Rick & Cyndi wrote:
>> "Arri London" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>>
>>> Damsel wrote:
>>>>
>>>> When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4
>>>> inches square
>>>> on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta inside was folded
>>>> in half,
>>>> so you were talking strands at least 5-1/2 feet long. One or two
>>>> were all
>>>> that a fork could hold.
>>>>
>>>> We twirled the cooked pasta by holding the tines of our forks
>>>> against a soup spoon and twirling.
>>>>
>>>> I die inside, just a little, when I see someone chop their
>>>> spaghetti into little pieces. Never could get the hang of
>>>> twirling against the plate.
>>>>
>>>> How do *you* get 'sketti from the plate to your mouth?
>>>>
>>>> Carol
>>>
>>> Twirling it but not against a spoon. I'd never seen anyone do that
>>> until I moved to the US.
>> =============
>>
>> While I've always lived in the US, I never saw it done until I moved
>> to the Midwest.
>>
>> I just cringe when I see it...I can't stand the sound of metal on
>> metal (fork vs. spoon) and the thought of somebody scratching up the
>> spoons... nope. It just seems *wrong*!!
>>
I never seem to make contact with the spoon when I do the twirl. If I do it
isn't loud enough to make that sound. No scratched spoons here.

Debbie

"Debbie" > said:

> I never seem to make contact with the spoon when I do the twirl. If I do it
> isn't loud enough to make that sound. No scratched spoons here.

Mom called the scratches a "patina."

Carol

--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon

Damsel wrote:

> We kids would have contests to see who could eat the biggest wad of
> spaghetti. As I mentioned earlier, one or two strands is pretty much
> all
> the average person can handle.
>
> Carol
>

Well ok, children also pick their noses and eat their 'snot' bite their
toenails and do other equaly disgusting things often involving
flatulence and the gag reflex (the vernacular "burp").

And metaphorically this is no differant than the "nature red in tooth
and claw" aspect of 'adult' perceptions.
---
JL

Joseph Littleshoes > said:

> Damsel wrote:
>
> > We kids would have contests to see who could eat the biggest wad of
> > spaghetti.
>
> Well ok, children also pick their noses and eat their 'snot' bite their
> toenails and do other equaly disgusting things often involving
> flatulence and the gag reflex (the vernacular "burp").

Was my recollection *that* gross?

> And metaphorically this is no differant than the "nature red in tooth
> and claw" aspect of 'adult' perceptions.

Huh?

Carol

--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon

"Rick & Cyndi" > writes:

>While I've always lived in the US, I never saw it done until I moved to the
>Midwest.

>I just cringe when I see it...I can't stand the sound of metal on metal
>(fork vs. spoon) and the thought of somebody scratching up the spoons...
>nope. It just seems *wrong*!!

My husband's ceramics professor, a native Italian, used a spoon and
fork to eat spaghetti noodles. It was how he was taught. He was very
fussy about his pasta, too, which always intimidated me.

Stacia

Glitter Ninja wrote:
>
> My husband's ceramics professor, a native Italian, used a spoon and
> fork to eat spaghetti noodles. It was how he was taught.

I don't think Italians can be taught... had to be instinctual.


Sheldon

Cyndi wrote:

> While I've always lived in the US, I never saw it done until I moved to
> the Midwest.
>
> I just cringe when I see it...I can't stand the sound of metal on metal
> (fork vs. spoon) and the thought of somebody scratching up the spoons...
> nope. It just seems *wrong*!!

Both my parents were from Iowa, and they didn't twirl their spaghetti in a
spoon. The first time I saw the technique was -- honest to God -- in a
cartoon. I think it was an issue of Mad magazine.

Bob

Carol wrote:

>> I just cringe when I see it...I can't stand the sound of metal on metal
>> (fork vs. spoon) and the thought of somebody scratching up the spoons...
>> nope. It just seems *wrong*!!
>
> SKREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAK!
>
> That'll teach ya.

Dunno how many "South Park" watchers we have here, but a recent rerun
featured the elementary school being forced to make drastic budget cuts.
The teacher said something like, "Sorry, children, we can't afford chalk, so
I've got to write on the blackboard with this rusty nail."

