Sponsor
Subscribe

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

RSS|ATOM|RDF

Subscribe with Bloglines

Add to My Yahoo!

Accolades




SAVEUR.com's Sites We Love



Sponsor

blog advertising is good for you
Search Site
Recently


Endings, Beginnings
and Spaghetti

The Anna
Tasca Lanza
Cooking School

Springtime
in Sicily


Born-Again
Vegetable
Boiling

An Inspiring
Book


Cold
Comfort


The Pizza
Project

Happy 2012, Long Time
No See



How to
Cook Indian


Blogs Around the World

101 COOKBOOKS
San Francisco, CA, USA
AN ENDLESS BANQUET
Montreal, Canada
BLEEDING ESPRESSO
Calabria, Italy
CHEZ PIM
SF Bay Area, CA, USA
CHUBBY HUBBY
Singapore
CREAMPUFFS IN VENICE
Toronto, Canada
COOKING ADVENTURES OF CHEF PAZ
New York, NY, USA
DAVID LEBOVITZ
Paris, France
DELICIOUS DAYS
Munich, Germany
DESERT CANDY
Washington D.C., USA
DINNER WITH JULIE
Calgary, Canada
DORIE GREENSPAN
Paris and NYC
EGGBEATER
SF Bay Area, CA, USA
FOOD & THOUGHTS
Copenhagen, Denmark
FOOD BEAM
Côte d'Azur, France
GLUTEN-FREE GIRL
Seattle, WA, USA
GRAB YOUR FORK
Sydney, Australia
HOMESICK TEXAN
New York, NY, USA
IL CAVOLETTO DI BRUXELLES
Rome, Italy
KALYN'S KITCHEN
Salt Lake City, UT, USA 
KUIDAORE
Singapore
LA TARTINE GOURMANDE
Boston, MA, USA
LOBSTERSQUAD
Madrid, Spain 
LUCULLIAN DELIGHTS
Pistoia, Italy 
LUCY'S KITCHEN NOTEBOOK
Lyon, France
MATT BITES
Los Angeles, CA, USA
MY MADELINE
Boston, MA, USA
NAMI-NAMI
Tallinn, Estonia
NORDLJUS
Suffolk, UK
ORANGETTE
Seattle, WA, USA
THE PASSIONATE COOK
Singapore
RAMBLING SPOON
Chang Mai, Thailand
ROSA JACKSON
Nice/Paris, France
SEVEN SPOONS
Ontario, Canada
SIMPLY RECIPES

SF Bay Area, CA, USA
SMITTEN KITCHEN
New York, NY, USA
STEAMY KITCHEN
Tampa Bay, FL, USA
SWEET AMANDINE
Cambridge, MA, USA
TARTELETTE
Charleston, SC, USA
TEA AND COOKIES
SF Bay Area, CA, USA 
TOAST
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
THE WEDNESDAY CHEF
Berlin, Germany

Beyond Blogs

MORE FOOD LINKS... 

Thursday
May192005

Tasting Notes

whiskey4.jpg
A cask-strength whisky given to Manuel for his birthday: a nose of burnt bacon, followed by memories of a sweater you wore by the campfire last summer, rounded out with a rusty barbed-wire fence and the scent of wet asphalt on a Tuesday morning.

And you thought you knew whisky. Oh sure, you probably knew that there is whisky without an 'e' from Scotland, whiskey with an 'e' from Ireland, whisky from Canada and the US, whisky from Japan, and whisky perverted into things like bourbon and rye by people who thought they could make a good thing better. You may know that whisky can be distilled once or three times; it can be single malt or blended, it can be aged in casks that previously held sherry, port or rum, and it can be reasonably affordable or unfathomably expensive. You probably even know it has varying flavor profiles, running the gauntlet from throat-scratchingly smoky to deliciously smooth, sweet and mild. But I'll bet there's some things about whisky you don't know.

