Some of you may recall my post back in December bemoaning
the loss of one of my favorite recipes - Pear Honey.
I looked everywhere, and I googled it and found about a
million recipes by that title but none of them were the one
I had. I posted here and got a number of replies. I ended
up using the one Barb Schaller sent which was not the one
I was looking for but sounded like it would be good - and it
was. I also checked with my aunt and my sister to see if I
had given them the recipe. My aunt was pretty sure I had
given it to her, but she could not find it either. I even
wrote to Bon Appetit to see if they had it in their archives.
I was fairly sure it had come from their magazine. They were
kind enough to look for me, but they didn't have it. So I
guess I was wrong about where I originally got it.

Well, last week my aunt called and said, "Guess what I found?"
She had come across the recipe when looking for something else.
So, here is what all the fuss was about.

PEAR HONEY

2 1/2 lb. pear chunks (5 c.)
1 c. sugar
1/4 c. lemon juice
1/4 c. honey
1 t. grated lemon rind
1/4 t. cloves

Combine all ingredients in saucepan and bring to boil. Simmer
for 20 minutes or until tender. Cool 30 minutes. Puree in food
processor. Makes ~ 2 c.

I knew it had more than just pears and sugar, which is what
the one Barb provided contained. I remember thinking it had
some honey and some lemon and some spice, probably cloves, but
I wasn't exactly sure. I guess this proves my memory isn't all
that bad after all. ;-)

Now, if I can only hold on to it until next year I'll make it
to go with my Grittibanz (Swiss bread figures). I'm just so
excited!

Kate

--
Kate Connally
“If I were as old as I feel, I’d be dead already.”
Goldfish: “The wholesome snack that smiles back,
Until you bite their heads off.”
What if the hokey pokey really *is* what it's all about?

On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 14:24:58 -0500, Kate Connally >
wrote:

>Well, last week my aunt called and said, "Guess what I found?"
>She had come across the recipe when looking for something else.
>So, here is what all the fuss was about.
>
>PEAR HONEY
>
>2 1/2 lb. pear chunks (5 c.)
>1 c. sugar
>1/4 c. lemon juice
>1/4 c. honey
>1 t. grated lemon rind
>1/4 t. cloves
>
>Combine all ingredients in saucepan and bring to boil. Simmer
>for 20 minutes or until tender. Cool 30 minutes. Puree in food
>processor. Makes ~ 2 c.
>
>I knew it had more than just pears and sugar, which is what
>the one Barb provided contained. I remember thinking it had
>some honey and some lemon and some spice, probably cloves, but
>I wasn't exactly sure. I guess this proves my memory isn't all
>that bad after all. ;-)
>
>Now, if I can only hold on to it until next year I'll make it
>to go with my Grittibanz (Swiss bread figures). I'm just so
>excited!
>
>Kate

thanks, kate!

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

I love pears, and am happy to have this recipe. Thanks!

Two possibly dumb questions, given the difficulty of finding ripe pears, or
pears that will actually ripen instead of going directly from rocks to mush:

a) Have you found that the ripeness of the pears makes much difference?
b) Do you favor any particular type of pear for this?

My third question is definitely too dumb to ask, so I'll just say that I'm
assuming you use peeled and cored fresh pears...

"Kate Connally" > wrote in message
...
> Some of you may recall my post back in December bemoaning
> the loss of one of my favorite recipes - Pear Honey.
> I looked everywhere, and I googled it and found about a
> million recipes by that title but none of them were the one
> I had. I posted here and got a number of replies. I ended
> up using the one Barb Schaller sent which was not the one
> I was looking for but sounded like it would be good - and it
> was. I also checked with my aunt and my sister to see if I
> had given them the recipe. My aunt was pretty sure I had
> given it to her, but she could not find it either. I even
> wrote to Bon Appetit to see if they had it in their archives.
> I was fairly sure it had come from their magazine. They were
> kind enough to look for me, but they didn't have it. So I
> guess I was wrong about where I originally got it.
>
> Well, last week my aunt called and said, "Guess what I found?"
> She had come across the recipe when looking for something else.
> So, here is what all the fuss was about.
>
> PEAR HONEY
>
> 2 1/2 lb. pear chunks (5 c.)
> 1 c. sugar
> 1/4 c. lemon juice
> 1/4 c. honey
> 1 t. grated lemon rind
> 1/4 t. cloves
>
> Combine all ingredients in saucepan and bring to boil. Simmer
> for 20 minutes or until tender. Cool 30 minutes. Puree in food
> processor. Makes ~ 2 c.
>
> I knew it had more than just pears and sugar, which is what
> the one Barb provided contained. I remember thinking it had
> some honey and some lemon and some spice, probably cloves, but
> I wasn't exactly sure. I guess this proves my memory isn't all
> that bad after all. ;-)
>
> Now, if I can only hold on to it until next year I'll make it
> to go with my Grittibanz (Swiss bread figures). I'm just so
> excited!
>
> Kate
>
> --
> Kate Connally
> “If I were as old as I feel, I’d be dead already.”
> Goldfish: “The wholesome snack that smiles back,
> Until you bite their heads off.”
> What if the hokey pokey really *is* what it's all about?
>

