h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

oh and I definitely think the key to risotto (according to my it's my signature dish) is that it MUST stand for 2 minutes off the heat and before being served. This is when you add more butter and usually some grated parmesan.

Plus I only just noticed at the beginning of the recipe: you don't just whack in the alcohol and then boil it off, you bring it to the boil, reduce to simmer and do it like that. Otherwise it burns.

Entry: Pigeon breasts on a leek risotto - A53617377
Author: Essardee - U14046362


15ml of wine is only about a tablespoon full, so you'd have to keep stirring anyway..... soon gone (which seems to be the case with the writer as well)

I also don't agree with 15ml
I use 2 glasses for 200gr of rice...

depends on the size of your glasses !
To me, it sounds too much, just as 15ml sounds too little. Individual recipes vary I guess

nah - normal wine glasses. I tell you - Jamie and me - we are not wrong

I would agree with the increased amount of white wine - but not with the addition of parmesan ( which, Sho, you are right to say is the normal way to finish risotto) Unless someone wants to go and test this out?
I presumed it was left out because the dish is called ...'Leek risotto'

You only need a small amount of parmesan - it goes in all my risottos and contributes to the creamy risotto texture.

But since I'm not planning on taking over this entry in any way - I don't really mind.

Parmesan is one of the most important flavourings in my opinion too.

Did you know that parmesan makes things yummy because it has the 'magic 5th taste' umami? which is also contained in good Soy sauce, and the dreaded monosodium glutamate?


http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15819485

Oh that's interesting. I never knew that.

I am a repository of fairly mundane stuff. Sometimes I can even remember the names of things

For reference by the researcher, or whomsoever adopts this entry, it would be a nice addition to further clarify 'risotto rice' with the often added ' (such as arborio or carnaroli) '.

I also agree that going from Cs to Gs, to Mls is unnecesssarily cumbersome. (and I certainly would not object to the addition of parmesan!)

Thankfully the French sorted out a rational way of measuring things a few hundred years ago. One day the British and Americans will adopt it and join the rest of the world. Then children in school will not be burdened and handicapped by having to learn ancient and Roman-derived measurement systems.

I agree that the more modern system can be accurate and easy to convert, but there are still advantages to a system that can be easily divided by as many number as feasible.

The reason that a dozen was so popular is that common folk, without any math training, could divide it by 2, 3, 4, or 6. That's not something you can do with a group of 10. And that is very handy if you've got a bunch of people sitting around a table; or, a group of thieves trying to divide their spoils!

Still, I'm not sure how Roman-derived the ancient systems were. If memory serves, each seemed to be based on some measurement of a monarch. Hands for measuring the height of horses; stone for weight; inch, foot, yard, etc. And I have no clue where bushels or acres got started.

It seems as if every trade had a need for a specified system. That persists today in the form of buzzwords.

And, if we really want to simplify things, why use a base-10 system as opposed to a base-2?

We do use base 2 in computing and mathematics. But, for 42's sake, why persist in the madness of mixing metric and imperial as we do? Then chuck in some folklore and a few twigs just to make it more confusing? We have joined the rest of Europe, partly, let's help the next generation by doing it properly, or let's not, and bring back cubits etc.

As I said early, I think one method throughout would be better. At least (IMO) the same method for rice and liquid. I'm not a fan of the US 'cup' system but in this particular case it's just the relation between the volume of two ingredients (i.e., would work whether the 'cups' were the approved size or not)

Aren't you being a bit UK/US centric though?

Not really, the concept of volume exists everywhere, and most people accoustomed to using metric know than 15ml = a tablespoon. I'm sure that regular spoons aren't standardised but it makes little difference. My first suggestion was for weight (see post 2). Others are more comfortable with volumes. Fine, I don't want to fight about it, but in such case it would be better to have both of the 'main' ingredients using the same system.

Hi - there is not long now until this entry will be eligible for the Flea Market. (unless the author reappears that is) (26th Oct?)

In the meantime, it should be said that recipes in the EG seem to be in metric units.

Risotto requires an amount of liquid depending on how much evaporation takes place whilst it is cooking - so cannot be an exact amount. Usually an amount of rice ( in grammes ) is given per serving, for risotto, with a minimum amount of hot stock needed to cook it in.

Perhaps we should offer two menus; one based on weight (mass) and one on volume? Then perhaps another based on base2, acres and cups? Each in metric and imperial?

How did we reach this place, when our ancestors just had a pot hanging over a fire made from charcoal?

I'm sure they had their differences on how best to produce the charcoal, and what sort of pot to use.