Author Archive: Dan P.

The “Neo”-Priest

Tuesday, September 13, 20050

priestThe new “recruitment” poster for the Catholic priesthood, featuring 28-year old Father Jonathan Meyer ready to fight the forces of evil. He got the idea after seeing a sketch during seminary that pitted a group of older priests battling Satan in martial arts fashion. The poster is being given out to teens everywhere in hopes that it will entice them into the priesthood; and thousands of those teens are grabbing them up. Well, certainly a sexy poster of a priest hanging on their walls will entice teens into something.

The Catholic church has such a good record on priests, teens, and sex … what could possibly go wrong?

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Flotsam, jetsam, lagan, and derelict

Time to “Veg-Out”

Monday, July 4, 20050

Buenos Aires – It’s a grey and rainy day, and we’re going to stay in for most of it. I thought it was a good time to finish up a couple of book reviews I’ve been working on…

Much as I love vegetables, being a vegetarian has never been truly an option for me. But when two books on vegetarian cooking arrive in my mailbox on the same day, I figure someone at least wants me to pay attention. I used to think that vegetarians were all a little, well, squirrely. And they didn’t eat anything that tasted good. Not that vegetables don’t taste good, but, well, the vegetarian restaurants I’d encountered seemed committed to brown, mushy or really, really chewy, tasteless food. Misery in dining as a way of life. Over the last few years though, I’ve discovered some truly wonderful restaurants that are meatless. The two big changes seem to be an appreciation for really exploring the potential of vegetarian cuisine, and, perhaps as important, dropping the dogmatic approach that up until only a few years ago dominated the scene.

Millenium CookbookThe first book I opened is the cookbook from the chef and staff of the Millennium restaurant in San Francisco. Aptly enough, not only for the restaurant but for the age we’re living in, the book is called The Millennium Cookbook; Extraordinary Vegetarian Cuisine. And it is. Extraordinary. First, the book is beautifully designed. Eye-catching photos, both color and sepia-toned, are liberally placed throughout the book. The graphic layout and color choices for text are equally enticing. Secondly, the book is a pleasure to read. The authors start by noting that their readers undoubtedly have different motivations for picking the book up – and all are equally valid.

One of my pet peeves are recipes in cookbooks that either just plain don’t work, or require a level of skill or knowledge that the average home cook just doesn’t generally possess. The Millennium Cookbook successfully avoids either pitfall. Recipes are clear, concise and well laid out. Where references are made to special techniques or ingredients, there are appropriate reference sections in the back that cover these. Nutritional information is provided for those whom are interested. Most importantly, the recipes work. I picked a random sampling of half a dozen and tried them out. All were delicious!

Heaven’s Banquet CookbookThe second book I approached with trepidation. Heaven’s Banquet; Vegetarian Cooking for Lifelong Health the Ayurveda Way already had the ring of dogma and brown, mushy food. Happily, my fears were unwarranted. The book certainly contains whole sections devoted to spirituality and vegetarian cuisine, and it is peppered with quotes and quips from spiritual texts. However, there is an easy-going, at times almost tongue-in-cheek approach to the presentation of the food and its relationship to life.

The book is nicely laid out, the recipes are easy to follow, and, like the Millennium Cookbook, the recipes work. There is also entire sections devoted to recipes covering interesting basics like making your own cheeses, seitan, spice mixtures and chutneys. Though illustrations are few and far between, they are present to illustrate specialized cooking techniques when the author feels something is a bit more complicated.

For vegetarians and non-vegetarians alike, these two books provide not only good food, approached from vastly different directions, but enjoyable reading as well.

 

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Books (Reviews)

,

Thou Shalt Read

Friday, June 24, 20050

In The Devil’s GardenBaltimore – I just finished the book In the Devil’s Garden: A Sinful History of Forbidden Food by Steward Lee Allen (Ballantine Books, 2002). I love stuff like this. History, speculation, romance, and a bit of comedic relief, and it’s all about my favorite topic – food! The book is an exploration into food taboos, both current and historical, and a look at where they came from, and the results of varioius laws, edicts, codes, and other such attempts to regulate their ingestion.

