Did I beat ya to it, nb?

http://oi51.tinypic.com/25he1d4.jpg

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

sf > wrote:

>http://oi51.tinypic.com/25he1d4.jpg

Pretty dissimilar to red beans and rice that I usually make...
I include a much larger fraction of celery/onion/bell pepper
and more liquid.

However, it looks pretty good.

Steve

On Nov 12, 9:56*pm, (Steve Pope) wrote:
> sf > wrote:
> >http://oi51.tinypic.com/25he1d4.jpg
>
> Pretty dissimilar to red beans and rice that I usually make...
> I include a much larger fraction of celery/onion/bell pepper
> and more liquid.
>
> However, it looks pretty good.
>
> Steve

Thanks Steve. I didn't have any celery or bell pepper, so I didn't
use them. However, I used plenty of onion. I've been trying to
figure out what the finished product is supposed to look like.
Recipes seem to vary with the cook. I found a blog where it showed
"real" red beans & rice and the beans were the way *I* like them with
rice... totally disintegrated - one thick mess of bean "gravy". I
would have liked more *thick* liquid too, however this stuff was on
the stove for 4-5 hours and that was as mushy as they got. They were
technically cooked and we were hungry, so we ate.

IMO, red beans and rice is okay... but I like other beans better with
rice. Not sure if I'll do it again.

Thanks for the feedback!

On Nov 13, 12:13*am, sf > wrote:
> On Nov 12, 9:56*pm, (Steve Pope) wrote:
>
> > sf > wrote:
> > >http://oi51.tinypic.com/25he1d4.jpg
>
> > Pretty dissimilar to red beans and rice that I usually make...
> > I include a much larger fraction of celery/onion/bell pepper
> > and more liquid.
>
> > However, it looks pretty good.
>
> > Steve
>
> Thanks Steve. *I didn't have any celery or bell pepper, so I didn't
> use them. *However, I used plenty of onion. *I've been trying to
> figure out what the finished product is supposed to look like.
> Recipes seem to vary with the cook. *I found a blog where it showed
> "real" red beans & rice and the beans were the way *I* like them with
> rice... totally disintegrated - one thick mess of bean "gravy". *I
> would have liked more *thick* liquid too, however this stuff was on
> the stove for 4-5 hours and that was as mushy as they got. *They were
> technically cooked and we were hungry, so we ate.
>
> IMO, red beans and rice is okay... but I like other beans better with
> rice. *Not sure if I'll do it again.
>
> Thanks for the feedback!

>
>
Yes, the beans are supposed to be nice and soft with great 'gravy.'
To get that 'gravy' take out about a 1/2 or so of the beans and mash
them against the side of the pot and add them back and stir. It
doesn't look like you have much liquid and if you ever get to eat red
beans and rice prepared by someone else you'll be quite surprised at
how goooooood they are.

On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 22:22:54 -0800 (PST), itsjoannotjoann
> wrote:

> On Nov 13, 12:13*am, sf > wrote:
> > On Nov 12, 9:56*pm, (Steve Pope) wrote:
> >
> > > sf > wrote:
> > > >http://oi51.tinypic.com/25he1d4.jpg
> >
> > > Pretty dissimilar to red beans and rice that I usually make...
> > > I include a much larger fraction of celery/onion/bell pepper
> > > and more liquid.
> >
> > > However, it looks pretty good.
> >
> > > Steve
> >
> > Thanks Steve. *I didn't have any celery or bell pepper, so I didn't
> > use them. *However, I used plenty of onion. *I've been trying to
> > figure out what the finished product is supposed to look like.
> > Recipes seem to vary with the cook. *I found a blog where it showed
> > "real" red beans & rice and the beans were the way *I* like them with
> > rice... totally disintegrated - one thick mess of bean "gravy". *I
> > would have liked more *thick* liquid too, however this stuff was on
> > the stove for 4-5 hours and that was as mushy as they got. *They were
> > technically cooked and we were hungry, so we ate.
> >
> > IMO, red beans and rice is okay... but I like other beans better with
> > rice. *Not sure if I'll do it again.
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback!
>
> >
> >
> Yes, the beans are supposed to be nice and soft with great 'gravy.'
> To get that 'gravy' take out about a 1/2 or so of the beans and mash
> them against the side of the pot and add them back and stir. It
> doesn't look like you have much liquid

I allowed that to happen because it wasn't thick enough yet. After I
fed us, I added a little more liquid and let it cook more. Not sure
how long it cooked... 30-60 minutes, but the next time I looked at it,
it was almost perfect - lots of thick gravy, with whole beans. I
wouldn't have complained if it had been that way when we wanted to
eat!

