This morning I had not yet hiked to the road to get the
paper so I was looking over an interesting Chirpstory from @dvnix. This
link summarizes a Twitter exchange between the writer Jeremy Duns and the
journalist Glenn Greenwald about whether the journalist’s coverage of Julian
Assange was truly impartial anymore, and I had what seemed like an important
thought about it, but I was interrupted by my finishing my coffee and actually needing
to get going. Most of the time, my ideas fly away like dry
leaves in a gust of sudden wind, but this one flew back to me this evening while
I was making macaroni and cheese.
First of all, I would like to say that Jeremy Duns makes
some pretty strong points, and Glenn Greenwald, a busy journalist, initially tries to
give him a perfunctory brush-off. It is difficult to take pointed criticism,
every professional knows, and I sympathize with Greenwald in so far as he is obviously trying to just do his job. Second of
all, I would like to say that I think Julian Assange’s refusal to return to
Sweden to face charges of sexual assault is dishonorable and disgusting. Hero
of free speech or no, no man should be above the law. Thirdly, I would like to
say that watching two smart, opinionated people argue on Twitter is pretty
entertaining.
But all of these are beside the point, which is this: when
someone takes the time to offer you thoughtful, but pointed criticism, they are
doing you a favor. I am not saying that I personally enjoy being called out, because I do
not. What I am saying is that careful readers who drill into the details you
offer and reach different conclusions and then tell you about it are helping you
do your job better as a journalist. Even if you do not agree with the
criticism, what does it tell you that you are doing wrong? You failed to meet someone's expectations. Why?
This question blows the dry leaves of my ideas back to homemade macaroni and cheese.
The last time I made macaroni and cheese I made it the same
way I have made it every time since I was about 20, which was a very long time
ago. I had grown up watching my mother make it, and I needed neither to measure
nor to wonder about the process. The last time I made it, I was vaguely
dissatisfied with the results. It just seemed too cheesy, and yet a bit too
dry. Today, I consulted a recipe, and followed it, and even measured all the
ingredients. The result was much better.
The recipe appears below. If you have improvements to suggest, I would
love to hear them.
Improvable Macaroni and Cheese
Preheat oven
to 400F. Boil salted water in a large pot.
When water
boils, add 1 pound pasta (elbows, shells, rigatoni, or ziti). Cook for approximately
2 minutes fewer than the instructions on package. Drain pasta, and return to
pot.
While pasta
is cooking, melt 4 tablespoons of butter in a large saucepan. Add 1/4 cup all-purpose flour and 1 teaspoon
dry mustard to saucepan. Cook, whisking, for 1 minute. Whisk in 1 quart whole
milk. Bring to a boil and immediately reduce heat to low, simmering until sauce
is thickened, 3 to 5 minutes.
Remove sauce
from heat. Whisk in 3 cups grated cheese (I used Cabot sharp cheddar and Kerrygold
Dubliner); add 1 teaspoon Worcestershire, and salt and pepper to taste.
Stir cheese
sauce into pasta, and transfer to a buttered 9”-by-13” baking dish.
Melt 2
tablespoons of butter and stir into about 2 cups of breadcrumbs. Scatter crumb
mixture over pasta in baking dish. Follow with a sprinkling of paprika.
Bake 15 to
20 minutes. Allow to cool a few minutes before serving.
My mother
liked to tell the story of a dinner guest who got a whole chunk of unmixed dry
mustard in his mouth when he ate her mac and cheese at our house; he was too
polite to say anything, but she could tell her mistake by the look on his face.
No comments:
Post a Comment