used a
> food mill. Like I said, most kitchens with which I am familiar don't
> have food mills.

But they have spoons and sieves for the same purpose? How about the
chinois (something else my grandma and great grandma had, with a massive
wooden dowel--a very cool tool!)? Food processors? Potato masher??



> Posted a link. Said I provided that link for anyone who might read the
> message who isn't familiar with them. That's wrong?

You posted a link to a very elementary kitchen tool. The manner of your
approach was condescending, following hard on another poster's mention
of a food mill: ("This is what we use:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_mill
Ours is constructed a little differently, but is essentially the same
thing")...

....right, because we'd never have known that.

Know your audience.

On Mon, 09 Jan 2012 07:11:53 -0700, Pennyaline
> wrote:

> The point is you're acting like a
> dewy-eyed newbie over one. It's akin to feeling you have to explain a
> telephone to us.

I sure didn't get that from what he said. In any case, I didn't use
mine enough to merit it taking up space in my kitchen cupboards so
it's living in the basement now and I use my wand blender for soup.
--

Ham and eggs.
A day's work for a chicken, a lifetime commitment for a pig.

On 9 Jan 2012 16:00:29 GMT, Mike Muth >
wrote:

> Posted a link. Said I provided that link for anyone who might read the
> message who isn't familiar with them. That's wrong?

Absolutely nothing.
--

Ham and eggs.
A day's work for a chicken, a lifetime commitment for a pig.

Pennyaline > wrote:

> On 1/9/2012 9:00 AM, Mike Muth wrote:
>
>> But can you say that about the folks who lurk but don't post or those
>> who may simply stumble across the group? How about those who come
>> here because they hope to learn something?
>
> Lurkers and new stumblees learn by lurking. That is the point of
> lurking. That is why a brief lurking interval and the reading of FAQs
> is recommended.

But, they can't learn if something is never mentioned...

>> For that matter, I know some pretty good cooks who have never used a
>> food mill. Like I said, most kitchens with which I am familiar don't
>> have food mills.
>
> But they have spoons and sieves for the same purpose?

Spoons and sieves have other uses, too. I don't think I've seen a
kitchen without those. Well, not in kitchen in which cooking is done.

> How about the
> chinois (something else my grandma and great grandma had,

Nope. I don't have one either.

> with a
> massive wooden dowel--a very cool tool!)? Food processors?

Those who have electricity, yes. A few of our friends are Amish.

> Potato masher??

Yep. Some have the old wooden kind, some have more modern stainless
steel tools. Some folks just use their electric mixer.

>> Posted a link. Said I provided that link for anyone who might read
>> the message who isn't familiar with them. That's wrong?
>
> You posted a link to a very elementary kitchen tool. The manner of
> your approach was condescending,

Perhaps you saw condescending. It wasn't.

> following hard on another poster's
> mention of a food mill: ("This is what we use:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_mill
> Ours is constructed a little differently, but is essentially the same
> thing")...

> ...right, because we'd never have known that.

Well, gee. I'm talking about how I prepare the recipe and then I also
mention that I use a food mill (which was actually in response to a
question). You do know that there are different kinds of food mills,
don't you? Go to, for example, Walmart.com and search for food mill.
One is exactly what I have, the other looks nothing like what I would
think of as a "food mill." Pointing to the wiki link does distinguish
between the two. You might also want to look up the Roma Food Mill or
the Babysteps Electric Food Mill. So pointing out that one is similar
to mine is not condescending, but using a link to provide a bit of
information.

--
Mike
http://www.facebook.com/groups/mikes.place.bar/
http://forums.delphiforums.com/mikes_place1/start
My Amazon.com author page: http://tinyurl.com/695lgym

On 9 Jan 2012 11:57:21 GMT, Mike Muth >
wrote:

> I guess
> I'm going to have to terrace part of it - if FEMA will let me do that.

Is that because you're so close to the creek? I know Oregon is very
strict about how close you can do *anything* which includes
cutting/trimming the bushes/weeds next to the creek. Takes all the
caché of creekside living away AFAIC. What if your terraced portion
wasn't stonework, would that make a difference?
--

Ham and eggs.
A day's work for a chicken, a lifetime commitment for a pig.

sf > wrote:

> On 9 Jan 2012 11:57:21 GMT, Mike Muth >
> wrote:
>
>> I guess
>> I'm going to have to terrace part of it - if FEMA will let me do
>> that.
>
> Is that because you're so close to the creek?

It's because the creek is part of the flood control plan. No one is
supposed to build anything which might impede the flow of water when the
creek floods. My house and workshop (future office) are above the flood
line, so I can do as I like in that are.

<snip>
> What if your terraced portion
> wasn't stonework, would that make a difference?

Nope. The free flow of floodwater is all that matters. It's really
stupid because the bridge at the intersection in the SE corner of my lot
would be a major impediment to the free flow of water at flood stage.
The creek narrows a good 8 feet at the bridge.

The creek is really nice when we have mild or warmer weather. I can
have breakfast on the deck and watch the wildlife (surprising amounts
given that I am in town). Afternoon coffee is also nicer outside.

When I am able to terrace outside, I'm going to build a patio under some
trees. I already have the brick. I just need to bring in a load of
sand so I can lay the bricks. We'll probably use an umbrella when we
eat, though. Lots of birds means that you run the risk of very unwanted
food additives.