Janet wrote:
> I love pears, and am happy to have this recipe. Thanks!
>
> Two possibly dumb questions, given the difficulty of finding ripe pears, or
> pears that will actually ripen instead of going directly from rocks to mush:
>
> a) Have you found that the ripeness of the pears makes much difference?
> b) Do you favor any particular type of pear for this?

Hi Janet,
I haven't really paid attention to the pears - only to try to find
the ripest ones I can at the supermarket. I think comice would be
nice but they never have them so it's usually bosc or bartletts that
are available and I tend to go for bartletts as bosc tend to be really
hard. I can't say if I've noticed any difference. But then for all
I know I've used the same kind of pears every time.

> My third question is definitely too dumb to ask, so I'll just say that I'm
> assuming you use peeled and cored fresh pears...

Duh. Yes. Sorry, couldn't help myself. I'm sure the original
recipe specified that but when I read it to my aunt over the phone
(she had it written on a used envelope so I'm pretty sure that's
what happened) she only wrote down the bare bones instructions, assuming
she would remember to peel and core them. ;-)

Speaking of that sort of thing - explicit instructions to peel,
core, seed, or whatever fruit or vegetables - I have always thought
that it should be unnecessary to state that as that would be the
default procedure. If something is supposed to be used with the
peel still or, or whatever, then that should be stated. I don't
know - it's probably just me. I guess there are people who wouldn't
know to peel and core the apples for apple pie, but really . . . ? ;-)
Anyway, I just mention that because lately I have noticed more and
more of what I consider *unnecessary* instructions in the recipes
I copy. Things like stating all-purpose flour when that's the default
and only other types of flour need to be specified. Same with
granulated sugar. And listing extra flour to flour the pasty
cloth or extra butter/oil to grease the pan in with the list of
ingredients. In the old days those things were not listed as an
ingredient. Oh,well. I guess I'm just too picky.

Anyway, I hope you like this. I love the mostly pear flavor.
the small amount of cloves does not really make it spicy like
apple butter, which I don't care for because of that. In fact
I love cinnamon - in many things - but I'd just as soon leave it
out of applesauce. Anyway, the pear honey ls lovely on regular
toast or biscuits or whatever but I always make it at Xmas to eat
on my Swiss bread figures which are a slightly sweet bread with
cardamom and lots of eggs and butter in the dough. I like to give
the bread figures as gifts along with a small jar of the pear honey.

Kate

> "Kate Connally" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Some of you may recall my post back in December bemoaning
>> the loss of one of my favorite recipes - Pear Honey.
>> I looked everywhere, and I googled it and found about a
>> million recipes by that title but none of them were the one
>> I had. I posted here and got a number of replies. I ended
>> up using the one Barb Schaller sent which was not the one
>> I was looking for but sounded like it would be good - and it
>> was. I also checked with my aunt and my sister to see if I
>> had given them the recipe. My aunt was pretty sure I had
>> given it to her, but she could not find it either. I even
>> wrote to Bon Appetit to see if they had it in their archives.
>> I was fairly sure it had come from their magazine. They were
>> kind enough to look for me, but they didn't have it. So I
>> guess I was wrong about where I originally got it.
>>
>> Well, last week my aunt called and said, "Guess what I found?"
>> She had come across the recipe when looking for something else.
>> So, here is what all the fuss was about.
>>
>> PEAR HONEY
>>
>> 2 1/2 lb. pear chunks (5 c.)
>> 1 c. sugar
>> 1/4 c. lemon juice
>> 1/4 c. honey
>> 1 t. grated lemon rind
>> 1/4 t. cloves
>>
>> Combine all ingredients in saucepan and bring to boil. Simmer
>> for 20 minutes or until tender. Cool 30 minutes. Puree in food
>> processor. Makes ~ 2 c.
>>
>> I knew it had more than just pears and sugar, which is what
>> the one Barb provided contained. I remember thinking it had
>> some honey and some lemon and some spice, probably cloves, but
>> I wasn't exactly sure. I guess this proves my memory isn't all
>> that bad after all. ;-)
>>
>> Now, if I can only hold on to it until next year I'll make it
>> to go with my Grittibanz (Swiss bread figures). I'm just so
>> excited!
>>
>> Kate
>>
>> --
>> Kate Connally
>> “If I were as old as I feel, I’d be dead already.”
>> Goldfish: “The wholesome snack that smiles back,
>> Until you bite their heads off.”
>> What if the hokey pokey really *is* what it's all about?
>>
>
>
>