Bob

Damsel wrote:

> Joseph Littleshoes > said:
>
> > Damsel wrote:
> >
> > > We kids would have contests to see who could eat the biggest wad
> of
> > > spaghetti.
> >
> > Well ok, children also pick their noses and eat their 'snot' bite
> their
> > toenails and do other equaly disgusting things often involving
> > flatulence and the gag reflex (the vernacular "burp").
>
> Was my recollection *that* gross?
>
> > And metaphorically this is no differant than the "nature red in
> tooth
> > and claw" aspect of 'adult' perceptions.
>
> Huh?

Geo politics and its economies is just the 'picking' of the collective
nose.

The young humans are just the adults in miniature with all the same
drives and compulsions. Fear, anger, pain, suffering. And the Sysiphian
task of trying to alleviate some small part of all that. And a bag of
chips.
---
Joseph Littleshoes

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:53:29 -0500, Damsel wrote:

> Same thing happens to me when I try to twirl against the plate. Even
> though I'm over on the side, strands from the main group keep jumping into
> the fork and making a pasta tennis ball.

I capture a few strands with the fork tines and twirl away from the
mass. If other strands try to join the party, I lift the fork a bit
and continue to twirl.

I refuse to order spaghetti when eating "out" because spaghetti is too
"fat" to twirl w/o splattering sauce all over my clothes and you can
never get the last inch or so of the strands to cooperate anyway.
Capellini/vermicelli/thin spaghetti is okay. Linguini is okay too...
but I refuse to fight with regular fat spaghetti noodles in public -
in fact I don't buy it to make at home (now that I think about this).

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 12:20:19 -0700, JimLane wrote:

> sf wrote:
> > On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 23:21:11 -0500, Damsel wrote:
> >
> >> How do *you* get 'sketti from the plate to your mouth?
> >
> > I twirl it against the plate - spoons are for sissies.
> >
> > There are two things I NEVER order in a restaurant:
> > spaghetti of any kind and chicken with bones in it.
>
> No chicken with bones, but ribs with bones? DISCRIMINATION! ;->
>
Ribs weren't mentioned.

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 14:46:34 GMT, Monsur Fromage du Pollet wrote:

> Damsel wrote on 27 Jun 2005 in rec.food.cooking
>
> > I've tried that, but I still wind up with stray strands of pasta
> > getting involved with the ones I started out with.
> >
> > Carol
> >
>
> You select the 1 or 2 strands you want/like. Pick them up between the
> tines of the fork. The actual lifting of the strands is sort of a
> art...use caution that you lifted no more than 2 strands and that you
> have lifted them somewhat NOT too close to a end of the either of
> the indivdual strands, but not so far from a end that you get the
> dreaded dangler.
>
You have mastered the art of spaghetti twirling, Monsur!

sf
<bowing to The Spaghetti Master>

Shut up Boli!

sf wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 12:20:19 -0700, JimLane wrote:
>
>> sf wrote:
>> > On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 23:21:11 -0500, Damsel wrote:
>> >
>> >> How do *you* get 'sketti from the plate to your mouth?
>> >
>> > I twirl it against the plate - spoons are for sissies.
>> >
>> > There are two things I NEVER order in a restaurant:
>> > spaghetti of any kind and chicken with bones in it.
>>
>> No chicken with bones, but ribs with bones? DISCRIMINATION! ;->
>>
> Ribs weren't mentioned.

Chicken ribs are a big treat where I live. Slow-cooked and lightly
seasoned. Takes a very skillful meat cutter to get those little suckers
so theres still enough meat on them in the right place to make it
worthwhile. People here don't use a sauce when they cook them. They
marinate for a couple minutes (hey, these things are *small*) and cook
them over a dying fire, mopping once or twice with a lemon-pepper
marinade. Cook in about 13 minutes and there you go.

Chicken ribs... Nothin like 'em...

No, seriously...

Pastorio

"Bob (this one)" > said:

> Chicken ribs... Nothin like 'em...
>
> No, seriously...

You're in rare form tonight, Bob. *g*

Carol

--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon

sf wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 12:20:19 -0700, JimLane wrote:
>
>
>> sf wrote:
>> > On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 23:21:11 -0500, Damsel wrote:
>> >
>> >> How do *you* get 'sketti from the plate to your mouth?
>> >
>> > I twirl it against the plate - spoons are for sissies.
>> >
>> > There are two things I NEVER order in a restaurant:
>> > spaghetti of any kind and chicken with bones in it.
>>
>> No chicken with bones, but ribs with bones? DISCRIMINATION! ;->
>>
>
> Ribs weren't mentioned.