Let me start with my few minor quibbles about the book. The book is divided into basically seven chapters, one for each of the usual seven deadly sins. Mr. Allen starts each chapter with a menu made up of either pseudonymed items or commonly named items with oddball descriptions – all in an attempt to humorously lead into each sin and the specific subject matter of that chapter. He’s far more amusing when he strings sentences together – for the most part the menus come across as juvenile attempts to entertain. He has a tendency to use “common knowledge” as fact – the most noticeable one for me was when he launched into an exploration of some of the kosher dietary laws. Two in particular stood out, let me take them one at a time.

He states that in Leviticus (Old Testament, or Torah, for those not up on these things) there is a prohibition against the mixing of meat and milk, and claims it was even part of the original ten commandments. First off, there is no such prohibition in Leviticus (I’ll get to that in a moment), and second, the latter claim is complete speculation. The actual statement in the bible translates as “Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother’s milk.” Literally that means that you are prohibited from boiling a young goat in it’s own mother’s milk. This goes along with other prohibitions about not killing a kid on the same day as it’s own mother. The kosher dietary law against mixing meat and milk came in much later in history, and was a rabbinical prohibition in the Talmud, (specifically the Mishnah) or commentary on the Torah, not a “divine” one. It was based on the biblical statement as an attempt to expand upon God’s intentions in the matter. Second, the original statement doesn’t appear in Leviticus (and therefore the kosher laws) at all. It appears twice in the bible, Exodus 34:26 and Deuteronomy 14:21.

The second one he tackles is the prohibition against eating pork. He meanders with this one and cites all sorts of various claims, most of which have been shown to be questionable. While I won’t claim that all scholars agree on where this one came from, there has seemed to be a settling towards an explanation he doesn’t even bother with (surprising, since much of this book goes into the politics of food taboos), which is political. The Jews, at the time, were living amongst, if I’m remembering my studies well, the Canaanites. These folk were major in the pig trade, in fact, they pretty much were the pig trade in the middle east. The leaders of the jewish folk were out to make sure that their people didn’t intermingle – socially, sexually, or even commercially – thereby maintaining a separate identity. Banning any contact with pigs, and making the punishments be both corporal and capital, was a shrewd political maneuver to accomplish their goals.

Those two examples popped up mostly because of my personal religious studies when younger, so they stood out. I wouldn’t be surprised if folks who have training in other areas were to find similar gaffes in other parts of the book.

Now, all that said… I loved this book! It is an entertaining and thoughtful read. It is well written, with some wonderful turns of phrase, good pacing, and overall, damned amusing. It is obviously researched in depth, and whole worlds of both local traditions and scholarly pursuit are brought into the discussion. It was “worldly” in the sense that it covered cultural taboos across the globe. The division into Western culture’s “seven deadly sins” is perhaps a hometown conceit, but the categories are recognizable enough, even if not universal, that anyone can follow them. Oh, and last… kudos to the publisher – the font used is beautiful, and has just enough of an exotic styling to add to the whole feel of the book.

This is the second book in a similar vein that Mr. Allen has written, the first being an exploration into the history of coffee, The Devil’s Cup, which has now moved onto my reading list.

 

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Books (Reviews)

,

Long & Pointy

Friday, May 27, 20050

ban_knives0From today’s New York Times:

British Medical Experts Campaign for Long, Pointy Knife Control
By JOHN SCHWARTZ

Warning: Long, pointy knives may be hazardous to your health.

The authors of an editorial in the latest issue of the British Medical Journal have called for knife reform. The editorial, “Reducing knife crime: We need to ban the sale of long, pointed kitchen knives,” notes that the knives are being used to stab people as well as roasts and the odd tin of Spam.

The authors of the essay – Drs. Emma Hern, Will Glazebrook and Mike Beckett of the West Middlesex University Hospital in London – called for laws requiring knife manufacturers to redesign their wares with rounded, blunt tips.

The researchers noted that the rate of violent crime in Britain rose nearly 18 percent from 2003 to 2004, and that in the first two weeks of 2005, 15 killings and 16 nonfatal attacks involved stabbings. In an unusual move for a scholarly work, the researchers cited a January headline from The Daily Express, a London tabloid: “Britain is in the grip of knives terror – third of murder victims are now stabbed to death.” Dr. Hern said that “we came up with the idea and tossed it into the pot” to get people talking about crime reduction. “Whether it’s a sensible solution to this problem or not, I’m not sure.”

In the United States, where people are more likely to debate gun control than knife control, partisans on both sides sounded amused. Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, asked, “Are they going to have everybody using plastic knives and forks and spoons in their own homes, like they do in airlines?”