If you're a wine aficionado you know that there is an entire vocabulary connoisseurs use to describe their favorite libation: fruity, jammy, leathery, oaky, chewy, floral, peppery, round, lengthy and complex are all common terms used to attempt to pin down wine's elusive and enigmatic qualities. If you're just an occasional drinker you probably scratch your head when reading such descriptions on the label, thinking, well, to me it tastes like WINE. Maybe a little sweeter at times, maybe a little vinegary at others (depending how much you forked out for the bottle), but all those fancy adjectives just seem like they've been made up to keep sommeliers in a job.

Well, have I got news for you. Did you know that in terms of vocabulary, in terms of nuance, and in terms of lunatic imagination, the world of whisky tasting has the world of wine tasting beat hands down by about a BILLION to ONE? Take the Scotch Malt Whisky Society as an example, an international membership organisation with headquarters in Scotland that specialises in buying single barrels of particularly good cask-strength whiskys, bottling them under their own label and making them available to members for purchase. Each barrel they acquire goes through a rigorous evaluation process by their panel of tasters before being given the seal of approval. After making their final selection, the tasters write up summaries of their findings, ostensibly to give members a head start on deciphering the subtle nuances of each bottle. These tasters have evaluated the finest whiskys in the world, and they have the vocabulary to prove it. Luckily for us, the Society releases their tasting notes to the public.

Below are some excerpts cobbled together from their voluminous archive of notes, accessible to anyone through their website. There is no joke here; each and every description below has appeared in their (very reputable) newsletter. I must warn you - reading through them is like taking a bungee jump for the mind. You may never look at things (or at least at whisky) in the same way again.

The nose is wonderfully fragrant – marzipan and wallpaper paste, soap flakes and rose petals. It drinks well at natural strength, with a thick mouthfeel and an oily aftertaste. The taste is sweet, hot, mouth filling and long, like the sun on a heathery hillside. Enjoy a bumpy, exciting ride with a whisky that is old enough to know better.

The nose is rich, deep and complex: reminiscent of well-worn church pews, hymn books, and even a distant trace of incense, but not musty. The first taste is of shellac and bay rum, with ripe peaches and over-ripe bananas. This resolves into boiled candy, before becoming deliciously waxy with expensive furniture polish.

The first impression on the nose is Kit-Kat chocolate, still in its wrapper. The palate continues in the same vein with a burnt twig finish. The unreduced nose evokes orange peels, cooking chocolate and the caramelized part of an upside down cake, all sitting on top of a leather armchair.

The first nose is of ashes in a grate, wet paper, ground cloves and dead wood. The flavour is peppery, with cigar boxes and pencil shavings. Behind this is a light phenolic note of band-aids and crepe bandages. Water brings up the Speyside character, but there remains a slightly musty, mossy note, or, as one panel member observed, the scent of a clean dog.

The taste is deliciously mature and rich, with a little heat on the mouth, and a delicate hint of pencil eraser. Once diluted, ripe melon and bicycle tyre aromas appear. In the corner a girl wearing perfume is doing her nails.

The initial nose is of peaches, soft toffee, ozone and dusty barns. Diluted, it tantalises with a touch of science classroom or the smell of skin after a swim. And then comes a baked pastry quality, fresh from the oven. A sweetly coy and charming dram with a frivolous wink.

After a while the scents of a carpenter’s shop emerge: fresh wood shavings, wood glue, teak oil. Tasting at this stage is not advised: it is hot and fiery, with white pepper and chillies. Water unfolds the true character of the whisky: candlewax, scented smoke - think of a high church just after mass has concluded - with a light medicinal note, like a footbath in a swimming pool.

Pass your nose over the glass and there is subtle smoke and pancetta – boy scouts are frying something nice in the forest.

It is a glowing gold whisky and noses of oil and rubber and steam; standing on a bridge while the Flying Scotsman rushes beneath, or the wooden work bench at Swan Hunter’s shipyard. If you want to experience the industrial revolution in a glass, here it is.

That's pretty convincing stuff, eh? There's obviously more to whisky than meets the eye. To find out how you too can become a member of the Society and try all these mind-boggling flavors for yourself,  just click here to learn all about the membership opportunities in your country.

Of course, you could just try heading down to your corner liquor store and asking for "something mossy, with a hint of old dog". They just might know what you mean.