Neither was chicken, until you bought it up, so I leaped and I note that
you didn't comment on ordering ribs for yourself in restaurants. Do you
or don't you? Is it about the bones, or, picking up the pieces and
gnawing on them? Now, about dem ribs?


jim

Bob (this one) wrote:
> sf wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 12:20:19 -0700, JimLane wrote:
>>
>>> sf wrote:
>>> > On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 23:21:11 -0500, Damsel wrote:
>>> > >> How do *you* get 'sketti from the plate to your mouth?
>>> > > I twirl it against the plate - spoons are for sissies.
>>> > > There are two things I NEVER order in a restaurant: > spaghetti
>>> of any kind and chicken with bones in it.
>>> No chicken with bones, but ribs with bones? DISCRIMINATION! ;->
>>>
>> Ribs weren't mentioned.
>
>
> Chicken ribs are a big treat where I live. Slow-cooked and lightly
> seasoned. Takes a very skillful meat cutter to get those little suckers
> so theres still enough meat on them in the right place to make it
> worthwhile. People here don't use a sauce when they cook them. They
> marinate for a couple minutes (hey, these things are *small*) and cook
> them over a dying fire, mopping once or twice with a lemon-pepper
> marinade. Cook in about 13 minutes and there you go.
>
> Chicken ribs... Nothin like 'em...
>
> No, seriously...
>
> Pastorio

Well, I don't know about folks like you, Bob, but ribs most everywhere I
have been in the us is about pork or beef rib bones. Nice humor, though.
Or, did you actually need an explanation? ;->


jim

"Damsel" > wrote in message
...
> "Shaun aRe" > said:
>
> > It just sorta leaps up at me since I'm so attractive ',;~}~
>
> "Sketti-Face! Sketti-Face! Sketti-Face!"

Too right! How else am I supposed to practice for me vampirein'?!? ',;~}~



Shaun aRe

then press the fork sideways to cut surplus.

Some years ago, I dated an Italian-American woman for a while. She was
a fantastic cook as was her mother and all of her aunts. Made
unbelieveable zitis, cannolies, etc. Before I knew what a great cook
she was, I made her spagetti one night. From a bottle sauce! She was
polite about the sauce, never said a word. But when I broke the
spagetti noodles in half to cook them, she reacted as if I had broken
the back of a baby! She was horrified. I got almost as strong a
reaction when I cut it with my fork to eat it! I have learned that,
unless you want the mafia hunting you down, never cut a spagetti
noodle!

Rick & Cyndi wrote:
> "Damsel" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "Bob" > said:
> >
> >> I twirl against the plate. This generally results in a ball of pasta
> >> roughly the size of a tennis ball stuck on the end of the fork. I swish
> >> the
> >> ball around in the sauce, then elegantly [HA!] bite pieces off the end of
> >> the fork.
> >
> > Please have someone film this performance, okay? I want to see this!
> >
> >> The trick to twirling against the plate is to start off with the fork at
> >> about a 45-degree angle to the plate, twirl it a few times, then slowly
> >> bring it to a perpendicular position while twirling.
> >
> > I've tried that, but I still wind up with stray strands of pasta getting
> > involved with the ones I started out with.
> >
> > Carol
> >
> > --
> > Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon
> ==============
>
> Bob and I apparently learned the same way... although I must admit to
> stopping (size-wise) sooner. I wrap until it's the size of a racquet ball
> and then press the fork sideways to cut surplus. YMDV! LOL
>
> Cyndi

On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 00:43:09 -0700, JimLane wrote:

> Neither was chicken, until you bought it up, so I leaped and I note that
> you didn't comment on ordering ribs for yourself in restaurants. Do you
> or don't you?

Hmmmm - I DON'T eat ribs eat in a restaurant either. NO BONES for
me.... and no long, fat noodles covered with a red sauce either. <G>
I don't make "spaghetti" at home using spaghetti noodles, either. I
use Angel Hair, Vermacelli, etc. but not spaghetti and NO meatballs
(there's that cutting aversion again). I want my meat evenly
distributed throughout the sauce.