Peter Hamm, a spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, which supports gun control, joked, “Can sharp stick control be far behind?” He said people in his movement were “envious” of England for having such problems. “In America, we can’t even come to an agreement that guns are dangerous and we should make them safer,” he said.

The authors of the editorial argued that the pointed tip is a vestigial feature from less mannered ages, when people used it to spear meat. They said that they interviewed 10 chefs in England, and that “none gave a reason why the long, pointed knife was essential,” though short, pointed knives were useful.

An American chef, however, disagreed with the proposal. “This is yet another sign of the coming apocalypse,” said Anthony Bourdain, the executive chef at Les Halles and the author of “Kitchen Confidential.”

A knife, he said, is a beloved tool of the trade, and not a thing to be shaped by bureaucrats. A chef’s relationship with his knives develops over decades of training and work, he said, adding, “Its weight, its shape – these are all extensions of our arms, and in many ways, our personalities.”

He compared the editorial to efforts to ban unpasteurized cheese. “Where there is no risk,” he said, “there is no pleasure.”

Note, we’re not talking about the usual sorts of “knife control” laws, like not letting kids buy them, or banning certain types of knives (well, I guess in a sense we are talking about banning certain kinds of knives), like switchblades, or gravity blades, or the latest in samurai sword attacks (which seem to be quite common if one does a google search) or things of that sort. This is more in the line of:

“Sharp, pointy objects shouldn’t be available to anyone.” said Sen. Lieberman, D-Conn., a key figure in the knife-control movement.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Flotsam, jetsam, lagan, and derelict

, , , ,

A good story makes the product better

Sunday, May 8, 20050

marketersOkay, this isn’t my own, it’s an excerpt from a new book called All Marketers Are Liars by Seth Goldin. The excerpt appeared in the May 2005 issue of Fortune: Small Business, so I’m not sure if it’s exactly what will appear in the final book (to be published this month). But, since it relates to my career, and I liked it, I’m just posting it. By the way, the rest of the excerpt is truly fascinating – look for the book in stores soon!

Georg Riedel is a fibber—an honest spinner of tales. He tells his customers something that isn’t true—his wineglasses make wine taste better—and then the very act of believing it makes the statement true. Because drinkers believe the wine tastes better, it does taste better.

Georg is a tenth-generation glass blower, an artisan pursuing an age-old craft. I’m told he’s a very nice guy. And he’s very good at telling stories. His company makes wineglasses (also whiskey glasses, espresso glasses, and even water glasses). He and his staff fervently believe that there is a perfect (and different) shape for every beverage. According to Riedel’s website, “The delivery of a wine’s ‘message,’ its bouquet and taste, depends on the form of the glass. It is the responsibility of a glass to convey the wine’s messages in the best manner to the human senses.”

Thomas Matthews, the executive editor of Wine Spectator magazine, said, “Everybody who ventures into a Riedel tasting starts as a skeptic. I did.” The skepticism doesn’t last long. Robert Parker Jr., the king of wine reviewers, said, “The finest glasses for both technical and hedonistic purposes are those made by Riedel. The effect of these glasses on fine wine is profound. I cannot emphasize enough what a difference they make.” Parker and Matthews and hundreds of other wine luminaries are now believers (and as a result, they are Riedel’s best word-of-mouth marketers). Millions of wine drinkers around the world have been persuaded that a $200 bottle of Opus One (or a bottle of Two-Buck Chuck) tastes better when served in the proper Riedel glass.

Yet when tests are done scientifically—double-blind tests that eliminate any chance that the subject would know the shape of the glass—there is absolutely zero detectable difference among glasses. A $1 glass and a $20 glass deliver precisely the same impact on the wine: none.

So what’s going on? Why do wine experts insist that the wine tastes better in a Riedel glass at the same time that scientists can easily prove it doesn’t? The flaw in the experiment, as outlined by Daniel Zwerdling in Gourmet magazine, is that the reason the wine tastes better is that people believe it should. This makes sense, of course. Taste is subjective. Riedel sells millions of dollars’ worth of glasses every year. It sells glasses to intelligent, well-off wine lovers, who then proceed to enjoy their wine more than they did before. Marketing, in the form of an expensive glass and the story that goes with it, has more impact on the taste of wine than oak casks or fancy corks or the rain in June. Georg Riedel makes your wine taste better by telling you a story.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Flotsam, jetsam, lagan, and derelict

, , ,