They taste like chickpeas...well lubricated chickpeas

Debi's Opinion of the 120 servings of Chickpea Salad

After services on Shabbat, my synagogue has kiddush. Essentially, it's an after-services lunch. Either, someone sponsors it in honor of an event (wedding, bat mitzvah, the Mariners made it to the World Series) or because they wanna. When that doesn't happen, the Shabbos Chefs get together and prep a nice little lunch.

All I wanted to do was make some bread. A specific bread. A 4-foot-long loaf of challah, specifically. For practice. For later. Not withstanding.

So, I was TRYING to coordinate with the person in charge that week so I wouldn't be stepping on her toes while I was trying to bake the challah that ate Cincinnati. She didn't realize it was her week. She'll be out of town. No worries, says I. I've been meaning to do kiddush for a while. I'll do it.

No one who knows me is surprised that I'd just randomly offer to cook for 180 people. What didn't occur to me is that planning during Passover (when you're also having 20 people over for 1st Seder)...well, it never happened. So Tuesday night, I'm busily trying to figure out what the hell I'm going to fix for 180 people so that the lovely head of the chef's committee can do all my bloody shopping for me. It's harder than it sounds to scale up a recipe from 6 servings to 180. No really.

One of my favorite side dishes is a little chickpea salad I like to make. Some chickpeas, green onion and a nice little vinaigrette. Uses hot sauce, so it's got a nice little kick.

Well, with 10 pounds of chickpeas, we made it in turns: flavorless, not quite so flavorless, too spicy for public consumption, better but not saying much. My last opinion was the title of this post. We decided soon after that to quit, let it marinate until Saturday morning, and then add 15 pounds of tomatoes. I actually think it will be quite nice after that. If not, lubricated is good after the season of our constipation.

Is it a classic because it's good or because English teachers assign it?

I recently picked up the first big Zombie Lit book Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. I got about 5 chapters in before deciding it might be funnier if I really knew what it was spoofing. Off I hied to the NetLibrary via my local library, and there downloaded all 11 hours of Pride and Prejudice. I have to say that aside from the strain induced by incredibly frequent eye rolls, it kept me engaged and entertained. So much so that I read The Scarlett Pimpernel and I'm about a chapter away from finishing Sense and Sensibility. While I can't say I understand why there are yearly conventions, I suppose the same can be said for many phenomena of my generation.

I had a hate/hate relationship with assigned reading. I don't know that I ever finished an assigned book unless we read it 100% in class. Cliff's Notes? A life saver. Since then, I've tried to go off and read some of them. Cannery Row, Hemmingway, Fitzgerald...I typically got about half a chapter in and never picked them up again. It's a bit easier with audio books. I'm not sure I'd have slogged through any of this stuff.

But who decides? Who decided Lord of the Flies was a "classic" and not just the product of a dude sitting down and thinking "How many symbols can I put in this book to drive sophomores NUTS in Mrs. Jones Advanced English?" I don't get it. Who likes some of this schlock? And if it DOES have merit, why waste it on hormone driven zombie freaks?

I dunno...I think I might pick up some Oscar Wilde next. I have the rest of Jane Austen waiting for me on my iPod. We'll see. Meanwhile, I'm taking suggestions for things that won't make me hate you.

Shakespeare was a prick

So earlier today, I made this my status on Facebook:
Debi is planning on suffering the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune next week. I've got a bit of time on the schedule.
Why did I do this? Well, it sounds like a cool thing to do, eh? Suffering outrageous fortune and all. Not as in money but as in "may you live in interesting times." Then I wondered "What does that mean?" Because anything his contemporary said in 3 words, Bill said in 20. Turns out it ain't so good. Huh.

Which doesn't so much lead to today's quote, but just sort of reinforces it. I hate Shakespeare. Mostly? Because he was a misogynistic schmuck. Well, and that's not even it. What REALLY peaves me is that his protagonists can get away with being the most god-awful bastards for 3 acts, make one little speech at the end, and everyone falls back in love with the dipshit. Not just the women. The men love him again, too.

I read Shakespeare. Romeo and Juliet, Julius Ceasar, Hamlet (I think that was it), King Lear. I've seen Shakespeare on stage several times, including twice with the Royal Shakespeare Company. I've seen movies (though honestly, he's MUCH better suited to the stage). I even watched Shakespeare in Love, and Gwen? Seriously?

So I'm perhaps not the most eloquent hater of "the Greatest Writer in the English Language." But I don't get it. Really I don't.