There are plenty of guacamole enthusiasts in the US. The authentic Mexican variety is more like a sauce, but in the US the predominant version is thick and chunky. I have seen many weird recipes for guacamole, with all sorts of bells and whistles, but I like my version best. Most good things in life are simple. Guacamole should bring the flavor of avocado to the front, and nothing else should be allowed to mask it. You want to choose an avocado that yields to your fingers, is not brown inside, and can be spread with a butter knife without too much effort.
Ingredients
2 Haas Avocados, peeled and pitted
2 tablespoons lime juice (or lemon juice), OR
Juice of 1 medium lime
A pinch of salt
1 tbsp finely chopped shallot OR red onion [Optional]
Preparation
Put all ingredients in a food processor, or use mortar and pestle. Mix.
Variations
There are many variations. My favorite is to add 1 deseeded chili pepper (Arbol or Thai). I don't like tomatoes in my guacamole. There is something called salsa and it utilizes tomatoes quite well.
April 30, 2008
Commentariis
The URL of my blog contains the term commentariis. The "s" is superfluous, and I would have liked to have it as commentarii, but I was too slow to get on the bandwagon and that name was already taken. So I made it a double and impure plural by adding an "s" at the end.
This term is inspired by the legendary commentarii of Julius Caesar from his Gaulish campaign. Considered a masterpiece of propaganda and statement of intent and style, it shows Caesar as an observant person and able commander who puts a consistent spin on things.
This term is inspired by the legendary commentarii of Julius Caesar from his Gaulish campaign. Considered a masterpiece of propaganda and statement of intent and style, it shows Caesar as an observant person and able commander who puts a consistent spin on things.
Gourmet Coffee and Café chains
Unless you live in rural Wyoming, you have probably seen and been a patron at the coffee chains such as Starbucks, Caribou Coffee, Peet's Coffee and Tea, Coffee Bean and others. Most of them started as luxury and novelty chains purveying gourmet coffee to US consumers. The business has done well, with many readily plunking down $3-$4 for a cup of lattè. The whole idea was inspired by the European cafés, though the American coffee shops are very different from their European counterparts. In European coffee houses, people go to sit, linger and talk, even for hours on end. Believe it or not, in Europe no one is likely to ask you to leave a coffee house, unless, of course, they're closing :). In Starbucks, for example, businessmen, entrepreneurs and students are the only groups who actually consume their food and drink in-store. This behavior, however, is likely influenced by the faster pace of life in US metros.
A Recent Trend
Retailing of espresso-based drinks has boomed in the past decade. Not that long ago, most Americans drank drip coffee bought in large tins from the local supermarket and brewed with a $25 Mr. Coffee coffee maker. A cup of watery brewed coffee was purchased from the gas station, cost 50 cents, and served just fine. Of course, espresso-based drinks existed, but not in a mass market. These days, especially in large metro areas with significant single and young population -- e.g. San Francisco, there are literally 4 of these chain stores on every city block. The trend is identical in suburbs, though to a lesser extent.
My Gripes
In general, I don't like Starbucks and other such companies, not because they're evil (I do take out coffee occasionally from such stores), but because:
1. They push espresso made exclusively from dark roasted beans on customers. I personally like espresso made with medium roasted beans à la Vienne (Viennese style). They should offer choice to engage the foodies, and to build loyalty.
2. Many youthful baristas don't know much about coffee. They just run machines, and are looking for another job anyway.
3. Their regular coffee is a joke. I hardly ever drink the coffee of the day, but they do no good to their image by serving coffee brewed 4 hours ago. It makes the store smell of burnt coffee grounds. Hint: Change the coffee filter and discard the coffee grounds. Don't serve poor-quality stuff.
4. They don't know what they stand for, and end up looking like any other general merchandise place -- offering stale tarts, hard pastry and ham and cheese sandwiches, thus massively diluting their business proposition.
5. There is consistency but they don't delight the customer. In retailing, unless you regularly (and mostly pleasantly) surprise the customer and make a personal connection, you're just another shop.
Gourmet in Gourmet Coffee
If one likes coffee, a good espresso maker (pressure based, not steam-based) can be had for $300. That's 3 months of one lattè every morning, just that a good Krupp will last 3 years, and you get to choose the beans yourself, and taste the terroir, not Starbucks which would be like "chicken". Unless one can tailor it to one's own taste, what kind of gourmet is one anyway?
I read an article a few months ago where the columnist's proposition was that every nation that got hooked on gourmet coffee soon got destroyed. The first example was the Ottoman Empire.
Happy Glucking!