> Is it about the bones, or, picking up the pieces and gnawing on them? Now, about dem ribs?

Bones are not an "eat-in" restaurant item for me.... way too messy.
Take out is fine. As for bone in chicken, I feel like my elbows are
flapping even though they are down by my sides - just like grandma
taught me. I've learned to ALWAYS ask if the chicken is boneless
(when it's not mentioned on the menu). That way I can enjoy my meal
instead of fighting with it.

sf wrote:
I've learned to ALWAYS ask if the chicken is boneless
> (when it's not mentioned on the menu). That way I can enjoy my meal
> instead of fighting with it.
>
>

:-> Let me suggest a knife and a fork.


jim

Kate Connally wrote:

> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>
>> On Sun 26 Jun 2005 09:21:11p, Damsel wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>
>> > When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4 inches
>> > square on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta inside was
>> > folded
>> > in half, so you were talking strands at least 5-1/2 feet long. One or
>> > two were all that a fork could hold.
>> >
>> > We twirled the cooked pasta by holding the tines of our forks against a
>> > soup spoon and twirling.
>> >
>> > I die inside, just a little, when I see someone chop their spaghetti
>> > into little pieces. Never could get the hang of twirling against the
>> > plate.
>> >
>> > How do *you* get 'sketti from the plate to your mouth?
>> >
>> > Carol
>> >
>>
>> Like you, fork against spoon.
>
> I'v never understood why some people feel the necessity
> of a spoon. I have no trouble twirling against the plate.
>
> Kate

Using a spoon allows you to more easily adjust the angle of your fork,
preventing the 'sketti from falling off.

I agree with Damsel; I just could not understand my ex-wife's propensity
for dragging a knife through her pile of pasta, reducing it to sub-inch
mini-sketti.

---jkb

--
"No sprinkles! For every sprinkle I find, I shall kill you!"
-- Stewie Griffin

Jeff Bienstadt > said:

> I agree with Damsel; I just could not understand my ex-wife's propensity
> for dragging a knife through her pile of pasta, reducing it to sub-inch
> mini-sketti.

Yup, that is surely a sign of mental illness. ;-)

Carol

--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon

In article >,
says...
> Nancy Young wrote:
> > "Monsur Fromage du Pollet" > wrote in message
>
> >>I just twirl it around my fork, spoon isn't required.
> >
> >
> > I'm with you ... just twirl it on the fork, make sure you get
> > just the right amount and put it in your mouth. One of my
> > favorite dinners, along with meatballs and hot Italian sausage
> > (I usually have one or the other at any given meal).
> >
> > nancy
>
> I'll third that motion. Fork only, no spoon. Long strands. I skeeve
> spa'ghet that's been all broken up. It seems like it is "dumbing it
> down" or something?
> Goomba

I'll fourth it. Never use a spoon to wind spaghetti onto a fork. Even
chopsticks work, in fact I find they work a little better.

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 20:16:55 GMT, Ophelia wrote:

> .. and why is that a problem! Some to the spoon, some to the plate...
> it all gets in the same place)
>
When digested properly, it comes out the same place too.
<should apologize for that?> Nah, it was too much fun!

On 27 Jun 2005 19:29:06 -0700, "Sheldon" > wrote:

>
>
>Glitter Ninja wrote:
>>
>> My husband's ceramics professor, a native Italian, used a spoon and
>> fork to eat spaghetti noodles. It was how he was taught.
>
>I don't think Italians can be taught... had to be instinctual.
>
>
>Sheldon
Galileo, Michaelangelo, Da Vinci, Fermi......Try to get the picture,
Sheldon

In article >, Arri London >
wrote:

> Damsel wrote:
> >
> > When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4 inches square
> > on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta inside was folded in half,
> > so you were talking strands at least 5-1/2 feet long. One or two were all
> > that a fork could hold.
> >
> > We twirled the cooked pasta by holding the tines of our forks against a
> > soup spoon and twirling.
> >
> > I die inside, just a little, when I see someone chop their spaghetti into
> > little pieces. Never could get the hang of twirling against the plate.
> >
> > How do *you* get 'sketti from the plate to your mouth?
> >
> > Carol
>
> Twirling it but not against a spoon. I'd never seen anyone do that until
> I moved to the US.