Monday
May162005

The List

thelist.jpg


It's springtime in Edinburgh.

Apart from the return of the birds who have drowsily emerged from their winter stupors, and apart from the first green shoots struggling to gain a foothold in the mud, and apart from the incessant daylight which provides extended viewing opportunities of the rain outside your window (just in case you missed it over the winter), spring is the time for the annual debut of The List.

The List, or more accurately, The List Eating & Drinking Guide, is an offshoot of The Weekly List, a popular events magazine. The List foodguide comes out once per year, and reviews every restaurant, bar, cafe and food shop in Edinburgh and Glasgow. It is regarded by many as Scotland's food bible, and several people I know base their dining choices exclusively on its recommendations. When I first arrived here I thought it must be a godsend to foodies, perhaps a local Gault-Millau or Zagat-type treasure. I had a lot to learn.

It wouldn't be an understatement to say that I have actually grown to hate The List. I mean, I know it happens to be the only comprehensive catalog of all places with things edible, and amazingly its authors manage to (re)review just about each and every place mentioned in the guide before its annual issue. I also freely admit that without The List, I wouldn't know half of the places to eat in this city. But this pales in comparison with the reason I hate The List: the reviews, to put it in plain English, suck. I'm tempted to say that the reviewers outright lie, but that may be courting impoliteness a little too intimately. Let's just say I have learned the hard way that I have to take every restaurant review with a bowlful of salt. The thing is - and this should set off warning bells no matter where in the world you are - that they never have a bad word to say about any restaurant. In Scotland to not have a bad word to say about any eating establishment is like wearing shorts and flip-flops all year round. It is indicative of a severely frayed connection with reality.

Here's a story to help you understand my history with The List. Despite the fact that several of the worst restaurants I had eaten at in Edinburgh had been the recipients of faultless reviews, I still decided to trust The List to pick out a 'special occasion' restaurant to celebrate an anniversary several months ago. The restaurant we chose was marked with The List's special Orange Square, which means it is one of their favorites in the category (which, by the way, was the 'pretentious and expensive' category). The review itself was particularly glowing, with descriptions of the way in which this restaurant had remained at the top of Edinburgh's dining scene for more than a decade due to the unwavering commitment of its legendary chef in sourcing the finest ingredients available, and how this particular chef's preparations were delightfully cutting-edge, yet wholesomely unpretentious. Well, the atmosphere in the restaurant was delightful, which now that I think back, formed a suspiciously large part of the review. The food, on the other hand, was just okay, at least I think - you see, we didn't actually get to taste very much of it. The meal consisted of retro-trendy nouvelle-cuisine sized portions of 'rustic Continental favorites' (which translated, apparently means tiny portions of simple French food). It didn't actually look very rustic to me, but then again I didn't have a microscope with me. For two small courses each and a bottle of their 'house' wine (we were too dismayed to risk dessert), we forked out around $200. It was at that moment I swore to fire bomb The List's head office.

I might have done so, too, if a small nugget of wisdom hadn't been recently imparted to me by someone who has lived here a bit longer. According to my informant, there is a code you need to learn before you can use The List. It basically involves learning that certain words have a deeper, subliminal meaning. The cheat sheet looks something like this:

cozy = cramped
cutting-edge/elegant/trendy = obscenely expensive
unpretentious = drab/ugly/plain
reliable cooking = unimaginative slop
rustic = plain/dull/simple, or in the case of food probably involving potatoes
pleasant = unpleasant
safe = unexciting
easygoing atmosphere = inattentive service
"the perfect eatery for those who crave choice"
= an eatery that has nothing going for it but the length of its menu

Thus informed, the reviews in The List actually make a lot of sense. When the new issue recently came out, for example, I found myself chuckling vindictively as I saw that the reviewers were ruthless indeed, and that all those horrible places I've been to got slammed with the reviews they deserved. Don't tell anyone, but I've even started entertaining the possibility of eating out again based upon its recommendations. I'm convinced now that there must be dozens of fabulous restaurants out there, just waiting to reward my newfound code-breaking skills. For the first time in four years, good food may be within my grasp!