--
Kate Connally
“If I were as old as I feel, I’d be dead already.”
Goldfish: “The wholesome snack that smiles back,
Until you bite their heads off.”
What if the hokey pokey really *is* what it's all about?

On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 14:24:58 -0500, Kate Connally wrote:

> Some of you may recall my post back in December bemoaning
> the loss of one of my favorite recipes - Pear Honey.
> I looked everywhere, and I googled it and found about a
> million recipes by that title but none of them were the one
> I had. I posted here and got a number of replies. I ended
> up using the one Barb Schaller sent which was not the one
> I was looking for but sounded like it would be good - and it
> was. I also checked with my aunt and my sister to see if I
> had given them the recipe. My aunt was pretty sure I had
> given it to her, but she could not find it either. I even
> wrote to Bon Appetit to see if they had it in their archives.
> I was fairly sure it had come from their magazine. They were
> kind enough to look for me, but they didn't have it. So I
> guess I was wrong about where I originally got it.
>
> Well, last week my aunt called and said, "Guess what I found?"
> She had come across the recipe when looking for something else.
> So, here is what all the fuss was about.
>
> PEAR HONEY

glad you found your recipe, kate. maybe to guard against future mishaps
you should make a copy and put it in a safe deposit box.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 14:24:58 -0500, Kate Connally wrote:
>
>> Some of you may recall my post back in December bemoaning
>> the loss of one of my favorite recipes - Pear Honey.
>> I looked everywhere, and I googled it and found about a
>> million recipes by that title but none of them were the one
>> I had. I posted here and got a number of replies. I ended
>> up using the one Barb Schaller sent which was not the one
>> I was looking for but sounded like it would be good - and it
>> was. I also checked with my aunt and my sister to see if I
>> had given them the recipe. My aunt was pretty sure I had
>> given it to her, but she could not find it either. I even
>> wrote to Bon Appetit to see if they had it in their archives.
>> I was fairly sure it had come from their magazine. They were
>> kind enough to look for me, but they didn't have it. So I
>> guess I was wrong about where I originally got it.
>>
>> Well, last week my aunt called and said, "Guess what I found?"
>> She had come across the recipe when looking for something else.
>> So, here is what all the fuss was about.
>>
>> PEAR HONEY
>
> glad you found your recipe, kate. maybe to guard against future
> mishaps you should make a copy and put it in a safe deposit box.
>
> your pal,
> blake

No fear: google probably now has it archived for all eternity!

On Tue, 2 Feb 2010 18:00:27 -0500, "Janet" >
wrote:

>>
>> glad you found your recipe, kate. maybe to guard against future
>> mishaps you should make a copy and put it in a safe deposit box.
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
>No fear: google probably now has it archived for all eternity!

If she can remember which name she used.