I twirl spaghetti against my plate. No big deal. I couldn't care less
how other people eat their pasta as long as they do not eject any of it
in my direction!

Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
>
> Kate Connally wrote:
>
> > Damsel wrote:
> > >
> > > When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4 inches
> > square
> > > on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta inside was folded in
> > half,
> > > so you were talking strands at least 5-1/2 feet long. One or two
> > were all
> > > that a fork could hold.
> >
> > Good grief! How did you get them into the pot to
> > cook them if they were that long? Even folded in half
> > they'd be too big for any pot I've ever seen.
>
> Our local Italian deli sells them, one is even a thin tubular, hollow
> spaghetti, not a cannelloni but a long tubular spaghetti. it also sells
> regular solid spaghetti in those lengths that are meant to be broken up,
> but can be cooked whole in a tall stock pot.

Well, Damsel was talking about stuff that was over 2 feet
long after folding in half. I've never seen a 2 1/2-3 foot
high stock pot.

> But even when cooked and
> served whole are usually served with a carving knife and the pasta is
> cut up into manageable pieces as it is served.
>
> > I've been around over 50 years and I've never come across
> > spaghetti that was more than about a foot long.
>
> The Chinese method of making long spaghetti like noodles produces 4 - 5
> foot long strands.

Yeah, I know about that. Not the same thing. I'm talking
regular dried spaghetti in a box.

> > Even
> > foot-long spaghetti is tough to get under the water all
> > at once, so I can't even begin to see how people would
> > manage anything longer. I suspect it was meant to be
> > broken into more manageable lengths when put in the
> > pot.
>
> That is how it is most often cooked but it can be cooked whole in a > tall
> pot. It quickly softens and folds itself into the water.

Not my experience, but it might happen that way with really
fine spaghettini or angel hair. The "regular" size spaghetti,
which is what I prefer, takes forever to soften enough to get it
all under the water. I don't cook mine in a tall stockpot but
in my dutch oven and even the regular foot-long stuff doesn't
go completely under the water until it has softened up enough
to bend.

Kate

Kate Connally wrote:
> Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
> >
> > Kate Connally wrote:
> >
> > > Damsel wrote:
> > > >
> > > > When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4 inches
> > > square
> > > > on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta inside was folded in
> > > half,
> > > > so you were talking strands at least 5-1/2 feet long. One or two
> > > were all
> > > > that a fork could hold.
> > >
> > > Good grief! How did you get them into the pot to
> > > cook them if they were that long? Even folded in half
> > > they'd be too big for any pot I've ever seen.
> >
> > Our local Italian deli sells them, one is even a thin tubular, hollow
> > spaghetti, not a cannelloni but a long tubular spaghetti. it also sells
> > regular solid spaghetti in those lengths that are meant to be broken up,
> > but can be cooked whole in a tall stock pot.
>
> Well, Damsel was talking about stuff that was over 2 feet
> long after folding in half. I've never seen a 2 1/2-3 foot
> high stock pot.

And you won't. Even with the French style stock pots that are equaly
wide as they are tall, a 2 1/2 foot tall pot would hold some 200
quarts, about 50 gallons... filled with water would weigh nearly 500
pounds, pot alone would weigh some 75 pounds. Who's going to lift
it... even the best commercial stove would likely collapse.

Sheldon

Damsel wrote:

> How do *you* get 'sketti from the plate to your mouth?
>

i use two methods of 'sketti transfer from plate to mouth. if i'm eating alone i
generally use the caveman method where by i stick a fork full of spaghetti in my
mouth and bite off any hangers and let them fall back on the plate. then i use
my trusty piece of toasted garlic bread to sop up everything left on the plate.
if i'm eating around others i try to at least appear to be civilized and use the
twirl against the plate method.

"A.C." > writes:

[snip]

There's a lot of talk about eating spaghetti noodles, but you are all
forgetting that the noodles are just a vehicle for yummy, yummy sauce!
Forget the noodles, just get a bowl of sauce and some crusty bread. And
a spoon.

Stacia

On Tue 28 Jun 2005 05:43:40p, Damsel wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> Jeff Bienstadt > said:
>
>> I agree with Damsel; I just could not understand my ex-wife's
>> propensity for dragging a knife through her pile of pasta, reducing it
>> to sub-inch mini-sketti.
>
> Yup, that is surely a sign of mental illness. ;-)
>
> Carol
>

Well, at least I passed *that* test!