A Recent Trend
Retailing of espresso-based drinks has boomed in the past decade. Not that long ago, most Americans drank drip coffee bought in large tins from the local supermarket and brewed with a $25 Mr. Coffee coffee maker. A cup of watery brewed coffee was purchased from the gas station, cost 50 cents, and served just fine. Of course, espresso-based drinks existed, but not in a mass market. These days, especially in large metro areas with significant single and young population -- e.g. San Francisco, there are literally 4 of these chain stores on every city block. The trend is identical in suburbs, though to a lesser extent.
My Gripes
In general, I don't like Starbucks and other such companies, not because they're evil (I do take out coffee occasionally from such stores), but because:
1. They push espresso made exclusively from dark roasted beans on customers. I personally like espresso made with medium roasted beans à la Vienne (Viennese style). They should offer choice to engage the foodies, and to build loyalty.
2. Many youthful baristas don't know much about coffee. They just run machines, and are looking for another job anyway.
3. Their regular coffee is a joke. I hardly ever drink the coffee of the day, but they do no good to their image by serving coffee brewed 4 hours ago. It makes the store smell of burnt coffee grounds. Hint: Change the coffee filter and discard the coffee grounds. Don't serve poor-quality stuff.
4. They don't know what they stand for, and end up looking like any other general merchandise place -- offering stale tarts, hard pastry and ham and cheese sandwiches, thus massively diluting their business proposition.
5. There is consistency but they don't delight the customer. In retailing, unless you regularly (and mostly pleasantly) surprise the customer and make a personal connection, you're just another shop.
Gourmet in Gourmet Coffee
If one likes coffee, a good espresso maker (pressure based, not steam-based) can be had for $300. That's 3 months of one lattè every morning, just that a good Krupp will last 3 years, and you get to choose the beans yourself, and taste the terroir, not Starbucks which would be like "chicken". Unless one can tailor it to one's own taste, what kind of gourmet is one anyway?
I read an article a few months ago where the columnist's proposition was that every nation that got hooked on gourmet coffee soon got destroyed. The first example was the Ottoman Empire.
Happy Glucking!
April 27, 2008
What is chiaroscuro?
Chiaroscuro is an Italian word made up by joining two words -- chiaro (clear) and oscuro (dark). So it literally means clear-dark. In its strictest sense it is applied to paintings where the contrast between light and dark is used to enhance an image by making it stand out in all its glory and stereo-vision. I don't know much about painting, but the paintings of Caravaggio make the human body glow, and he's a famous name associated with chiaroscuro.
I named my blog chiaroscuro because it is very opinionated, and I blur and obscure, even obliterate opposing views. It hints at a contrast between what is being said pointedly, and what (a lot) is being left out.
I named my blog chiaroscuro because it is very opinionated, and I blur and obscure, even obliterate opposing views. It hints at a contrast between what is being said pointedly, and what (a lot) is being left out.
Dead Letter Office (DLO)
We had ordered something online and had it shipped to our address in Southern California. The package was not insured but was tracked. And lucky for us it was, because it never got to us. After the expected period of delivery was over, our package was shown as being in Santa Clara, CA. A few weeks later, USPS website showed it to be in Saint Paul, Minnesota enduring the bitter cold.
Dead Letter Office (DLO)
On a whim, I mentioned this to a nice lady at the local post office. She informed us that Saint Paul is where the Dead Letter Office is. That's where the undeliverable packages go and wait for recovery. She directed me to another friendly staffer who took care of the matter by sending a fax to the DLO in Saint Paul with mailing addresses of sender and addressee, along with the tracking number and phone number of sender or addressee should any questions arise. Three weeks afterwards, the tracking number fetched thin air at the USPS website. At this point, we gave up hope again, such is the belief inspired by government agencies. We were wrong. The package was delivered within a week.
Kudos to USPS
Ol' Ben Franklin's system is working quite well. I know that the postage has been rising consistently since 1999, but know ye readers that the cost of sending a package or letter via USPS is far lower than that in other state-run post services in prosperous European countries. And that's in spite of the fact that dwellers in 48 contiguous states subsidize the postage to and from Alaska and Hawaii.
Dead Letter Office (DLO)
On a whim, I mentioned this to a nice lady at the local post office. She informed us that Saint Paul is where the Dead Letter Office is. That's where the undeliverable packages go and wait for recovery. She directed me to another friendly staffer who took care of the matter by sending a fax to the DLO in Saint Paul with mailing addresses of sender and addressee, along with the tracking number and phone number of sender or addressee should any questions arise. Three weeks afterwards, the tracking number fetched thin air at the USPS website. At this point, we gave up hope again, such is the belief inspired by government agencies. We were wrong. The package was delivered within a week.
Kudos to USPS
Ol' Ben Franklin's system is working quite well. I know that the postage has been rising consistently since 1999, but know ye readers that the cost of sending a package or letter via USPS is far lower than that in other state-run post services in prosperous European countries. And that's in spite of the fact that dwellers in 48 contiguous states subsidize the postage to and from Alaska and Hawaii.
