Everyone hates Rose Levy Beranbaum

[Hey, first post of the year!] [and a really late one since I started it and left it as a draft for ages!]

So, those of you who know who Rose Levy Beranbaum is know that this post is going to be about baking. For those who don't know who that is, this post is going to be about baking. Whether you know it or not, Rose Levy Beranbaum is the author of a slew of books about baking The Cake Bible, Rose's Heavenly Cakes, The Pie and Pastry Bible, The Bread Bible and more. These are excellent books, full of useful information and delicious recipes. I credit The Bread Bible with finally allowing me to consistently make pretty good bread. The Cake Bible has been invaluable in the bit of cake baking I've done.

At this point you are wondering perhaps, "why the hate then?" Though if you bake and have used her books, you may know already. The feeling is not really hate, and it's almost love, but me and all the bakers that I know (ok, the 'everyone' from the title turns out to be a handful of people) feel a sort of good natured exasperation with Ms. Beranbaum. Yes, the recipes are delicious, well explained, nearly foolproof, with plenty of information so that you know what is going on when you do stuff. We just can't get over the feeling that she's, well, a precision freak. A mere cup of an ingredient is not good enough.

Let me give an example.
-------------------------------------------------
The lemon curd I made according to Rose's recipe was delicious. It got eaten up right quick on crumpets, brioche, added to apple charlotte and so on.

It calls for 1 cup plus 2 Tablespoons of sugar...

it calls also for 1/2 cup plus 1 Tablespoon of lemon juice...
--------------------------------------------------

She also is very keen on weighing ingredients rather than using volume measures, which is understandable. That's how pros do it and for many things it's more accurate and consistent. And looking at the wight measures that 1/2C + 1T of lemon juice becomes a nice even 5oz. The sugar looks reasonable at 8oz. The egg yolks weigh 4.6 oz though, so that's not the whole solution to making her recipes not slightly exasperating (the yolks are 4 fluid ounces, so volume is the way to go there apparently).

One further example; moving out of the cake and frosting/filling realm, which does, admittedly require a fair degree of precision for proper results, to bread, which is a much more forgiving and relaxed skill (unless you're working at professional bakery that seeks identical product with each batch baked). Even here Rose's habits of exactitude apply.
-------------------------------------------------
From the Basic Soft White Sandwich Loaf:

Just the starter:

2 1/4 C (plus 2 1/2 T) unbleached AP flour (use only Gold Medal, King Arthur, or Pilsbury[!])

scant 1 3/4 C room temperature water

2 T plus 1 t honey .....

3/4 t instant yeast (see page 561 for acceptable brands)
-------------------------------------------------

You can see a certain... inflexibility to the author's character. I simply chuckly and use a generous 2 T of honey when I make my variation of the Soft White Sandwich loaf, which uses half whole wheat flour and eliminates the butter. I like to imagine Rose gnashing her teeth as I do so as she struggles to press a Foley teaspoon measure into my hands (the most accurate brand (in the round bowl style, not the oval) that she knew of until she discovered the POURfect brand of measuring utensils). I imagine her grimace at my use of so much whole wheat flour (she claims it is too bitter and few of her bread recipes call for any, though some admit a small amount). I can only speculate at the horror she must feel as we use brands of unbleached AP flour other than those she allows, and when we make cakes using the unbleached cake flour King Arthur offers instead of pure bleached cake flour for the very lightest of textures... (I'm just not a big fan of baking with bleach).

I can still make a nice looking (and delicious) brioche.

probably unplanned obsolescence

I'm just popping up here to express a certain frustration with changing standards and sizes... particularly in the world of bicycle parts. This is a familiar story to anyone who plays around with old bicycles.

I am currently working on restoration (to usability, not showpiece status) of a mid 80's Raleigh Touring bike (the text="kodiak/" if you're interested). The chainrings were pretty chewed up, so I intended to replace them and went into my local bike shop (LBC), to order the new ones. We both took a look and guessed it was a standard 110/74 B.C.D. arrangement and ordered based on that. Unbeknownst to us, there were stumbling blocks in the works.