--
Wayne Boatwright Õ¿Õ¬
____________________________________________

Give me a smart idiot over a stupid genius any day.
Sam Goldwyn, 1882-1974

No need to say "spaghetti noodles" instead of just spaghetti (linguini,
ravioli, macaroni...)
It grates on the ear. Same as when people add an "s" to ravioli (which
is already plural) so the "s" is inappropriate.
Rant Over.
Carry On

Goomba38 > writes:

>No need to say "spaghetti noodles" instead of just spaghetti (linguini,
>ravioli, macaroni...)
>It grates on the ear.

OK, I'll do whatever you say.
By the way, there is a definite need to quote what you're following up
to, so we know what the hell you're talking about. I expect you to now
do what *I* say.

Stacia
glad that's settled

Jeff Bienstadt wrote:
>
> Kate Connally wrote:
<snip>
>
> Using a spoon allows you to more easily adjust the angle of your fork,
> preventing the 'sketti from falling off.
>
> I agree with Damsel; I just could not understand my ex-wife's propensity
> for dragging a knife through her pile of pasta, reducing it to sub-inch
> mini-sketti.
>
> ---jkb
>


But but but I've seen so very many Americans do just that. Perhaps they
grew up on the nasty pasta in tins, which is always short.

Kate Connally wrote:
> Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
>
>> Kate Connally wrote:
>>
>>> Damsel wrote:
>>>
>>>> When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4
>>>> inches square on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta
>>>> inside was folded in half, so you were talking strands at least
>>>> 5-1/2 feet long. One or two were all that a fork could hold.
>>>
>>> Good grief! How did you get them into the pot to cook them if
>>> they were that long? Even folded in half they'd be too big for
>>> any pot I've ever seen.

Spaghetti will soften and become flexible within seconds of being put
into rapidly boiling water. The pot merely needs to be able to hold the
appropriate amount of water.

>> Our local Italian deli sells them, one is even a thin tubular,
>> hollow spaghetti, not a cannelloni but a long tubular spaghetti.

Called "bucatini."

>> it
>> also sells regular solid spaghetti in those lengths that are meant
>> to be broken up, but can be cooked whole in a tall stock pot.
>
> Well, Damsel was talking about stuff that was over 2 feet long after
> folding in half. I've never seen a 2 1/2-3 foot high stock pot.
>
>> But even when cooked and served whole are usually served with a
>> carving knife and the pasta is cut up into manageable pieces as it
>> is served.
>>
>>
>>> I've been around over 50 years and I've never come across
>>> spaghetti that was more than about a foot long.

I have several packages of "Gragnese" brand pasta imported from Italy in
my kitchen that are about 20 inches long. The spaghetti inside are
folded in half. I most often cook the pasta in a 12-quart stock pot and
usually put about a gallon and a half of water along with about 1/4 cup
salt like Italians in Italy do.

>> The Chinese method of making long spaghetti like noodles produces 4
>> - 5 foot long strands.
>
> Yeah, I know about that. Not the same thing. I'm talking regular
> dried spaghetti in a box.

How about in a clear plastic bag?

>>> Even foot-long spaghetti is tough to get under the water all at
>>> once, so I can't even begin to see how people would manage
>>> anything longer. I suspect it was meant to be broken into more
>>> manageable lengths when put in the pot.
>>
>>> That is how it is most often cooked but it can be cooked whole in a
>>> tall pot. It quickly softens and folds itself into the water.
>
> Not my experience, but it might happen that way with really fine
> spaghettini or angel hair. The "regular" size spaghetti, which is
> what I prefer, takes forever to soften enough to get it all under the
> water.

"Forever" is about a minute with rapidly boiling water in sufficient
quantity. At least a gallon per pound. Less than that and the water
temperature drops significantly and it won't come back to a boil very
quickly. So the pasta isn't at an appropriate level of turbulence and
temperature. Stirring it often adds to the natural convection and
turbulence of boiling. All necessary to get it done properly.

> I don't cook mine in a tall stockpot but in my dutch oven
> and even the regular foot-long stuff doesn't go completely under the
> water until it has softened up enough to bend.