Cricket in India
For weeks now the country of India has been awash in the madness brought on by non-stop cricket. Everyone is whoring to get their face on TV. To be associated with the glitz and over-the-top extravaganza that is more entertainment than sport. I can't recall any other sport being afforded such status for such duration anywhere anytime.
It wasn't always so. Before the 1983 Cricket World Cup held in England, there was little cricket on the TV. Few people understood it, and few watched it. The Indian team lost most games anyway, and no one wanted to watch their team lose. The country was socialist and with the edict of self-reliance, there was just too much for everyone to do on a daily basis to allow for obsessions.
The Summer of 1983
That all changed in the Summer of 1983. Late one evening in June 1983, someone told us to tune in to Doordarshan, the only and state-run TV station in India at that time. West Indies were five down, and it appeared that they would lose the final of the 1983 World Cup, and that India, with their rag-tag two-bit outfit, would actually win. Till that time, the only sport India ever won at an international level was field hockey. It was late in the night when the game finished, and I don't remember how it ended. That changed everything. The socialist country had beaten the best in the world at the most hallowed ground. Not once, but twice.
Until that time, most children played other sports for recreation. I didn't even know how to play cricket, and I was not alone. Buoyed by the euphoria of success (As wrote Emily Dickinson -- Success is counted special, by those who ne'er succeed), every parent was buying cricket gear for their children, and the children were hitting some balls. The mood didn't last though, as West Indies toured India and humiliated them. But the deed was done. A whole country turned to a sport, productivity suffered as everyone was glued to their radios for any game of cricket involving India. Grade schoolers ran home during the lunch break to catch some action, were late and received punishments. A whole country, poor and backward, fed on the collective euphoria for a long time.
Endnote
Despite the madness, there is little infrastructure to support new players. The league cricket system is ludicrous. There are not enough facilities and there is little money unless you can make it big on the international level. The advertisers have made money and spent money on themes related to the national gratification brought on by cricket, but very little money has been invested in generating a system to produce better players -- a system where a determined person with talent can succeed. I have seen many talented players give up, and go to the dogs. And that was where the families supported the perilous path of becoming a sports person. Unless that changes, I will remain skeptical of the hype associated with cricket in India.
It wasn't always so. Before the 1983 Cricket World Cup held in England, there was little cricket on the TV. Few people understood it, and few watched it. The Indian team lost most games anyway, and no one wanted to watch their team lose. The country was socialist and with the edict of self-reliance, there was just too much for everyone to do on a daily basis to allow for obsessions.
The Summer of 1983
That all changed in the Summer of 1983. Late one evening in June 1983, someone told us to tune in to Doordarshan, the only and state-run TV station in India at that time. West Indies were five down, and it appeared that they would lose the final of the 1983 World Cup, and that India, with their rag-tag two-bit outfit, would actually win. Till that time, the only sport India ever won at an international level was field hockey. It was late in the night when the game finished, and I don't remember how it ended. That changed everything. The socialist country had beaten the best in the world at the most hallowed ground. Not once, but twice.
Until that time, most children played other sports for recreation. I didn't even know how to play cricket, and I was not alone. Buoyed by the euphoria of success (As wrote Emily Dickinson -- Success is counted special, by those who ne'er succeed), every parent was buying cricket gear for their children, and the children were hitting some balls. The mood didn't last though, as West Indies toured India and humiliated them. But the deed was done. A whole country turned to a sport, productivity suffered as everyone was glued to their radios for any game of cricket involving India. Grade schoolers ran home during the lunch break to catch some action, were late and received punishments. A whole country, poor and backward, fed on the collective euphoria for a long time.
Endnote
Despite the madness, there is little infrastructure to support new players. The league cricket system is ludicrous. There are not enough facilities and there is little money unless you can make it big on the international level. The advertisers have made money and spent money on themes related to the national gratification brought on by cricket, but very little money has been invested in generating a system to produce better players -- a system where a determined person with talent can succeed. I have seen many talented players give up, and go to the dogs. And that was where the families supported the perilous path of becoming a sports person. Unless that changes, I will remain skeptical of the hype associated with cricket in India.
April 26, 2008
The Curry Craze
Curry is rampant in the US now. It conquered the UK decades ago, and is now invading the country across the pond. Therefore everyone wants to cook Indian food now. Even Julia Child's old and seminal French cookbook Mastering the art of French Cooking had many dishes with curry powder. I have seen many Indian restaurants in Paris, in Amsterdam and even all over Germany. That means everyone is telling everyone else how to make Indian food. Including many first-generation Indians who are very proud at having found something they're better than the Westerners at. Indians have major complexes about Europeans and European-Americans and European-Australians.