I discovered on getting the new shiny chainrings home that the small one was really too small for the crankset I was intending it to adorn. I returned the next day for a second measurement and hopefully reordering. It was not to be, as we discovered upon pouring through parts catalogs, and my later internet explorations, this lovely Takagi crankset uses the now obsolete text="86" for the inner chainring (just browse around at that link to find the answers to questions you may be having like "what is B.C.D?", "what is a chainring", "just what, when you get right down to it, is this guy talking about?"), and this size is no longer available. It's not made no more.

I checked ebay and looked elsewhere around the strange and mystical world of NOS bike parts on the internet. I'd be paying more than $50 no matter where I went it seems. So, plan #2! The outer chainrings are 110, and that's lovely. I think I'm just going to find a new crankset in the nice, safe, modern 110/74 format and re-buy that 26 tooth chainring I ordered and be done with it (can't even get 26 tooth in 86 B.C.D. I'd be stuck with 28 as the smallest available size, and I'd be hard pressed to find another replacement in a hurry). This is, to some degree, kowtowing to the modern age I guess... but really, sometimes the whole thing with all these different standards and sizes just seems calculated to annoy (or rather, to get you to buy a particular company's parts rather than mixing and matching to your own contentment). Maybe it isn't always reasonable, but I sometimes wish bike and bike part makers would just get together and agree to use a single set of standards for everything so everything would interchange nicely and smoothly, and then just don't change anything... this of course does not solve the issue of all the old bikes out there sporting a wide array of parts in all shapes and, particularly, sizes.

Props to the LBS by the way. In no way is this an indictment of the service available at text=Chain Reaction.

impermanence

Just finished mending some holes that appeared in a couple sweaters and a pair of gloves, which procedure has prompted a short, not particularly original post about the value of repairing instead of replacing.

Repairing should really take its place as a 4th 'R' in the mantra of 'Reduce, Reuse, Recycle'. It is an art that has sadly dwindled... who darns socks in this day and age? You just pick up another pack from Shopko... or Fleet Farm in my case. Now, I've never darned a sock myself, and I'm unlikely to when it comes to the sort picked up in packs of 6 for $3. The whole purpose of being for something like that is to be disposable, and I don't think darning would extend the life of such a sock for long enough to be worthwhile. I also have nicer socks; thick, part wool, wintry socks. Those I would mend... will mend, when in the course of human events they develop little holes. My nice wool sweaters I mended this evening. They were cheaply acquired at thrift stores, but they are not cheap items. Both are 100% merino wool and are, I believe, attractive and flattering colors and shapes. They are worth hanging onto. A corollary to the proposal that it's good to repair things because it keeps nice things around longer is that if you have nice things you are more likely to wish to repair them to keep them around longer. A really durable, comfortable pair of shoes is worth resoling. A pair of flip flops... well, that's really only a sole to begin with so that's a poor example perhaps... but a $15 pair of sneakers isn't worth taking to the cobbler even if he could do anything about it (and did you know that Appleton is still home to a guy who makes his living repairing shoes? ... I'm pretty sure he's still there in his little downtown storefront anyway, I haven't been by there all that recently).

[Ranting] Things were once built to last, and to be fixable. Fewer and fewer things are now. Computers are still expensive enough that we have them repaired or learn to do repairs and replacements ourselves. Cars too, and many bicycles. Many electronic devices have cheapened to the point where they don't make economic sense to repair, and have become complicated enough that there's less to repair: a fried chip, or some inaccessible plastic thinger that is half the size of your pinkie fingernail, cost a fraction of a fraction of a penny to produce and yet its loss renders a CD player entirely useless. The day is coming when a computer will be like a VCR I'm sure... well, I guess I mean DVD player, since VCRs are an obsolete technology entirely. Most likely a computer will just be an access point for this cloud processing network we hear about from technological gurus. Hopping back to bicycles, you can buy a completely cheapened and complicated bicycle ('complicated' in this instance refers largely to the use of plastic to make a lot of crucial components, which is also cheapening, but plastic is a much more complicated material to produce than steel or even aluminum... to the best of my understanding), and you can buy this bicycle for an absurdly low price. And when something goes wrong you will buy a new one because even if a bike mechanic is willing to work on the $80 Magna you bought at Toys R Us (they'd rather you bought from them, but would accept at least you buying something that wasn't marketed as a toy for Pete's sake), the poor quality of the components make such a bike not worth servicing in the first place (like the cheap cotton tube sock). The repair will be too time consuming and insufficiently lasting to be worth the time and money. Don't even get me started on the toy store's 'fully suspended' models of 'mountain bikes'...