I'll let you know just as soon I can afford to find out.

Friday
May132005

A Dinner in Three Episodes: The Encore

ricottaicecream2.jpg

PREVIOUSLY, ON DINNER: The Grand Finale

You didn't really think it was over yet, did you? ;) I couldn't let you off the hook that easily.

In case you're just joining us, this is all going to seem remarkably out of context, so I would advise you to go back first here, then here, and finally here to figure out what the heck I'm talking about. Or, if all you care about is ice cream, read on!

Cakes without something creamy, fluffy, saucy or frosty always look a bit naked, don't they? Even when they're full of tasty things like lavender, orange and almond. But here's the tricky thing: with these strong flavors already vying for your attention, whatever goes with them has to complement, rather than compete. I suppose a dollop of whipped cream, or even the perennial favorite greek yogurt would have done the job... but I don't know, that all seems so ordinary. And really, I'm a sucker for ice cream. Ice cream is fantastic, because in addition to being one of the universe's all-time greatest hits, it always sparks intense admiration from guests, as if it were a feat of culinary alchemy to make. Nothing could actually be further from the truth.

Most of the time I start with a custard base when I make ice cream. While not strictly necessary, I love the rich eggy smoothness it gives. On the other hand, it's a bit fussy as you have to walk the fine line between curdled eggs and salmonella risk (the latter of which I admittedly don't take too many precautions against). It also takes a long time, because you have to start by heating ingredients, and so before you can get them iced a long cooling period has to follow. The magic of this ice cream, then, is that neither does it contain eggs nor does it need to be cooked, but it is nonetheless incredibly rich and smooth, and the whole thing can be shoved in the freezer within ten minutes of removing the ingredients from the fridge. "And what if I don't have an ice cream maker?" you ask. Well, you don't need one. In fact, I don't have one either - well technically I do but it's in storage in Germany - and that doesn't stop me. The only thing that you have to do if you make ice cream without a machine is take the semifrozen mixture out of the freezer at regular intervals and stir it vigorously (or use a hand beater if you prefer) to break down the ice crystals. Granted, it's not quite as creamy as the churned kind, but it sure beats no ice cream.

The recipe, once again, comes from The Book*, but I actually deviated quite a bit. The original uses just ricotta, sugar, milk and cream. I suppose if you have really, really top quality sheep's milk ricotta that simple mixture would be flavorful enough, but my local Tesco ricotta doesn't really cut the mustard in that sense. If you have a source for it, by all means eliminate the bells and whistles. If, like me, your ricotta is somewhat less illustrious, I would highly recommend the addition of a bit more flavor like in the following recipe. One more thing - I do find that British supermarket ricotta is a cut above the American stuff sold in large plastic containers with pseudo-Italian names. If you're in the US, use it at your own risk. If you have any other soft unripened cheese at your disposal, however, whether it be a high quality farmer's cheese, cream cheese, even goat cheese - I would probably use that instead. Hmmm, goats cheese ice cream, any takers?

Ricotta and Honey Ice Cream

Source: Liberally adapted from Crazy Water, Pickled Lemons

500g (a little over 1 lb.) of the best ricotta you can find
2/3 cup (175ml) milk
1 cup (250ml) heavy whipping cream
1 teaspoon finely grated lemon zest
pinch salt
1/3 cup (90ml) honey
powdered sugar, to taste (sifted)

Beat the ricotta, milk, honey, salt and lemon zest together until light and smooth. Beat the cream with two or three tablespoons of powdered sugar in a chilled bowl until soft peaks form. Fold into the ricotta mixture. Taste for sweetness: keeping in mind that when frozen the sweetness will be a little muted. Stir in either more honey (if you want that flavor more pronounced), or more powdered sugar. Pour into a freezer-safe container with a lid. Freeze until solid (at least 6 hours), removing the mixture every hour or so to beat it a bit and break up the ice crystals. Or, if you are one of the lucky ones, churn it in your ice cream maker. This is really nice with cakes, or with fruit, or with other ice creams, or with a big bowl and a spoon...

*See previous posts, if you really don't know!