[Sca-cooks] Seljuk/Rumi/Sufi Cuisine

[Phil Troy / G. Tacitus Adamantius]

On Apr 29, 2010, at 8:20 AM, Terri Morgan wrote:

>> Hrothny,
>> How about lobster?  Ya gotta try lobster!  It's the best!!!
> 
> I have, in the last 10  months or so, tried mussels (I'm not impressed - it
> was rather like chewing garlic-flavoured pencil erasers),

Overcooked.

> small shrimp &
> large (Yum, for both), Chesapeake crab (more work than they're worth!),

You might consider adjusting the bar there a bit. Yes, probably not for the instant gratification crowd, but there is nothing, and I mean nothing, in the edible crustacean line to match their sweetness when fresh and properly cooked. But yes, best enjoyed when you've got a lengthy, very informal social situation where you can spend a couple of hours cracking and digging at a leisurely pace, and socializing. It's not something for a "man, I'm so hungry I could eat a horse in five minutes", situation...

I'm always amused at the sort of proprietorial attitude of the good folk of the Chesapeake Bay region about their crabs: the blue crab ranges from Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras, and I used to catch them as a kid, riding my bike to Broad Channel, near the Southern coast of Queens County on Long Island. But I've had everything from my knowledge of crab lore to the taxonomic authenticity of the local crabs assaulted, or at least criticized by my own flesh and blood who share my geographical origins, but now live in Maryland. Many's the time I've had to interrupt a relative from that area and explain that yes, we do have fish here, too, and I know what it is.

> Alaskan crab (MUCH better, thank you),

For the lazy, yes ;-), and for locals. For flavor, not so much... very good, certainly, but prone to a slight toughness and, unless you're actually at/on the Pacific coast, the only real advantage is the larger size and larger chunks when shelled.

> and crabcakes, which were
> disappointing but I've been assured that the quality is highly dependant on
> the cook's skill and I need to try them again.

Absolutely true. Also broad variations in style which don't necessarily impact directly on quality. While you're at it, see if you can check out Crab Imperial, which is like a little gratin of crabmeat stuffed into its own shell, a big scallop shell, or a small casserole dish...

> I plan on trying lobster soon. I'm not so sure about oysters - I think I'll
> stick to trying those in gumbo, not ala carte. I don't really know what else
> to go for. Seafood has been something I've ignored all my life. 

For the true oyster aficionado, there's only one way to go, and that's raw. They are rather richly ocean-flavored, and there's an essential communing-with-the-ocean experience that comes with eating them raw. Some people don't care for them that way, which is fine, but my feeling is that if you actually like oysters, eating them raw is the way to go; if you don't really like oysters, disguising their flavor and texture with crusty breadcrumbs, batters, stuffings, etc., is all very well, but if it's easier to get something else, you might as well.

If you discover that you don't like mussels after giving them a fair shot (I didn't really like them for a long time, until I realized they are almost always overcooked, which spoils their flavor and texture), I'd say there's a good chance you won't like oysters.

Yes, it's true, coastal type people tend to take their seafood very seriously! ;-)

Adamantius






"Most men worry about their own bellies, and other people's souls, when we all ought to worry about our own souls, and other people's bellies."
			-- Rabbi Israel Salanter