Okay. This is growing longer than I intended. I will conclude with my belief that fixing things also gives you a better understanding of things you use (bicycles are a good example of this, me being an avid bicycle repairman, I can tell you I know a lot more about that vehicle now than I did before I started mucking about in bottom brackets). You might even learn how to make something yourself, using the best materials you can find and constructing it with care, but even the care you put into mending has an effect of adding to the value of your possessions; not, perhaps in resale or antique value (the antique appraisers tend to hate when things are repaired for some reason), but sentimentally surely. Those little mending stitches, glue beads, welds or whatever are better than writing your name on the label for claiming an object as yours (questions of the evils or benefits of private property are hereby ignored for the sake of a more poetic argument).

Mending.
Give it a try. It's more fun than shopping.

Housekeeping

I've made a couple changes/additions to the kombucha post to reflect the latest advances in knowledge, accuracy of instruction, and spelling. Just one of the many services I provide to you, the dedicated reader. You're welcome.

Cultural Detritus

To make up for my infrequency in posting I bring you today, not one but two (2) elucidations of random things I've come accross that make me both laugh and weep a bit for the future of our species. [Okay, I wrote that and then ended up sitting on this post for ages and then not including the other bit I promised. I may get to it]

First off we have the invitation I recieved in the mail to sign up for a credit card. Typically these are referred to as credit card offers. This one however is an invitation.

Observe

Quite a lovely black envelope, yes? With gold(ish) formal writing upon it. Let's see it from the front shall we?
Well, isn't that lovely? The Black Card. Let's look inside shall we? It doesn't matter much what your answer to these questions I keep asking actually are, I'm just going to go ahead anyway with my little plan here. They are what is known as rhetorical questions. Asked merely for the sake of style, not to elicit a response. English lesson over.

They have a director of Customer Experience... This should make you nervous right off the bat. It's never a good sign when people redefine corporate positions. Take human resources as an example. Just the term is disturbing and, funnily enough, dehumanizing. I mean, you could use the same term in an organ harvesting operation... if that doesn't give you pause you obviously haven't been watching enough bad thrillers on late night television.

Alright. Enough of that, lets see what this Black Card actually entails. Are you feeling the anticipation? Are you as curious as I was to see what all this is about? I hope so. Moving along, we find the meat of the matter:
Ah! Wonderful! Here we see (though in fact if we were reading carefully we also saw it in the letter from Customer Experience Director) that the Black Card (should follow suit with the Visa folks by putting it in boldface type I guess) is "not for everyone". Well certainly. Not everyone is worthy of such a fancy invitation... only the very best of us. In fact, only 1% of U.S. residents. A pretty elite group I must say, us 1%ers. The few, the proud, the holders. Apparently we get high caliber personal 'concierge' service. I envision a tuxedo clad, Jeeves like figure to personally deliver the card, or indeed, simply to accompany me on all my acquisitional excursions, carrying the Black Card in a metal briefcase handcuffed to his wrist, which will be unlocked when I am ready to make my purchase. You get that kind of service with the Black Card, for it is not a mere piece of plastic. Oh, no. Oh, no no no no no. It is a patent pending carbon card. As we know from the world of bicycling, everything is made better by making it out of carbon. It's lighter and stronger than conventional credit cards (it seems tawdry to even use such a term in reference to this "the ultimate buying tool" [in actuality, the ultimate buying tool is the one who gets this card]). It is laterally stiff and vertically compliant. It is the card of choice of pro racers world over, or would be, but you see, it's limited to only 1% of U.S. citizens, so those damn Belgians can't have one. Even Lance Armstrong may not have gotten one of these exclusive invitations.