Lon

On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 12:52:46 -0500, Kate Connally wrote:

> Janet wrote:
>> I love pears, and am happy to have this recipe. Thanks!
>>
>> Two possibly dumb questions, given the difficulty of finding ripe pears, or
>> pears that will actually ripen instead of going directly from rocks to mush:
>>
>> a) Have you found that the ripeness of the pears makes much difference?
>> b) Do you favor any particular type of pear for this?
>
> Hi Janet,
> I haven't really paid attention to the pears - only to try to find
> the ripest ones I can at the supermarket. I think comice would be
> nice but they never have them so it's usually bosc or bartletts that
> are available and I tend to go for bartletts as bosc tend to be really
> hard. I can't say if I've noticed any difference. But then for all
> I know I've used the same kind of pears every time.
>
>> My third question is definitely too dumb to ask, so I'll just say that I'm
>> assuming you use peeled and cored fresh pears...
>
> Duh. Yes. Sorry, couldn't help myself. I'm sure the original
> recipe specified that but when I read it to my aunt over the phone
> (she had it written on a used envelope so I'm pretty sure that's
> what happened) she only wrote down the bare bones instructions, assuming
> she would remember to peel and core them. ;-)
>
> Speaking of that sort of thing - explicit instructions to peel,
> core, seed, or whatever fruit or vegetables - I have always thought
> that it should be unnecessary to state that as that would be the
> default procedure. If something is supposed to be used with the
> peel still or, or whatever, then that should be stated. I don't
> know - it's probably just me. I guess there are people who wouldn't
> know to peel and core the apples for apple pie, but really . . . ? ;-)
> Anyway, I just mention that because lately I have noticed more and
> more of what I consider *unnecessary* instructions in the recipes
> I copy. Things like stating all-purpose flour when that's the default
> and only other types of flour need to be specified. Same with
> granulated sugar. And listing extra flour to flour the pasty
> cloth or extra butter/oil to grease the pan in with the list of
> ingredients. In the old days those things were not listed as an
> ingredient. Oh,well. I guess I'm just too picky.

i have some sympathy for what you are saying, and when you give a recipe
verbally, you know who you're talking to and what to omit.

but when writing something down, the extra effort to make things explicit
isn't that great, and the audience to whom it will be useful is probably
greater. i think we've all read complaints about grandma's recipes where
the amounts or procedures are vague because *she* didn't need to be
reminded of them.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:

> i have some sympathy for what you are saying, and when you give a
> recipe verbally, you know who you're talking to and what to omit.
>
> but when writing something down, the extra effort to make things
> explicit isn't that great, and the audience to whom it will be useful
> is probably greater. i think we've all read complaints about
> grandma's recipes where the amounts or procedures are vague because
> *she* didn't need to be reminded of them.
>
> your pal,
> blake

It is also true that while it is a duh to assume that apples are peeled for
pie, it is not so obvious for, say applesauce, where the skin is often left
on to color it.

And sometimes people make preserved/candied fruits from canned
fruit--candied pineapple being a notable example.

I don't think it matters in this case, since the precise quantities probably
aren't important for success, but sometimes people write recipes that make
it unclear whether they mean the measure by weight or volume to be taken
before or after some step such as peeling and coring or chopping the item,
as in:

2 cups of shelled walnuts, chopped

vs

2 cups of walnuts, shelled and chopped

vs

2 cups of shelled and chopped walnuts.

Maybe it's the former technical writer in me. <G>

On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 16:47:30 -0500, Janet wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>
>> i have some sympathy for what you are saying, and when you give a
>> recipe verbally, you know who you're talking to and what to omit.
>>
>> but when writing something down, the extra effort to make things
>> explicit isn't that great, and the audience to whom it will be useful
>> is probably greater. i think we've all read complaints about
>> grandma's recipes where the amounts or procedures are vague because
>> *she* didn't need to be reminded of them.
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
> It is also true that while it is a duh to assume that apples are peeled for
> pie, it is not so obvious for, say applesauce, where the skin is often left
> on to color it.
>
> And sometimes people make preserved/candied fruits from canned
> fruit--candied pineapple being a notable example.
>
> I don't think it matters in this case, since the precise quantities probably
> aren't important for success, but sometimes people write recipes that make
> it unclear whether they mean the measure by weight or volume to be taken
> before or after some step such as peeling and coring or chopping the item,
> as in:
>
> 2 cups of shelled walnuts, chopped
>
> vs
>
> 2 cups of walnuts, shelled and chopped
>
> vs
>
> 2 cups of shelled and chopped walnuts.
>
> Maybe it's the former technical writer in me. <G>

writing instructions of any kind is hard. you really have to be careful to
make sure what you wrote is what you meant.

your pal,
blake

Janet wrote:
> blake murphy wrote:
>
>> i have some sympathy for what you are saying, and when you give a
>> recipe verbally, you know who you're talking to and what to omit.
>>
>> but when writing something down, the extra effort to make things
>> explicit isn't that great, and the audience to whom it will be useful
>> is probably greater. i think we've all read complaints about
>> grandma's recipes where the amounts or procedures are vague because
>> *she* didn't need to be reminded of them.
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
> It is also true that while it is a duh to assume that apples are peeled for
> pie, it is not so obvious for, say applesauce, where the skin is often left
> on to color it.

Really? I've never heard of it in my soon-to-be 63 years on this
planet. And I don't think I'd care for it. However, I still say
that would be the exception, rather than the rule. So any applesauce
recipes where they want the peels left on should state that.

> And sometimes people make preserved/candied fruits from canned
> fruit--candied pineapple being a notable example.
>
> I don't think it matters in this case, since the precise quantities probably
> aren't important for success, but sometimes people write recipes that make
> it unclear whether they mean the measure by weight or volume to be taken
> before or after some step such as peeling and coring or chopping the item,
> as in:
>
> 2 cups of shelled walnuts, chopped
>
> vs
>
> 2 cups of walnuts, shelled and chopped
>
> vs
>
> 2 cups of shelled and chopped walnuts.
>
> Maybe it's the former technical writer in me. <G>

Well, I would say "2 c. of chopped walnuts" (actually I would say
2 c. of chopped almonds since I hate walnuts) since it goes
without saying that the nuts have been shelled. For one thing
there is no way you could chop a walnut while it was still in
the shell. ;-)

Kate

--
Kate Connally
“If I were as old as I feel, I’d be dead already.”
Goldfish: “The wholesome snack that smiles back,
Until you bite their heads off.”
What if the hokey pokey really *is* what it's all about?

On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 14:26:24 -0500, Kate Connally >
wrote:

> Well, I would say "2 c. of chopped walnuts" (actually I would say
> 2 c. of chopped almonds since I hate walnuts) since it goes
> without saying that the nuts have been shelled. For one thing
> there is no way you could chop a walnut while it was still in
> the shell. ;-)

Is that 2C before or after chopping? The way yours reads it's 2C
measured after chopping. 2C walnuts, chopped would be measure them
first then chop.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

Kate Connally wrote:
> Janet wrote:
>> blake murphy wrote:
>>
>>> i have some sympathy for what you are saying, and when you give a
>>> recipe verbally, you know who you're talking to and what to omit.
>>>
>>> but when writing something down, the extra effort to make things
>>> explicit isn't that great, and the audience to whom it will be
>>> useful is probably greater. i think we've all read complaints about
>>> grandma's recipes where the amounts or procedures are vague because
>>> *she* didn't need to be reminded of them.
>>>
>>> your pal,
>>> blake
>>
>> It is also true that while it is a duh to assume that apples are
>> peeled for pie, it is not so obvious for, say applesauce, where the
>> skin is often left on to color it.
>
> Really? I've never heard of it in my soon-to-be 63 years on this
> planet. And I don't think I'd care for it. However, I still say
> that would be the exception, rather than the rule. So any applesauce
> recipes where they want the peels left on should state that.

I actually have always thought of "peels on" as the applesauce default. They
are removed by the food mill/applesauce mill after cooking.

But I admit I haven't made applesauce in eons and no longer own a food mill.
<G>

sf wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 14:26:24 -0500, Kate Connally >
> wrote:
>
>> Well, I would say "2 c. of chopped walnuts" (actually I would say
>> 2 c. of chopped almonds since I hate walnuts) since it goes
>> without saying that the nuts have been shelled. For one thing
>> there is no way you could chop a walnut while it was still in
>> the shell. ;-)
>
> Is that 2C before or after chopping? The way yours reads it's 2C
> measured after chopping. 2C walnuts, chopped would be measure them
> first then chop.

Well, if you say "2 c. chopped nuts" then of course they
are chopped before measuring. If you say "2 c. of nuts, chopped"
then that would mean you measure them before they are chopped.
This is one of my pet peeves with recipes that say things like
"2 t. parsley, chopped" when they mean "2 t. chopped parsley".
A lot of things just can't be measured before they are chopped
or whatever if they are big sprigs of fresh parsley or something
like that - it won't fit in a t. to be measured until after it is
chopped. Be precise, fer cryin' out loud.

Kate


--
Kate Connally
“If I were as old as I feel, I’d be dead already.”
Goldfish: “The wholesome snack that smiles back,
Until you bite their heads off.”
What if the hokey pokey really *is* what it's all about?