Funny recipes
I find the recipes quite funny. Almost all recipes ask you to fry onion, garlic, ginger and chili peppers. And then they ask for adding tomatoes. And then they ask you to add turmeric, red chili powder, garam masala and cumin seeds. To everything you cook. They also stipulate you garnish with cilantro. Even spinach and other greens are garnished by cilantro. It makes no sense gastronomically or visually. This is also a bit of a joke because at least 50 percent of Indians do not eat garlic, and many don't like ginger. Very few Indian dishes have cumin seeds in them, and even when cumin seeds are present, they're the last addition. Well, maybe the second after the garam masala which is added just before serving.
Such recipes give the impression that the base of all Indian food is the same. I have read that in many places. All curries have the same base. Why do we have different curries then, I wonder. It's just a comforting thought that you have distilled the Indian cuisine with one base -- like summarizing French cuisine by béchamel sauce.
Please don't fry spices in oil
My pet peeve is with people recommending frying spices in oil. It is not at all canon, and very few home cooks in India other than the aspirational ones do it. You are not supposed to fry all the spices in oil. Roast some spices on a very hot plate, yes, occasionally, but fry in oil, never. It paints your walls with a yellow patina and, of course, smells awful. Sadly it makes the taste worse, as the aromatic compounds in spices are borne away with oil vapor before they get a chance to bond with the food. Frying a little too long can mar a dish.
Bad recipes
Some recipes are just plain bad. They have you use ricotta cheese to make Kulfi. Others ask you to use heavy cream and whip the hell out of it. That's ice cream, and not good ice cream, with far more volume taken up by air than by milk solids. To make kulfi, you have to slowly simmer milk, till it thickens enough to lightly coat a spoon. I feel sorry for those who ate ricotta cheese kulfi. I associate ricotta cheese with body-builders who want to eat a lot of protein. I can't imagine them eating kulfi.
Rachael Ray version of Indian food is alive and well
The Indian recipes floating around are like Rachael Ray's Turdy Minute Meals (Get it? Thir-ty Minute Meals) where a lot of ingredients are thrown in and massive busywork is shown to produce something that does not look pretty. And probably tastes even worse.
My recommendation
My approach to cooking Indian food or any kind of food really is simple. Use fresh ingredients. Do not overcook meat or vegetables. Remove the scum when you make a broth. Add spices at the end, after you are satisfied with the saltiness. Cilantro loses its flavor when it's boiled for even one minute. Don't overdo cilantro. And seek balance.
Funny recipes
I find the recipes quite funny. Almost all recipes ask you to fry onion, garlic, ginger and chili peppers. And then they ask for adding tomatoes. And then they ask you to add turmeric, red chili powder, garam masala and cumin seeds. To everything you cook. They also stipulate you garnish with cilantro. Even spinach and other greens are garnished by cilantro. It makes no sense gastronomically or visually. This is also a bit of a joke because at least 50 percent of Indians do not eat garlic, and many don't like ginger. Very few Indian dishes have cumin seeds in them, and even when cumin seeds are present, they're the last addition. Well, maybe the second after the garam masala which is added just before serving.
Such recipes give the impression that the base of all Indian food is the same. I have read that in many places. All curries have the same base. Why do we have different curries then, I wonder. It's just a comforting thought that you have distilled the Indian cuisine with one base -- like summarizing French cuisine by béchamel sauce.
Please don't fry spices in oil
My pet peeve is with people recommending frying spices in oil. It is not at all canon, and very few home cooks in India other than the aspirational ones do it. You are not supposed to fry all the spices in oil. Roast some spices on a very hot plate, yes, occasionally, but fry in oil, never. It paints your walls with a yellow patina and, of course, smells awful. Sadly it makes the taste worse, as the aromatic compounds in spices are borne away with oil vapor before they get a chance to bond with the food. Frying a little too long can mar a dish.
Bad recipes
Some recipes are just plain bad. They have you use ricotta cheese to make Kulfi. Others ask you to use heavy cream and whip the hell out of it. That's ice cream, and not good ice cream, with far more volume taken up by air than by milk solids. To make kulfi, you have to slowly simmer milk, till it thickens enough to lightly coat a spoon. I feel sorry for those who ate ricotta cheese kulfi. I associate ricotta cheese with body-builders who want to eat a lot of protein. I can't imagine them eating kulfi.
Rachael Ray version of Indian food is alive and well
The Indian recipes floating around are like Rachael Ray's Turdy Minute Meals (Get it? Thir-ty Minute Meals) where a lot of ingredients are thrown in and massive busywork is shown to produce something that does not look pretty. And probably tastes even worse.
My recommendation
My approach to cooking Indian food or any kind of food really is simple. Use fresh ingredients. Do not overcook meat or vegetables. Remove the scum when you make a broth. Add spices at the end, after you are satisfied with the saltiness. Cilantro loses its flavor when it's boiled for even one minute. Don't overdo cilantro. And seek balance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)