Well, besides a personal shopping valet and a high-tech carbon fiber rectangle, what do we get?
Well, oh yes, the limited membership, so we know we're special. That's very important. We are indeed, those special few who demand only the best of what life has to offer.

Exclusive Rewards Program. No further information about what rewards are on offer, but they've gotta be pretty damn good don't you think? I'd expect a Lexus at least. Not right away of course, but after a few years of using the Black Card I think I'll have earned it.

Luxury Gifts. Geese that lay golden eggs, singing harps, that sort of thing. Not to be confused with the rewards, which we get in return for a job well done, these gifts are given to us simply to show that we are loved and valued, unconditionally... well okay, one condition, there is a small anual fee, a mere pittance. See it up there?

$495

a year

This is a damn special card. The APR isn't even that great. I think it starts at 13% or something. You pay them for the privilage of using the Black Card. If you're special enough to join the exclusive club.

Do me a favor all of you who work in retail. If any customer of yours pays for something with this card... just punch them in the face. If you are uncomfortable with violence, simply tease them mercilessly. Be sure to bring up the $495 a year, and the fact that the card is made of carbon (we're glossing over the fact that plastic is also made of carbon, but it has not escaped our notice. I know what they mean by "carbon" in this case).

The Dehumanization of our Heroes

Tomorrow is Columbus Day in this country (it's Columbus Day in Spain too I've learned, but that's just a coincidence, since they always observe it on the 12th). This, naturally, got me thinking a bit about Christopher Columbus. This began as the usual "why do you hate America?" style of thinking that certain talk radioists regularly deride. Typical stuff: he didn't actually discover anything, since there were folks there already; he never even landed in North America where we so revere him; he neither revolutionized the way the Earth was envisioned at the time, nor even ever realized he had discovered a new continent; he brought european diseases to the New World, and new world diseases back to Europe; he instigated the centuries of murder and oppression of the folks who were already here... all that stuff.

I then realized that, actually, none of that matters. Not, at least, as regards the holiday of Columbus Day (which most folks only think about inasmuch as it's a day off school, and you can't get mail or do any banking that day). It's the myth of the man that we are concerned with on Columbus Day, not the real human who thought he found the Indies and was convicted of brutal torture in his governorship across the water and all that. The image of Columbus in the heads of schoolkids, and most adults (even those who know better) has more in common with Paul Bunyan that with the man himself.

Columbus, in 1492 sailed the ocean blue (of course), because he was off to discover America! He lashed together his three ships, the Niña, the Pinta and the Santa Maria, and set forth all by himself, having, through force of will convinced the Imperial rulers of Spain that the Earth was indeed round (some confusion here with the discovery of a new continent and the search for a western route to the Indies and their lucrative spices). He quite probably hooked a rope each to the three ships and strapped planks to his feet and became the first water-skier, blowing up a wind for himself to fill the sails when the ocean winds would not provide. He landed... oh, somewhere up around Plymouth Rock I'd guess, and said "Aha! I have discovered America! Go me!" And he proceeded to make friends with the natives who had no quarrel with him saying he'd discovered America (imagine walking next door, sticking a flag on your neighbor's porch and saying "I've discovered your house, and all its riches belong to Spain!"). He returned triumphant to Spain (though possibly a lot of folks envision it as England even if they know better). From that began 600 years of peaceful european colonization of the New World.

This is the folk hero version of Christopher Columbus, and he his unassailable with mere facts. There is a folk hero version of George Washington (with his cherry tree), Abraham Lincoln (without the depression) and a few others. The founding fathers are less crucial to our self-image as Americans than our founding mythic heroes. In this sense, in spite of his Genoese birth, Columbus is as American as apple pie (made with apples that originated in Central Asia, with a crust made of middle eastern wheat, since I'm being contrary here). Our folk heroes are not allowed to be real human beings. Paul Bunyan never lived through a hard winter, or got drunk and disorderly on a Saturday night, this could not be concieved.

So... I'm not sure exactly what the conclusion here to be drawn is. I think I feel a bit softer towards Columbus in a way. Toward the folk Columbus in any case, and I realize that the real guy didn't participate in this mythmaking, he just did some stuff, like we all do, and he got co-opted, warts removed and be-pedestaled. Can't blame a guy for that. Can blame him for stuff he actually did of course, or allowed to be. But that's a different issue. Perhaps the point is just to be aware, if you're going to talk about Christopher Columbus, there are two persons of that name that you can be talking about... and there may even be some value in the folk hero version, bravely defying the established wisdom of his time and discovering new frontiers. Not to say we should simply ignore reality in favor of usable myths, but maybe we can use the myths if we keep in mind that that's what they are. Columbus certainly has more to offer as a folk hero than does Paul Bunyan, who teaches us... if you grow up to be...um... really big... you can create the Grand Canyon.

flip-flapping in the breeze

... actually, currently flip-flapping in the basement...
It's:
My latest finished project!

Good thing, since that's what this thing was pretty much intended for. The cultural criticism and nature writing is well and good, but I'm supposed to making stuff. I have been, and I'm gonna tell you about it.

Hobby Lobby. I don't know quite what it is about Hobby Lobby. I don't quite like going there. Some of it is that it's a chain store, but there just aren't many local craft stores of that sort around. There's a nice yarn shop a mile from my house, and local places to get paint and assorted art supplies... but I think all the fabric shops are chains of at least some size. Anyway, there are certain things for which Hobby Lobby is indispensible. One of these, for some reason, is yellow rip-stop nylon... about which more in another post or two. Two of these is scrap leather. They get these bags of cast off bits of a variety of shapes and sizes and colors from... I dunno, saddleries and cobblers and purseries and whatnot. They stick a bunch of bits in a bag and I go and pick up a bag or two and try to decide what to do with 'em all.

First thing I've done now is to make up a pair of leather mudflaps for one of my bicycles. The venerable Brooks of England makes leather mudflaps... they cost $30 a piece. One can also get some through Velo-Orange, for cheaper. Now you can get them from me! I decided, since I had the leather, some punches, knives and leather treatment stuff made out of bee secretions I should just make some myself.

First I figured out a good size based on measuring my fenders and checking the listed sizes for the Velo-Orange and Brooks styles, figuring it's best to copy what's out there first of all. I also was limited by the sizes of leather pieces I had in colors that roughly matched one another (for front and rear flaps). So I came up with a pattern, and made a template on some lovely green paper.

That's the negative shape of course, I traced the positive shape on the leather, but either would work, I think the positive shape was probably wandering around somewhere out of reach when I took this blurry photo though.

So then I cut out my trapezoids (not trapeziuses... that would hurt), and punched holes for mounting, like so:

I also needed some mounting bolts, so I went to the hardware store (the little local one) and got these slick and shiny fellas. They're SAE, not metric, but come close enough that I can use my metric bike tools to mount them without ruining everything.

Aren't those lovely? They did have that type in metric, but only in black, and I'm a sucker for shiny bits of metal.

Next order of business was cleaning and weather-treating the things since they're going to be catching lots of mud and dirt and water and gunk and stuff and ambiguous goo. Behold the stuff:

Yeah... that's all. And then the flaps looked like SO:

but rather less blurry...











And then I drilled holes in the fenders to match the holes in the flaps like SO:














And assembled with the bolts like SO:












(with and without flash)




And that was it really.

Now they are sitting in the basement because the bike they are intended for is in a hundred pieces in the basement as well. But they're pretty cool I think and I wanted to share.

Hope you've enjoyed it.