--
Mike
http://www.facebook.com/groups/mikes.place.bar/
http://forums.delphiforums.com/mikes_place1/start
My Amazon.com author page: http://tinyurl.com/695lgym

On 1/9/2012 11:03 AM, Mike Muth wrote:

> But, they can't learn if something is never mentioned...

If they were reading FAQs and lurking and perusing old posts, they would
know what you obviously don't: almost everything has already been mentioned.




> Spoons and sieves have other uses, too. I don't think I've seen a
> kitchen without those. Well, not in kitchen in which cooking is done.

You are too condescending for words. Outright plonkable, you are.


Re chinois:

> Nope. I don't have one either.

No surprise.



>> with a
>> massive wooden dowel--a very cool tool!)? Food processors?
>
> Those who have electricity, yes. A few of our friends are Amish.
>
>> Potato masher??
>
> Yep. Some have the old wooden kind, some have more modern stainless
> steel tools. Some folks just use their electric mixer.

Does that include your Amish friends who don't have electricity?



> Well, gee. I'm talking about how I prepare the recipe and then I also
> mention that I use a food mill (which was actually in response to a
> question). You do know that there are different kinds of food mills,
> don't you? Go to, for example, Walmart.com and search for food mill.
> One is exactly what I have, the other looks nothing like what I would
> think of as a "food mill." Pointing to the wiki link does distinguish
> between the two. You might also want to look up the Roma Food Mill or
> the Babysteps Electric Food Mill. So pointing out that one is similar
> to mine is not condescending, but using a link to provide a bit of
> information.

You might want to go back to my original response to you, in which I
talked about food mills, then reconsider the spirit of your post above
and what you truly mean to convey through it.

Pennyaline > wrote:

<snip>

I realize that you will never accept me in this group or anything I have to
say, or that anyone would want to do simple recipes, simply and without a
gadget-laden kitchen. We aren't going to agree. I see no point in
continuing this sub thread. If you want to think that you "won", feel
free.


--
Mike
http://www.facebook.com/groups/mikes.place.bar/
http://forums.delphiforums.com/mikes_place1/start
My Amazon.com author page: http://tinyurl.com/695lgym

Pennyaline wrote:

>>> That's a food mill, lovie, and it's just like most every other food mill
>>> out there.
>>
>> Well, yeah. That's why I provided the pointer to what I use instead of a
>> sieve and spoon. I assumed that there were possibly readers who were not
>> familiar with food mills. IME, most kitchens these days don't have them.
>
> You're not doing a cooking demonstration to a small group in the local
> library. This is a food group, honey. We know what food mills are. We know
> about these things.

You forget that this group is being served out to Foodbanter, and those
people don't know a damn thing.

Bob

Mike wrote:

> <nothing much>

Over on RFC Facebook, Damsel brought up the topic of Valentine's Day. My
recent observation was that whenever Lin and I go out on a "special" night
like that, we seem to get the rush service, as if the restaurant has grossly
overbooked its tables. Accordingly, I've resolved to cook Valentine's dinner
at home again this year. I have a few ideas, but haven't settled completely
on any particular items. Here's what I'm considering:


Braised Celery Hearts with Shrimp

Glazed Chicken Livers with Blood-Orange Segments
Mashed Cauliflower

Candied Red Bell Pepper on a Farina Timbale

Apricot Clafoutis (made from dried apricots reconstituted with plum wine)


Has anybody else started their Valentine's Day planning?

Bob

Mike replied to Gary:

>> I posted a recipe a short while back. the split pea soup with
>> butternut squash or sweet potatoes.
>
> Would you be kind as to provide me a link to it or just e-mail it to me.
> I'd like to try that with sweet potatoes.

There's this new site called Google which can find things like that for you.
I highly recommend it.

Bob

Gary wrote:

> I posted a recipe a short while back. the split pea soup with butternut
> squash or sweet potatoes.
>
> Jill just couldn't imagine that. sheldon mentioned not pureeing it which
> I did not say to do. It pretty much got shot down or ignored by all here.

Maybe if you hadn't buried it in a thread about immersion blenders (which I
didn't read because find them pretty useless) it would have received wider
attention.


> I'll never try another recipe after having this.

I'll never STOP trying new things.

Bob

On 2012-01-09, gloria p > wrote:

> I make mine the same way as Dave but I use a ham bone instead of the
> smoked hock. I've tried the hock and we decided it was too strong
> (salty? smoky? I don't remember.)

Gloria, try locating some ham shanks. A little meatier and more
likely to find un-smoked/cured. Often located near and packaged
like ham hocks, which they usually resemble.

nb

--
vi --the root of evil

On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 22:42:39 -0800, "Bob Terwilliger"
> wrote:

> My
> recent observation was that whenever Lin and I go out on a "special" night
> like that, we seem to get the rush service, as if the restaurant has grossly
> overbooked its tables.

I've only been out once for Valentines Day in recent memory (I've been
married too long to remember that far back) and you're right about the
over booked tables. The last time we went out was on a Valentines
Day. We booked at Le Charm and good thing we had reservations because
they were completely packed with people lined up outside waiting for a
table. I can't say we were rushed because the wait staff had more to
do than rush us, but we were so close to other tables that we ended up
chatting with the couple next to us... which was probably something
they would have rather not done considering it was V Day. In any
case, the food was good and I was willing to give them another
chance... but hubby was less than charmed by the experience (he
doesn't want to pay that kind of money to be practically sitting in a
stranger's lap), so we've never been back.
--

Ham and eggs.
A day's work for a chicken, a lifetime commitment for a pig.