That's too wide and shallow a pot and not enough water. You want a tall,
narrow pot to keep the water boiling hard. A wide-topped pot has too
much surface area for water to evaporate from, and the extra evaporation
keeps the water from a full, hard boil. A pound of pasta, any shape,
dropped into a gallon of boiling water should return to a full, rolling
boil in no more than two minutes. All stranded pasta will flex enough to
submerge in that time.

Pastorio

Fork against spoon was how I always did it, too. But I never had to
deal with Monster Spaghetti such as you describe. =o) Ours was very
ordinary spaghetti, each noodle being about 1 foot long.

Melissa

wrote:
> Fork against spoon was how I always did it, too. But I never had to
> deal with Monster Spaghetti such as you describe. =o) Ours was very
> ordinary spaghetti, each noodle being about 1 foot long.

It's interesting. You don't see Italians use the spoon technique until
you get towards the south. Northerners pull a few strands out of the
pile and twirl them on the plate onto the fork. You'll see more
Neapolitans and Sicilians using spoons. Different understanding of
what's "proper." One set of my grandparents were northerners; the other
Sicilian. Meals were exhausting.

My approach is that I'm hungry and the best way to get it into my face
quickly is the best way.

Pastorio

Bob (this one) wrote:

>> Our local Italian deli sells them, one is even a thin tubular, hollow
>> spaghetti, not a cannelloni but a long tubular spaghetti.
>
> Called "bucatini."


I got a box of bucatini once, and found myself unable to come up with a
recipe which takes advantage of its shape. Most sauce is too thick to
permeate to the middle of the pasta. Is there some traditional use for it?
My best guess at this point is that you're supposed to serve it in broth,
like Japanese udon.

Bob

Bob (this one) wrote:
> Kate Connally wrote:
>
>> Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
>>
>>> Kate Connally wrote:
>>>
>>>> Damsel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4
>>>>> inches square on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta
>>>>> inside was folded in half, so you were talking strands at least
>>>>> 5-1/2 feet long. One or two were all that a fork could hold.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Good grief! How did you get them into the pot to cook them if they
>>>> were that long? Even folded in half they'd be too big for any pot
>>>> I've ever seen.
>
>
> Spaghetti will soften and become flexible within seconds of being put
> into rapidly boiling water. The pot merely needs to be able to hold the
> appropriate amount of water.
>
>>> Our local Italian deli sells them, one is even a thin tubular, hollow
>>> spaghetti, not a cannelloni but a long tubular spaghetti.
>
>
> Called "bucatini."
>
>>> it
>>> also sells regular solid spaghetti in those lengths that are meant
>>> to be broken up, but can be cooked whole in a tall stock pot.
>>
>>
>> Well, Damsel was talking about stuff that was over 2 feet long after
>> folding in half. I've never seen a 2 1/2-3 foot high stock pot.
>>
>>> But even when cooked and served whole are usually served with a
>>> carving knife and the pasta is cut up into manageable pieces as it is
>>> served.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I've been around over 50 years and I've never come across spaghetti
>>>> that was more than about a foot long.
>
>
> I have several packages of "Gragnese" brand pasta imported from Italy in
> my kitchen that are about 20 inches long. The spaghetti inside are
> folded in half. I most often cook the pasta in a 12-quart stock pot and
> usually put about a gallon and a half of water along with about 1/4 cup
> salt like Italians in Italy do.
>
>>> The Chinese method of making long spaghetti like noodles produces 4
>>> - 5 foot long strands.
>>
>>
>> Yeah, I know about that. Not the same thing. I'm talking regular
>> dried spaghetti in a box.

Jumping in here on pasta length, 50 years of experience or not, I walked
into a Baron's Market today in Rancho Bernardo to see what they have on
their shelf, and surprise of surprises, there in clear wrap from Italy
is a package over two feet long with doubled over pasta.

The cut ends looked like an "S" with open channels on both sides, not
closed like an "8."

From the label: Maestri Pastai Ferretto Calabro. MP is an Italian firm
and the rest is the pasta name.

Slam dunk. Italian pasta DOES exist in four-foot lengths. $1.99 17.6 oz.


jim

JimLane > said:

> Slam dunk. Italian pasta DOES exist in four-foot lengths. $1.99 17.6 oz.

Told ya!

I'd love to find some of that again. You can feed a family of five on 15
strands of the stuff. LOL!

Carol

--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon