1534: "Beer"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
higgs-boson
Posts: 519
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:00 pm UTC
Location: Europe (UTC + 4 newpix)

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby higgs-boson » Tue Jun 09, 2015 11:02 am UTC

Neil_Boekend wrote:... Dunno if they are available in other countries ...

In Germany, "Clausthaler" would be the best-known non-alcohol beer (claiming to have 'full taste'), there is no "Clausthaler" brew non-non-alcohol*. Maybe visitors interested in alcohol-free brews should start with that one.

Fun fact on a side node: Beck's is a brewery in northern Germany (commercials here feature a two-master with green sails - since Bremen has quite a history doing seaborne trade, it is not far-stretched). In the U.S. - and only in the U.S. - there's a Beck's Oktoberfest brew. Nobody in Germany would ever associate Beck's (coming from a city far away from Munich) with the Oktoberfest. Contrary to oversea's beliefs, Germany isn't a country full of beer-drinking lederhosn bumpkins and red-cheeked dirndl dressed beauty bunnies. Not even in October**. That's just Bavaria. And in there, it's mostly Munich. And beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

*However, the original brewery (among a great deal of others) has been bought and closed by Binding... it's basically the same as everywhere).
**Oktoberfest starts in September. Don't be late.
Apostolic Visitator, Holiest of Holy Fun-Havers
You have questions about XKCD: "Time"? There's a whole Wiki dedicated to it!

User avatar
HES
Posts: 4873
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 7:13 pm UTC
Location: England

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby HES » Tue Jun 09, 2015 12:16 pm UTC

ucim wrote:Pizza and orange juice - a surprising (and emphatic) yes! (But I can't convince anybody to try it.)

Yeah, this works.

But I'm British and don't like tea or beer, so my opinion isn't to be trusted :roll:
He/Him/His Image

phas
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 1:45 pm UTC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby phas » Tue Jun 09, 2015 12:44 pm UTC

CharlieP wrote:
phas wrote:One of the few funny things about being an italian is that when you see people from other countries arguing about food, you always think "what in the world are these barbarians saying?"


A couple of years ago I spent a few nights on a lovely Thai island in a quiet (almost private) resort run by an Italian couple. For dinner one night they suggested "pizza", and invited our choices of toppings. One of my travelling companions innocently asked for a "Hawaiian", which was met with baffled looks. When she described its composition, the ham was agreeable, but the word "pineapple" was met by amazement, indignation and a quick, terse "No".


Ok, this is a pizza.

Image

It's made with water, flour, yeast, salt, olive oil and salt for the dough and unprocessed tomato pulp, olive oil, mozzarella, salt and basil as topping.

The horrible habit of putting all sort of things (but not peperoni and, for god's sake, not pineapple) on top of pizza is widespread even in Italy. This is a stupid thing, because it kills the taste of the crust that is the real deal of the pizza and prevent proper cooking of the dough. This habit comes from the fact that making a proper pizza is difficult and putting a lot of cheese/sausages/stuff on it helps to make it palatable even if it's not properly prepared. Of course in Naples, that is the "city of pizza", this bad habit is not widespread and many pizza restaurants will flatly refuse to sell anything else than the proper pizza.

elasto
Posts: 3568
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby elasto » Tue Jun 09, 2015 2:25 pm UTC

In China my pizzas sometimes come with peas on...

Desecration and sacrilege...

User avatar
PeteP
What the peck?
Posts: 1451
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 4:51 pm UTC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby PeteP » Tue Jun 09, 2015 2:31 pm UTC

ucim wrote:Pizza is commonly eaten with beer, but to me that makes no culinary sense. Ugh. (I like pizza, and I like beer; they just don't go together).

Red wine however, yes.

Pizza and orange juice - a surprising (and emphatic) yes! (But I can't convince anybody to try it.)

Jose

I prefer pizza with milk. I find milk adds something to grain based things.

User avatar
Quizatzhaderac
Posts: 1596
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Space Florida

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby Quizatzhaderac » Tue Jun 09, 2015 2:34 pm UTC

higgs-boson wrote: Contrary to oversea's beliefs, Germany isn't a country full of beer-drinking lederhosn bumpkins and red-cheeked dirndl dressed beauty bunnies.
Cancels trip to Germany
The thing about recursion problems is that they tend to contain other recursion problems.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1756
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby Quercus » Tue Jun 09, 2015 2:35 pm UTC

Now I just really want a pizza

Spoiler:
With a beer to go with it (which I will pretend to enjoy)

User avatar
Angelastic
Posts: 700
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 8:36 am UTC
Location: .at (let's see what's through here!)
Contact:

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby Angelastic » Tue Jun 09, 2015 2:38 pm UTC

ELUNO wrote:I came here to start the great big beer revolt of 2015! :evil: :evil: :evil:

Now, now… you can't start a beer revolt when the beer is already revolting. :D
Knight Temporal, and Archdeacon of buttermongery and ham and cheese sandwiches. Nobody sells butter except through me.
Image Smiley by yappobiscuits. Avatar by GLR, buffygirl, BlitzGirl & mscha, with cari.j.elliot's idea.
Haiku Detector
starts a trend to make way for
my robot army.

commodorejohn
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:21 pm UTC
Location: Placerville, CA
Contact:

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby commodorejohn » Tue Jun 09, 2015 2:51 pm UTC

higgs-boson wrote:Contrary to oversea's beliefs, Germany isn't a country full of beer-drinking lederhosn bumpkins and red-cheeked dirndl dressed beauty bunnies.

Well, it's that or Dieter of Sprockets for your national stereotype; personally, I'd go with the lederhosen and dirndls.
"'Legacy code' often differs from its suggested alternative by actually working and scaling."
- Bjarne Stroustrup
www.commodorejohn.com - in case you were wondering, which you probably weren't.

Kit.
Posts: 1091
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 5:14 pm UTC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby Kit. » Tue Jun 09, 2015 2:58 pm UTC

higgs-boson wrote:Hi, I am Higgs-Boson and I don't like tea.

You probably don't like water either.

higgs-boson wrote:In their opinion, it just MUST be the case that I did not try the real tasty kind of tea, yet. 25 years of having to taste tea, from common to exotic, from casual to ceremonial, from green to black, I'd say: For me, there is no real tasty kind.

Good tea is supposed to be "fragrant", not "tasty".

phas
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 1:45 pm UTC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby phas » Tue Jun 09, 2015 3:23 pm UTC

PeteP wrote:
ucim wrote:Pizza is commonly eaten with beer, but to me that makes no culinary sense. Ugh. (I like pizza, and I like beer; they just don't go together).

Red wine however, yes.

Pizza and orange juice - a surprising (and emphatic) yes! (But I can't convince anybody to try it.)

Jose

I prefer pizza with milk. I find milk adds something to grain based things.


That's something else that makes me think "Wtf?!". How in the world can anyone eat food with something so strong flavoured as orange juice :shock: or milk :shock:

Basically when you eat food, you would like to drink either water, that has no taste so you can appreciate what you are eating or a wine that is suited to accompany that particular food.

Ok, maybe i'm a little close-minded here, but i cannot help it.

User avatar
Echo244
Posts: 511
Joined: Wed May 20, 2015 9:49 am UTC
Location: Ping! Ping! Ping! Ping!

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby Echo244 » Tue Jun 09, 2015 3:39 pm UTC

Maybe it's an orange juice suited to accompany that particular food...
Unstoppable force of nature. That means she/her/hers.
Has committed an act of treason.

phas
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 1:45 pm UTC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby phas » Tue Jun 09, 2015 4:16 pm UTC

Echo244 wrote:Maybe it's an orange juice suited to accompany that particular food...


Ok, yes, this is a good point. The answer is complex.

I consider two (legitimate) way of cooking (in the broad sense of "preparing a meal").

The first one is for professional trained chef. This doesn't mean "people that work in a restaurant", this means people that studied how to cook for years at a college level.
These people have a strong, flexible and deep theory and that enable them to do whatever they want.

Then there's the "common cooking", that is basically for everyone else. From people like me that cook only for eating, to even good chefs of good restaurants that don't have that kind of background.
These people have to abide to some traditional way of cooking. This doesn't mean that they have to simply cook existing receipts, but they need to follow some "rules" that comes from "the lore" of cooking in some area. (country, region, whatever).
For example the rules of the cooking i'm familiar with are things like "no cheese and fish", "no pepper and chilly", "garlic and onion isn't usually a good combo", "don't mix two different grain derivatives", "don't mix grain derivatives and potatoes", "the less you cook fish, the best", "meat and fish? not really", "sweet and salty is an hell to come up with, so stick to what you know it works" etc etc etc

To clarify the difference between the two, i'll make an example. Some years ago i went to a restaurant, the chef is a friend of mine so i didn't order. He just started to bring me stuff. At some point he came with tuna fish with a slice of Pecorino. Normally you can't do that, it's "against the rules". He's a great chef and it was delicious. I couldn't to that, it wouldn't work with every Pecorino, it wouldn't work even with another pecorino from the same area and i'm not sure it will work with another Pecorino from the same producer in a different year. What my friend did was taste THAT Pecorino, look and smell at THAT fish and think "ok, this taste will work with the taste of that fish when it will be cooked". To do that you need years of study and training.

Of course i can be familiar enough only with my cultural cooking, that is north-west italian (there's no thing as a unified italian cousine) that's why i admitted that i'm close minded. BUT when i come across people from Spain or Turkey or France i kind of understand how they cook. They have a different "set of rules", they mix or do things that are "strange", but ultimately it makes sense.

When i read things like "Pizza with orange juice" it just seem wrong.

rmsgrey
Posts: 3464
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby rmsgrey » Tue Jun 09, 2015 5:53 pm UTC

Many years ago, my sister scandalised her Home Ec teacher by mentioning an old family recipe - ingredients: milk, flour, fat (butter/margarine/whatever), tinned tomatoes, bacon, pasta. And, as any competent housewife knows, you can't mix milk and tomato - the tomatoes are too acidic and curdle the milk. The key is that you make a white sauce first, so the milk is bound into the flour and fat, so the acidity of the tomatoes is irrelevant - the milk can't react to it...

Recipe (for those who care):

Boil the pasta as usual. While it's cooking, make a white sauce by melting some butter over a low heat, mix in some plain flour to make a mass, then gradually add milk, mixing well, to form thinner and thinner pastes (add too much milk at once, and you end up with hard lumps in a thin sauce which is almost impossible to recover from). Once you've got your paste thinned down to a sauce, add the other ingredients - tinned tomato, chopped bacon, seasoning to taste - and simmer. Optionally fry up the bacon a bit first. Once the pasta's done, drain it and stir in the sauce before serving. The sauce will thicken as it cools.

Quantities are either judged by eye and experience, or can be found by googling for a white sauce recipe. A pint of milk makes sauce for 3-5 people.

phas
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 1:45 pm UTC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby phas » Tue Jun 09, 2015 6:14 pm UTC

rmsgrey wrote:Many years ago, my sister scandalised her Home Ec teacher by mentioning an old family recipe - ingredients: milk, flour, fat (butter/margarine/whatever), tinned tomatoes, bacon, pasta. And, as any competent housewife knows, you can't mix milk and tomato - the tomatoes are too acidic and curdle the milk. The key is that you make a white sauce first, so the milk is bound into the flour and fat, so the acidity of the tomatoes is irrelevant - the milk can't react to it...

Recipe (for those who care):

Boil the pasta as usual. While it's cooking, make a white sauce by melting some butter over a low heat, mix in some plain flour to make a mass, then gradually add milk, mixing well, to form thinner and thinner pastes (add too much milk at once, and you end up with hard lumps in a thin sauce which is almost impossible to recover from). Once you've got your paste thinned down to a sauce, add the other ingredients - tinned tomato, chopped bacon, seasoning to taste - and simmer. Optionally fry up the bacon a bit first. Once the pasta's done, drain it and stir in the sauce before serving. The sauce will thicken as it cools.

Quantities are either judged by eye and experience, or can be found by googling for a white sauce recipe. A pint of milk makes sauce for 3-5 people.


The "thing" you are doing with flour, butter (NOT margarine, NOT *whatever*) and milk is called Béchamell is one of the cornerstones in the french cousine and is quite used in italy too (it's needed for Lasagne p.e.). Base quantities are 100g butter, 100g flour, 1l milk. You can find the complete recipe on the internet.

What you are doing somehow resembles what we call "Pasta al forno", that is like "Pasta in the oven", except you have to put it in the oven at the end :p Of course to do that, you boil the pasta less, roughly 2/3 of normal cooking time and then finish cooking in the oven, with Béchamell, tomato and everything (consider that the pasta in the oven will cook slower). And please, cook the tomato sauce before and use something less fat that bacon, like ham for example. You are already using milk and butter for God and arteries sake! Oh, and it will need cheese, bot mixed with the ingredients and on top of it, to form a crust in the oven. But be considerate with quantities please!

Image
Last edited by phas on Tue Jun 09, 2015 7:26 pm UTC, edited 2 times in total.

phas
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 1:45 pm UTC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby phas » Tue Jun 09, 2015 6:29 pm UTC

rmsgrey wrote:Many years ago, my sister scandalised her Home Ec teacher by mentioning an old family recipe - ingredients: milk, flour, fat (butter/margarine/whatever), tinned tomatoes, bacon, pasta. And, as any competent housewife knows, you can't mix milk and tomato - the tomatoes are too acidic and curdle the milk. The key is that you make a white sauce first, so the milk is bound into the flour and fat, so the acidity of the tomatoes is irrelevant - the milk can't react to it...

Recipe (for those who care):

Boil the pasta as usual. While it's cooking, make a white sauce by melting some butter over a low heat, mix in some plain flour to make a mass, then gradually add milk, mixing well, to form thinner and thinner pastes (add too much milk at once, and you end up with hard lumps in a thin sauce which is almost impossible to recover from). Once you've got your paste thinned down to a sauce, add the other ingredients - tinned tomato, chopped bacon, seasoning to taste - and simmer. Optionally fry up the bacon a bit first. Once the pasta's done, drain it and stir in the sauce before serving. The sauce will thicken as it cools.

Quantities are either judged by eye and experience, or can be found by googling for a white sauce recipe. A pint of milk makes sauce for 3-5 people.


Also, the phrase "the sauce will thicken as it cools" is deeply alarming. As a rule of thumb, you should not let pasta cool down, because it will "overcook" and become a hideous chewing-gum like thing. You cannot even cook pasta less and then let it cool down, because pasta has to cook completely at 100C* or more or it will become the hideous thing mentioned above. This also means that pasta should be put in water that is already boiling, with enough water to not drop the temperature too much by adding pasta, ideally putting the lid back until it starts boiling again.

When you prepare things with cold pasta, like "pasta's salad", you should cool it down fast immediately after cooking, for example putting it under cold water.


* >100C happens when you are completing cooking in the oven as in this case or when you are putting some almost-cooked pasta inside the pan with the sauce for ~30sec on high fire. This is called "saltare la pasta" (roughly make the pasta "jump", from the movement you usually do to mix it, like here https://youtu.be/E-J71tN67Kc?t=34s) and it's useful for mixing it well with the sauce as well as using the starch that is released in the last phase of pasta's cooking to correct tomato's natural acidity.

JudeMorrigan
Posts: 1254
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 1:26 pm UTC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby JudeMorrigan » Tue Jun 09, 2015 7:30 pm UTC

phas wrote: "garlic and onion isn't usually a good combo"

This confuses me. Ah well, different strokes and all that.

rmsgrey
Posts: 3464
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby rmsgrey » Tue Jun 09, 2015 7:49 pm UTC

phas wrote:Also, the phrase "the sauce will thicken as it cools" is deeply alarming. As a rule of thumb, you should not let pasta cool down, because it will "overcook" and become a hideous chewing-gum like thing. You cannot even cook pasta less and then let it cool down, because pasta has to cook completely at 100C* or more or it will become the hideous thing mentioned above. This also means that pasta should be put in water that is already boiling, with enough water to not drop the temperature too much by adding pasta, ideally putting the lid back until it starts boiling again.


I don't know about you, but, personally, I find putting things at 100C into my mouth to be a negative experience. 60C is about the limit for what my mouth can compensate...

How do you advocate transferring the 100C pasta-in-sauce to one's stomach without losing the lining of one's mouth?

phas
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 1:45 pm UTC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby phas » Tue Jun 09, 2015 8:47 pm UTC

rmsgrey wrote:
phas wrote:Also, the phrase "the sauce will thicken as it cools" is deeply alarming. As a rule of thumb, you should not let pasta cool down, because it will "overcook" and become a hideous chewing-gum like thing. You cannot even cook pasta less and then let it cool down, because pasta has to cook completely at 100C* or more or it will become the hideous thing mentioned above. This also means that pasta should be put in water that is already boiling, with enough water to not drop the temperature too much by adding pasta, ideally putting the lid back until it starts boiling again.


I don't know about you, but, personally, I find putting things at 100C into my mouth to be a negative experience. 60C is about the limit for what my mouth can compensate...

How do you advocate transferring the 100C pasta-in-sauce to one's stomach without losing the lining of one's mouth?


Yeah well, i was talking about cooking. When you move the stuff into the dish, it will cool down rapidly and then when you pick it up with the fork even more.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1756
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby Quercus » Tue Jun 09, 2015 10:28 pm UTC

phas wrote:
Echo244 wrote:Maybe it's an orange juice suited to accompany that particular food...


Ok, yes, this is a good point. The answer is complex.

I consider two (legitimate) way of cooking (in the broad sense of "preparing a meal").

The first one is for professional trained chef. This doesn't mean "people that work in a restaurant", this means people that studied how to cook for years at a college level.
These people have a strong, flexible and deep theory and that enable them to do whatever they want.

Then there's the "common cooking", that is basically for everyone else. From people like me that cook only for eating, to even good chefs of good restaurants that don't have that kind of background.
These people have to abide to some traditional way of cooking. This doesn't mean that they have to simply cook existing receipts, but they need to follow some "rules" that comes from "the lore" of cooking in some area. (country, region, whatever).
For example the rules of the cooking i'm familiar with are things like "no cheese and fish", "no pepper and chilly", "garlic and onion isn't usually a good combo", "don't mix two different grain derivatives", "don't mix grain derivatives and potatoes", "the less you cook fish, the best", "meat and fish? not really", "sweet and salty is an hell to come up with, so stick to what you know it works" etc etc etc

To clarify the difference between the two, i'll make an example. Some years ago i went to a restaurant, the chef is a friend of mine so i didn't order. He just started to bring me stuff. At some point he came with tuna fish with a slice of Pecorino. Normally you can't do that, it's "against the rules". He's a great chef and it was delicious. I couldn't to that, it wouldn't work with every Pecorino, it wouldn't work even with another pecorino from the same area and i'm not sure it will work with another Pecorino from the same producer in a different year. What my friend did was taste THAT Pecorino, look and smell at THAT fish and think "ok, this taste will work with the taste of that fish when it will be cooked". To do that you need years of study and training.

Of course i can be familiar enough only with my cultural cooking, that is north-west italian (there's no thing as a unified italian cousine) that's why i admitted that i'm close minded. BUT when i come across people from Spain or Turkey or France i kind of understand how they cook. They have a different "set of rules", they mix or do things that are "strange", but ultimately it makes sense.

When i read things like "Pizza with orange juice" it just seem wrong.


I'm not sure I could disagree with you more (I don't mean that in any antagonisitic sense - your way of cooking is fine, and if it works for you then that's great, I just adopt almost completely the opposite approach). I say this for two reasons:

Firstly I don't recognise that a college level education gives you a unique ability to break the rules. Cooking is simply a particular subset of chemistry and physics. It's amenable to experiment and careful observation as much as any other branch of science (and yes, cooking is also an art - but then so are practical chemistry and physics). Anyone can try something out and taste for themselves whether it works. Is a highly trained chef more likely to come up something which works? - of course, but it's by no means impossible for an experienced home cook to do so.

Knowing the rules will keep you out of trouble, but knowing, or deducing through experiment, the reasons behind the rules lets you explore new territory. That doesn't take years of training, the reasoning isn't particularly mysterious or complicated - a book like Harold Mcgee's On Food and Cooking will get you a lot of the way there in just a few hours. So if you want to always get a dish which works, then follow the rules, but if you're willing to put up with some failed experiments bending the rules will teach you a lot more about how food works.

Professional chefs don't magically know what's going to work either - when developing new recipes they try lots of things. They are guided by their experience and training but they still have frequent failures. I remember Heston Blumenthal saying on a radio show that when he's developing new dishes the ideas which don't work far outnumber the ideas that do.

My second reason is fusion cooking. Cross-cultural cooking can have some delicious results, and by definition it involves throwing out some rules of one food culture, in order to mix them with the rules of another food culture.

My attitude to this is probably influenced by my upbringing - both my mother and my father were very experimental with food, and would adopt bits and pieces from all sorts of styles of cooking, from Vietnamese to Eastern European. Most of the time the results were delicious.

phas
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 1:45 pm UTC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby phas » Tue Jun 09, 2015 10:57 pm UTC

I'm not sure I could disagree with you more (I don't mean that in any antagonisitic sense - your way of cooking is fine, and if it works for you then that's great, I just adopt almost completely the opposite approach). I say this for two reasons:

I agree that we disagree. I don't find your arguments very convincing for some reasons that i will enumerate. Surprisingly i somewhat agree with your conclusion tough.

Firstly I don't recognise that a college level education gives you a unique ability to break the rules. Cooking is simply a particular subset of chemistry and physics. It's amenable to experiment and careful observation as much as any other branch of science (and yes, cooking is also an art - but then so are practical chemistry and physics). Anyone can try something out and taste for themselves whether it works. Is a highly trained chef more likely to come up something which works? - of course, but it's by no means impossible for an experienced home cook to do so.

Yes, cooking can be analyzed from chemical and physical perspective. Even if the scientific study of cooking, Molecular Gastronomy is a relatively new discipline. The problem with your argoment is that the measure of the result of "cooking" is the taste of who is eating this, and this is hardly a scientific measure. Taste has a lot to do with culture, habit and so on. For this reason i don't think that cooking can be handled as a purely scientific discipline more or less like music cannot be regarded simply as pure math.


My second reason is fusion cooking. Cross-cultural cooking can have some delicious results, and by definition it involves throwing out some rules of one food culture, in order to mix them with the rules of another food culture.

I dont think that fusion cooking is necessarily in conflict with my point of view. I've a turkish friend and sometimes we "fusion cook" something. Usually i do this when i see him cooking something that makes sense to me and then i modify something in a way that is similar to how i'm used to cook and if it makes sense to him to we have done some "italo-turkish fusion cooking". I would not do that alone, because i wouldn't be able to understand if i am doing something absurd in respect to turkish culture of food, but as long as we are the both of us is fine.

My attitude to this is probably influenced by my upbringing - both my mother and my father were very experimental with food, and would adopt bits and pieces from all sorts of styles of cooking, from Vietnamese to Eastern European. Most of the time the results were delicious.


Here i agree. Food attitude is strongly influenced by upbringing. My father is a skilled amateur cook and a zealot of ingredients quality, but he is also some kind of food-nazi who despise every not italian food (apart some relative tolerance for french and strangely german food). I guess this influenced me a bit too much :p

chaoric
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 6:04 am UTC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby chaoric » Tue Jun 09, 2015 11:07 pm UTC

I can't believe so many people (at least in the first page or two) grouped olives with beer. One is clearly superior to the other -- even the green variety.

(I wish this comic was in the middle of March so this comment could be more ambiguous.)

Mikeski
Posts: 1039
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby Mikeski » Tue Jun 09, 2015 11:30 pm UTC

chaoric wrote:I can't believe so many people (at least in the first page or two) grouped olives with beer.

Then you do not want to know what a Wisconsin Martini is.

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6568
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby ucim » Wed Jun 10, 2015 2:01 am UTC

phas wrote:[a bunch of stuff about how one must be a professional chef to appreciate how to pair foods, and then]

When i read things like "Pizza with orange juice" it just seem wrong.
Did you actually try it? Because that's how you learn stuff.

I'll give you another interesting combo - peach pie with white wine. At the time I discovered this, the wine was Chablis (but the 1980 American "Chablis", which is sort of generic - some say isn't real wine at all!) and my wine palate was not yet well developed. However, the combo is interesting enough to be worth pursuing. Alas, I no longer have peach pies, but I've discovered many wonderful white (and white dessert) wines which would go with those flavors, so the direction is not crazy at all.

The key to cooking, pairing, and other gastronomic delights: Try it and pay attention. They don't all work, but sometimes they are wonderful. Learn from both experiences. But you can't learn without trying it.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

CharlieP
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:22 am UTC
Location: Nottingham, UK

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby CharlieP » Wed Jun 10, 2015 7:45 am UTC

JudeMorrigan wrote:
phas wrote: "garlic and onion isn't usually a good combo"

This confuses me. Ah well, different strokes and all that.


I consider that *anything* and onion isn't a good combo, which usually limits my choice when eating out.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

peregrine_crow
Posts: 180
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2014 7:20 am UTC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby peregrine_crow » Wed Jun 10, 2015 8:54 am UTC

PeteP wrote:I prefer pizza with milk. I find milk adds something to grain based things.


I prefer milk with salty, fat things, so including pizza, but also other kinds of fast food (french fries, hamburgers etc).

phas wrote:That's something else that makes me think "Wtf?!". How in the world can anyone eat food with something so strong flavoured as orange juice :shock: or milk :shock:

Basically when you eat food, you would like to drink either water, that has no taste so you can appreciate what you are eating or a wine that is suited to accompany that particular food.


I find that with a lot of foods, I prefer to drink something that contrasts the food in some way (though obviously not all combinations work here). When I'm eating something I get accustomed to the flavour pretty quickly and don't really taste it anymore, or at least not fully. By eating or drinking something else with a contrasting flavour my mouth transitions to this other flavour (you have to pick the drink such that this transition is pleasant), then with the next bite I can experience the flavour fully again.

Because water has such a mild flavour (though it totally has a flavour) it usually doesn't contrast enough with the food to get this effect. The advantage of milk is that the flavour is strong enough to get this transitioning while having a fairly neutral aftertaste which doesn't get in the way of the next bite of food. I've never tried orange juice with dinner, but Taksi (a dutch drink with a very sweet fruit-like flavour) goes well with a lot of different meals.
Ignorance killed the cat, curiosity was framed.

User avatar
mathmannix
Posts: 1415
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 2:12 pm UTC
Location: Washington, DC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby mathmannix » Wed Jun 10, 2015 8:51 pm UTC

HES wrote:
Shale wrote:Usually legal purchasing age and legal drinking age are the same; I know in the US providing a minor with alcohol, family or not, can be punishable with jail time.

Even communion wine?

I'm probably wrong, but AFAIK, nobody claims to drink wine for communion in the US... Protestants use grape juice, and we Catholics drink the transubstantiated Blood of Christ.
I hear velociraptor tastes like chicken.

Mikeski
Posts: 1039
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby Mikeski » Wed Jun 10, 2015 10:28 pm UTC

mathmannix wrote:
HES wrote:
Shale wrote:Usually legal purchasing age and legal drinking age are the same; I know in the US providing a minor with alcohol, family or not, can be punishable with jail time.

Even communion wine?

I'm probably wrong, but AFAIK, nobody claims to drink wine for communion in the US... Protestants use grape juice, and we Catholics drink the transubstantiated Blood of Christ.

That, and the amount of wine taken at communion "doesn't count" as drinking alcohol, somehow. see also: cough syrup. (I suppose the exceptions might be written in the law somewhere... but probably not. Some busybody would decide it was the wrong amount and keep changing it.)

Also, during the USA's "prohibition" years, when nobody could drink alcohol, you could still legally produce and use communion wine. And get a doctor's prescription for alcohol for therapeutic purposes. (Nagging cough? Take two shots of brandy and call me in the morning!)

CharlieP
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:22 am UTC
Location: Nottingham, UK

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby CharlieP » Thu Jun 11, 2015 11:28 am UTC

mathmannix wrote:
HES wrote:
Shale wrote:Usually legal purchasing age and legal drinking age are the same; I know in the US providing a minor with alcohol, family or not, can be punishable with jail time.

Even communion wine?

I'm probably wrong, but AFAIK, nobody claims to drink wine for communion in the US... Protestants use grape juice, and we Catholics drink the transubstantiated Blood of Christ.


US Protestants are different to Church of England Protestants then. This is going waaaay back, but "our" communion wine (when I was "in") was something akin to sherry, which was mixed with water before being drunk.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

CharlieP
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:22 am UTC
Location: Nottingham, UK

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby CharlieP » Thu Jun 11, 2015 11:57 am UTC

Mikeski wrote:
mathmannix wrote:
HES wrote:
Shale wrote:Usually legal purchasing age and legal drinking age are the same; I know in the US providing a minor with alcohol, family or not, can be punishable with jail time.

Even communion wine?

I'm probably wrong, but AFAIK, nobody claims to drink wine for communion in the US... Protestants use grape juice, and we Catholics drink the transubstantiated Blood of Christ.

That, and the amount of wine taken at communion "doesn't count" as drinking alcohol, somehow. see also: cough syrup. (I suppose the exceptions might be written in the law somewhere... but probably not. Some busybody would decide it was the wrong amount and keep changing it.)


I'm not sure what the limit is, but in the UK it's perfectly legal (or it was the last time I "checked") to sell shandy (beer mixed with lemonade) as a soft drink/soda/pop/insert your regional term here. At less than 0.5% alcohol you'd probably get bloated long before blotto though.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

User avatar
mathmannix
Posts: 1415
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 2:12 pm UTC
Location: Washington, DC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby mathmannix » Thu Jun 11, 2015 1:47 pm UTC

CharlieP wrote:
mathmannix wrote:
HES wrote:
Shale wrote:Usually legal purchasing age and legal drinking age are the same; I know in the US providing a minor with alcohol, family or not, can be punishable with jail time.

Even communion wine?

I'm probably wrong, but AFAIK, nobody claims to drink wine for communion in the US... Protestants use grape juice, and we Catholics drink the transubstantiated Blood of Christ.


US Protestants are different to Church of England Protestants then. This is going waaaay back, but "our" communion wine (when I was "in") was something akin to sherry, which was mixed with water before being drunk.

And I've never been to an Anglican/Episcopalian church service, so they might drink wine (and they believe it stays wine, not turns into Blood, yes?) Over my life, prior to becoming Catholic, I attended various Methodist, Wesleyan, Nazarene, Presbyterian, Baptist (Southern and regular), Pentecostal, Evangelical Covenant, and Independent Bible churches. And I never had wine in any of those. (I never went to a Lutheran church either; it looks from brief internetting like they might use wine.) That covers most of the common Presbyterian churches here (and some of the less common ones.)
I hear velociraptor tastes like chicken.

rmsgrey
Posts: 3464
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 6:35 pm UTC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby rmsgrey » Thu Jun 11, 2015 2:54 pm UTC

mathmannix wrote:
CharlieP wrote:
mathmannix wrote:
HES wrote:
Shale wrote:Usually legal purchasing age and legal drinking age are the same; I know in the US providing a minor with alcohol, family or not, can be punishable with jail time.

Even communion wine?

I'm probably wrong, but AFAIK, nobody claims to drink wine for communion in the US... Protestants use grape juice, and we Catholics drink the transubstantiated Blood of Christ.


US Protestants are different to Church of England Protestants then. This is going waaaay back, but "our" communion wine (when I was "in") was something akin to sherry, which was mixed with water before being drunk.

And I've never been to an Anglican/Episcopalian church service, so they might drink wine (and they believe it stays wine, not turns into Blood, yes?) Over my life, prior to becoming Catholic, I attended various Methodist, Wesleyan, Nazarene, Presbyterian, Baptist (Southern and regular), Pentecostal, Evangelical Covenant, and Independent Bible churches. And I never had wine in any of those. (I never went to a Lutheran church either; it looks from brief internetting like they might use wine.) That covers most of the common Presbyterian churches here (and some of the less common ones.)

My understanding is that transubstantiation doesn't change the form of the bread and wine - the chemical composition stays the same - but rather than the whatever-matter-is-made-of is replaced with god-stuff rather than whatever normal mundane matter is made of. The fundamental particles get a holiness number of +1 rather than 0. So if you were to take a sample of blessed communion wine and submit it to any physical test you care to mention, it would be indistinguishable from the unconsecrated stuff, but if you had a holiness detector handy, it would read off the scale...

User avatar
Quizatzhaderac
Posts: 1596
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Space Florida

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby Quizatzhaderac » Thu Jun 11, 2015 3:05 pm UTC

While we're well off the topic of the comic: I got to thinking about pairing pizza with beer versus red wine and I got to thinking:
Sparkling red wine must be a thing. Maybe it goes awesomely with pizza. Anyone here tried it?

Quercus wrote: Anyone can try something out and taste for themselves whether it works.
Phas's point seems to be not that only a trained chef can experiment, but a trained chef can do a much broader category of things without the associated uncertainty of experimenting.
The thing about recursion problems is that they tend to contain other recursion problems.

CharlieP
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:22 am UTC
Location: Nottingham, UK

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby CharlieP » Thu Jun 11, 2015 3:10 pm UTC

Quizatzhaderac wrote:While we're well off the topic of the comic: I got to thinking about pairing pizza with beer versus red wine and I got to thinking:
Sparkling red wine must be a thing. Maybe it goes awesomely with pizza. Anyone here tried it?


No, but a quick Internet search informs me that "A sparkling Shiraz is a keen choice for drinking at breakfast or pairing with sweet tangy BBQ".
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1756
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby Quercus » Thu Jun 11, 2015 3:11 pm UTC

Quizatzhaderac wrote:
Quercus wrote: Anyone can try something out and taste for themselves whether it works.
Phas's point seems to be not that only a trained chef can experiment, but a trained chef can do a much broader category of things without the associated uncertainty of experimenting.


Actually, yeah, I think you're right (sorry Phas). That post came across as somewhat prescriptive, rather than descriptive when I first read it, but I think that that's just their way of writing.

User avatar
HES
Posts: 4873
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 7:13 pm UTC
Location: England

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby HES » Thu Jun 11, 2015 4:23 pm UTC

CharlieP wrote:No, but a quick Internet search informs me that "A sparkling Shiraz is a keen choice for drinking at breakfast or pairing with sweet tangy BBQ".

The latter of which sounds like a really good pizza
He/Him/His Image

Zinho
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 3:23 pm UTC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby Zinho » Thu Jun 11, 2015 4:56 pm UTC

Quercus wrote:
orthogon wrote:Infographic idea: map of the world showing how acceptable it is to mix sweet and savoury flavours. . .)

Ha! Good idea. I do know of a recipe for chicken tagliatelle with a raspberry based sauce that is pretty damn great, but I'm guessing it wasn't invented by an Italian.

ucim wrote:Pizza and orange juice - a surprising (and emphatic) yes! (But I can't convince anybody to try it.)
Jose

While we're throwing out odd food combinations that we like, here's one for your consideration:

[math]Soft serve ice cream on cafeteria pizza.[/math]
This was naturally concocted in a College dormitory cafeteria in a necessity-is-the-mother-of-invention fashion. It was described to me as "tasting funny", as in, it makes you laugh when you eat it. I was skeptical at first, but enjoyed giggling at the taste combination quite a bit. If you're ever in a situation to try it out, I recommend giving it a shot!

User avatar
Steve the Pocket
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:02 am UTC
Location: Going downtuuu in a Luleelurah!

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby Steve the Pocket » Fri Jun 12, 2015 6:28 pm UTC

What wine pairs well with a Sinner's Sandwich? :P
cephalopod9 wrote:Only on Xkcd can you start a topic involving Hitler and people spend the better part of half a dozen pages arguing about the quality of Operating Systems.

Baige.

mwchase
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2015 5:13 pm UTC

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby mwchase » Fri Jun 12, 2015 7:23 pm UTC

This has me wondering something. How do people actually manage to get drunk? I always skip straight to the hangover, if I'm reading the symptoms right. I'm not saying I get rapidly blackout drunk, it's not that kind of "skip". I'm saying I've only ever felt lightly buzzed (from a small sip, to combat writer's block), or agonizingly hung over in the middle of the night (from one drink).

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 1905
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: 1534: "Beer"

Postby Sableagle » Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:55 pm UTC

Someone over on another webcomic forum got a kidney stone and was advised to drink beer. He said he didn't like beer. His doctor told him to find one he liked and drink it. He sampled beers and posted reviews. That thread seems to be lost, but a follow-up thread called "beer" exists. I have posted many reviews of beers on that thread. I have a list of their rankings on my livejournal account. I use the same username in both places. His username on the other webcomic's forum is Sehson. This post has a space after every full stop so that it will not be blocked as spam.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests