Part I: "You say Knee-Wha, I say Quinoa"
Quick - name a staple that's always in your pantry. Although the quantity of items in my pantry always pales in comparison to that of my parents' (which I affectionately refer to as the Bomb Shelter--you know where I'll be headed in the event of a nuclear disaster), those new kitchen cabinets (right) allow for much more room for the staples on my list: mac & cheese, brownie mix, and Chef Boyardee Mini-Ravioli's.
China Millman (surely this is a pseudonym and not her actual name), Restaurant Critic of the venerable Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, seems to philosophically disagree with my offerings and came up with a list of her own. It includes, amongst other things, salumi, quinoa, and sriracha hot sauce. You can see the article with the complete list here.
I am by no means a gourmand, but it's pretty sad when I have to go on the Internet to figure out what half the items were (salumi, in case you were wondering, is an "artisan cured meat"). Quinoa I did know as a grain associated with Native Americans, although I did not know it was pronounced "Knee-wha", until my friend Nut Bar (not his real name) happily corrected my mispronunciation.
I'm sorry if I disappoint Miss China, but while I may indulge in some quinoa, bulgur, cous cous, or similar in a restaurant, I won't be stocking my pantry with some any time soon. I am many things, but Martha Stewart I am not.
Part II: Plans for Sacred Grounds Grounded
With leads me to Part II of this blog, Sacred Ground. You might remember ever since Flight 93 crashed on 9/11 in a field in rural Pennsylvania, there has been an effort afoot to build a memorial there.
Well, it seems that the owner of that parcel of land, Mike Svonavec, has lawyered up, gotten himself incorporated, and wants what he considers to be "fair compensation" for the land, and I'm assuming an associated Right of Way to build/access a road to the memorial site. His idea of fair compensation is -- are your ready for this? -- $10 million dollars. Unless he was raising chickens on that land that laid golden eggs, I'd say he's trying to capitalize on what was one of the darkest days in American history.
But, hey, that's just my opinion. If you'd like to tell Mike what you think, you can: just look him up on switchboard.com -- his address and phone are right there. I told Nut Bar this story, and he suggested Eminent Domain, which I think is a stellar idea. I'm all for compensating the guy for people tromping through his property, but asking $10 million? That's my definition of chutzpah.
Ok I have you on my RSS feed in outlook. have fun.. and your goal is to keep me entertained everyday... right?
ReplyDelete:)
Brian
is there really a NEED for a memorial?
ReplyDeleteone time (you know, back before society got hung up political correctness, protecting people from hurt feelings, and appeasing anyone and everyone that has been wronged by freaking CHANCE)memorials were for people who contributed meaningful art, music, or poetry, or their LIVES in battle. oh, "battle" means with guns and stuff, not in a courtroom.
of course losing a friend or relative in such a manner is a horrible thing to live through, but a memorial that will require more than a plaque and a spotlight is too much.
no listen to nut ba. lissen hear:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/audio.pl?quinoa01.wav=quinoa
actually what i (nutbar)said to julie was that it's pronounced "keen-WHA," but i tend to mumble so she must've mis-heard me.
ReplyDeleteas to memorialize or not to memorialize: as i understand the matter, it's not a question of need. we memorialize those individuals and events whose lives and meaning we don't want to forget. seems to me, we could do with a little more reflection on our collective responsibility (hence Obama's soaring rhetoric.) but if, anonymous, you're saying that too often this want ends being betrayed by other interests (or is simply executed in poor taste), i agree (and I think that's julie's point.) the question is: does the potential for the poor realization of something good completely outweigh or efface the desire to do good (in this case, remember what we value?) seems like no to me. as to the notion that it was chance that killed the individuals on flight 93, i think that's an oversimplification. while there were elements of relatively random events/choices at work, clearly the attempt to hijack the plane was as deliberate an act as can be conceived (and, therefore, our understand of the event must be guided by that), no?