> and if you ever get to eat red
> beans and rice prepared by someone else you'll be quite surprised at
> how goooooood they are.

If I ever do, I hope to be pleasantly surprised! We'll tour the South
one of these days, so I'm sure I'll be presented with lots of
opportunities to order at in a restaurant in the future.



--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

sf > wrote:

>On Nov 12, 9:56*pm, (Steve Pope) wrote:

>> Pretty dissimilar to red beans and rice that I usually make...
>> I include a much larger fraction of celery/onion/bell pepper
>> and more liquid.

>> However, it looks pretty good.

>Thanks Steve. I didn't have any celery or bell pepper, so I didn't
>use them. However, I used plenty of onion. I've been trying to
>figure out what the finished product is supposed to look like.

Well, in my thinking for it to be distinctively "red beans and rice"
it needs the trilogy of celery/onion/bell pepper, but obvsioulsy
one can make a great-tasting bean dish without this.

It does look like you got hold of actual "small red beans".

As far as the liquid fraction goes, I have not uses a bean-mashing
approach. I just use vegetable stock, and thicken it with a little
file'. (Almost always I cook then fully drain beans, before making
bean stews of any sort, including this one.)

>Recipes seem to vary with the cook. I found a blog where it showed
>"real" red beans & rice and the beans were the way *I* like them with
>rice... totally disintegrated - one thick mess of bean "gravy". I
>would have liked more *thick* liquid too, however this stuff was on
>the stove for 4-5 hours and that was as mushy as they got. They were
>technically cooked and we were hungry, so we ate.

Perhaps something in the broth arrested the beans from cooking more.
They look quite intact. Many ingredients will stop beans from cooking.

>IMO, red beans and rice is okay... but I like other beans better with
>rice. Not sure if I'll do it again.

I'd recommend giving it another shot with the full "trilogy", because
I do think there is something subtle going on with the flavors
of those particular vegetable ingredients and that of the small red beans
that works really well. Opinions will vary on this, but the combination
of those four ingredients (small red bean, celery, onion, bell pepper)
is a constant across many recipes.

Steve

On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 19:20:40 +0000 (UTC),
(Steve Pope) wrote:

> sf > wrote:
>
> >On Nov 12, 9:56*pm, (Steve Pope) wrote:
>
> >> Pretty dissimilar to red beans and rice that I usually make...
> >> I include a much larger fraction of celery/onion/bell pepper
> >> and more liquid.
>
> >> However, it looks pretty good.
>
> >Thanks Steve. I didn't have any celery or bell pepper, so I didn't
> >use them. However, I used plenty of onion. I've been trying to
> >figure out what the finished product is supposed to look like.
>
> Well, in my thinking for it to be distinctively "red beans and rice"
> it needs the trilogy of celery/onion/bell pepper, but obvsioulsy
> one can make a great-tasting bean dish without this.

My criteria is the beans. They *must* be red.
>
> It does look like you got hold of actual "small red beans".

That's what the bag said.
>
> As far as the liquid fraction goes, I have not uses a bean-mashing
> approach. I just use vegetable stock, and thicken it with a little
> file'. (Almost always I cook then fully drain beans, before making
> bean stews of any sort, including this one.)

I don't think I saw a single recipe that called for filé. I have it
on hand, so that's not something I need to pick up at the store.
>
> >Recipes seem to vary with the cook. I found a blog where it showed
> >"real" red beans & rice and the beans were the way *I* like them with
> >rice... totally disintegrated - one thick mess of bean "gravy". I
> >would have liked more *thick* liquid too, however this stuff was on
> >the stove for 4-5 hours and that was as mushy as they got. They were
> >technically cooked and we were hungry, so we ate.
>
> Perhaps something in the broth arrested the beans from cooking more.
> They look quite intact. Many ingredients will stop beans from cooking.
>
No idea, it was Swanson's chicken broth. I added water to it after
dinner and kept cooking the remainder. An extra 30-60 minutes
produced the kind of sauce I wanted.

> >IMO, red beans and rice is okay... but I like other beans better with
> >rice. Not sure if I'll do it again.
>
> I'd recommend giving it another shot with the full "trilogy", because
> I do think there is something subtle going on with the flavors
> of those particular vegetable ingredients and that of the small red beans
> that works really well. Opinions will vary on this, but the combination
> of those four ingredients (small red bean, celery, onion, bell pepper)
> is a constant across many recipes.
>
Many, but not all. I'll give it a shot sometime when I have all three
on hand. I (almost) never use celery and the days of buying a stalk
or two are gone, so it may be a long time - or maybe not. Christmas
is coming and I like to stuff celery with a mixture of cream cheese,
dried cranberry and walnuts, so I'll have it on hand in December.


--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

sf > wrote:

>On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 19:20:40 +0000 (UTC),

>(Steve Pope) wrote:

>> Well, in my thinking for it to be distinctively "red beans and rice"
>> it needs the trilogy of celery/onion/bell pepper, but obvsioulsy
>> one can make a great-tasting bean dish without this.

>My criteria is the beans. They *must* be red.

>> It does look like you got hold of actual "small red beans".

>That's what the bag said.

>> As far as the liquid fraction goes, I have not uses a bean-mashing
>> approach. I just use vegetable stock, and thicken it with a little
>> file'. (Almost always I cook then fully drain beans, before making
>> bean stews of any sort, including this one.)

>I don't think I saw a single recipe that called for filé. I

That's right, I have not seen this in a recipe either. But it
makes perfect sense to me. I add a little to the beans, and
then sprinkle more on top when serving. So far, no complaints.

>> Perhaps something in the broth arrested the beans from cooking more.
>> They look quite intact. Many ingredients will stop beans from cooking.

>No idea, it was Swanson's chicken broth. I added water to it after
>dinner and kept cooking the remainder. An extra 30-60 minutes
>produced the kind of sauce I wanted.

I've never used chicken broth.

>> I'd recommend giving it another shot with the full "trilogy", because
>> I do think there is something subtle going on with the flavors
>> of those particular vegetable ingredients and that of the small red beans
>> that works really well. Opinions will vary on this, but the combination
>> of those four ingredients (small red bean, celery, onion, bell pepper)
>> is a constant across many recipes.

>Many, but not all. I'll give it a shot sometime when I have all three
>on hand. I (almost) never use celery and the days of buying a stalk
>or two are gone, so it may be a long time - or maybe not.

You may want to try some locally grown celery... it can be far
more flavorful than the supermarket stuff.

We have had dinner guests say, "Wow! This is amazing celery!".

Steve

On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 13:18:55 GMT, "l, not -l" > wrote:

>
> On 13-Nov-2010, (Steve Pope) wrote:
>
> > it needs the trilogy of celery/onion/bell pepper,
> <snip>
> > I'd recommend giving it another shot with the full "trilogy"
> <more snipe>
>
> Actually, it's trinity, not trilogy.

I'm pretty sure he knew that and meant to say trilogy or maybe he
experienced a brain cramp at the time and couldn't remember the
correct word. Hence the quote marks either way, because he knew
"trilogy" was the wrong word.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 07:34:19 -0800, sf > wrote:

>On Sun, 14 Nov 2010 13:18:55 GMT, "l, not -l" > wrote:
>
>>
>> On 13-Nov-2010, (Steve Pope) wrote:
>>
>> > it needs the trilogy of celery/onion/bell pepper,
>> <snip>
>> > I'd recommend giving it another shot with the full "trilogy"
>> <more snipe>
>>
>> Actually, it's trinity, not trilogy.
>
>I'm pretty sure he knew that and meant to say trilogy or maybe he
>experienced a brain cramp at the time and couldn't remember the
>correct word. Hence the quote marks either way, because he knew
>"trilogy" was the wrong word.

Otherwise known as an off-teleprompter obominationism.

"l, not -l" wrote:

>> it needs the trilogy of celery/onion/bell pepper,
><snip>
>> I'd recommend giving it another shot with the full "trilogy"
> <more snipe>
>
> Actually, it's trinity, not trilogy.


"l, not -l" is right; it's "n, not l".

Bob

l, not -l > wrote:

>On 13-Nov-2010, (Steve Pope) wrote:

>> it needs the trilogy of celery/onion/bell pepper,
><snip>
>> I'd recommend giving it another shot with the full "trilogy"
><more snipe>

>Actually, it's trinity, not trilogy.

Thanks.

Steve

> l, not -l > wrote:
>
>> On 13-Nov-2010, (Steve Pope) wrote:
>
>>> it needs the trilogy of celery/onion/bell pepper,
>> <snip>
>>> I'd recommend giving it another shot with the full "trilogy"
>> <more snipe>
>
>> Actually, it's trinity, not trilogy.
>


I've heard celery/onion/bell pepper called the trinity
in Cajun/Creole cooking, but I've also seen the combination of
celery/onion/carrot as a base in other cuisine. Does it have
a specific name also?

gloria p

On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 05:56:23 +0000 (UTC),
(Steve Pope) wrote:

>sf > wrote:
>
>>http://oi51.tinypic.com/25he1d4.jpg
>
>Pretty dissimilar to red beans and rice that I usually make...
>I include a much larger fraction of celery/onion/bell pepper
>and more liquid.
>
>However, it looks pretty good.
>
>Steve

I agree about the ingredients. I went to Tulane and practically
existed on RBR, made with andouille. (I was NOT rich).

I worked on RBR for over 10 years before I discovered that the taste I
was missing was minced celery. Steve calls for the trinity, and I
can't fault that. But try a bit of minced celery with it.

Also, this was a Washing-day (Monday) dish, as one could use the
leftover Sunday ham and let it cook all day while the women were
washing the clothes.

Ergo: It must taste of ham, or something similar. I use tasso and/or
picklemeat (a Cajun thing). Maybe w/some andouille. PLus Goya's ham
flavoring.

I will not vote on whether this is Cajun or Creole. Typically, Creole
cooking was much more elegant than Cajun, so, if I HAD to vote, I'd go
with cajun.

ALso, the beans must be slightly overcooked, and some of them smashed
into a paste to make the dish more creamy, with either water or broth
to add liquid.

Serving over rice is OK. Up the the cook whether the sausage is diced
or cut into rounds or served as links on the platter.

Pass the hot sauce!

Alex

For mo see: http://www.gumbopages.com/food/basics/

If you are fortunate enough to own a copy of the Times-Picayune 100th
anniv. eddition of their food page, you will find this dish given
rather short shrift. Creole cooking was excellent and remains so to
this day.

"sf" > wrote in message
news
>
> Did I beat ya to it, nb?
>
> http://oi51.tinypic.com/25he1d4.jpg
>
> --
>
> Never trust a dog to watch your food.



brown unsmoked anduoille (I know, it's spelled wrong) sausage in
butter...remove from pan and brown the trinity in the leavings.....add this
to the red beans and rice as well as the sausage and have an all-in-one
meal.
-ginny

On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 10:32:40 -0500, "Virginia Tadrzynski"
> wrote:

>
> "sf" > wrote in message
> news
> >
> > Did I beat ya to it, nb?
> >
> > http://oi51.tinypic.com/25he1d4.jpg
> >
>
>
>
> brown unsmoked anduoille (I know, it's spelled wrong) sausage in
> butter...remove from pan and brown the trinity in the leavings.....add this
> to the red beans and rice as well as the sausage and have an all-in-one
> meal.

I put andouille in the beans, but didn't brown it on purpose - mainly
because no recipe I found said to do that. I even discussed (with
hubby) how I wouldn't brown the sausage prior to cooking, so it wasn't
an accident. Is browning the sausage one of those unwritten rules of
red beans and rice? Not browning it went against my better
judgment... but I live in California and we like everything to have a
tan, so what do I know?

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

On Nov 13, 8:41*am, sf > wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 10:32:40 -0500, "Virginia Tadrzynski"
>
>
>
> > wrote:
>
> > "sf" > wrote in message
> >news
>
> > > Did I beat ya to it, nb?
>
> > >http://oi51.tinypic.com/25he1d4.jpg
>
> > brown unsmoked anduoille (I know, it's spelled wrong) sausage in
> > butter...remove from pan and brown the trinity in the leavings.....add this
> > to the red beans and rice as well as the sausage and have an all-in-one
> > meal.
>
> I put andouille in the beans, but didn't brown it on purpose - mainly
> because no recipe I found said to do that. *I even discussed (with
> hubby) how I wouldn't brown the sausage prior to cooking, so it wasn't
> an accident. *Is browning the sausage one of those unwritten rules of
> red beans and rice? * *Not browning it went against my better
> judgment... but I live in California and we like everything to have a
> tan, so what do I know?
>
> --
>
> Never trust a dog to watch your food.

Here's my recipe. I don't brown the andouille either.

http://www.hizzoners.com/recipes/lun...d-beans-a-rice

On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 09:14:06 -0800 (PST), ImStillMags
> wrote:

> Here's my recipe. I don't brown the andouille either.
>
> http://www.hizzoners.com/recipes/lun...d-beans-a-rice


Thanks, I generally have a ham hock in the freezer.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

On 2010-11-13, sf > wrote:
>
> Did I beat ya to it, nb?
>
> http://oi51.tinypic.com/25he1d4.jpg

To the pic? I'd hafta say yes.

Is that a dish you made? If so, I will say it looks great. I've yet
to pull off that dish to my satisfaction. You gotta a recipe? You
know I respect your opinion, yer carrot cake being right up there with
illegal drugs.

nb

On Sat, 13 Nov 2010 17:31:14 GMT, notbob > wrote:

> On 2010-11-13, sf > wrote:
> >
> > Did I beat ya to it, nb?
> >
> > http://oi51.tinypic.com/25he1d4.jpg
>
> To the pic? I'd hafta say yes.
>
> Is that a dish you made? If so, I will say it looks great. I've yet
> to pull off that dish to my satisfaction. You gotta a recipe? You
> know I respect your opinion, yer carrot cake being right up there with
> illegal drugs.
>
I didn't print out that recipe, nb... so I'm not sure where it came
from. It was pretty elaborate for what's supposed to be a simple
meal. I'm looking at the hizzhonor recipe for next time, although
with the exception of bell pepper and andouille it's pretty much the
way I cook all my other beans - but hey, *I* like my beans! LOL

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

On 2010-11-13, sf > wrote:
>
> Did I beat ya to it, nb?
>
> http://oi51.tinypic.com/25he1d4.jpg

I don't have any dried red beans, but I have some canned red beans,
which I didn't buy. Can I add some andouille sausage, sauted trinity,
and creole seasoning and put over rice, it will that be a waste of
time?

I've never made RBAR, but like Popeye's over salted version.

nb

On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 19:20:31 GMT, notbob > wrote:

> On 2010-11-13, sf > wrote:
> >
> > Did I beat ya to it, nb?
> >
> > http://oi51.tinypic.com/25he1d4.jpg
>
> I don't have any dried red beans, but I have some canned red beans,
> which I didn't buy. Can I add some andouille sausage, sauted trinity,
> and creole seasoning and put over rice, it will that be a waste of
> time?
>
> I've never made RBAR, but like Popeye's over salted version.
>
If it says "small red bean" on the label, that's what you want. Use
canned to save yourself soaking and cooking time. I would think that
you should give it some time in the pot anyway to meld all the flavors
together and break down some of the beans (recipes call that
"creamy"). You should get a good idea from it about if you want to
try making RBAR again (or not) using dried beans.

BTW: I found Pinquintos in a can and bought some. I'll try that and
decide if they're worth it to hunt for the beans or just wait to
stumble across them sometime. I'll see them eventually. Mayacoba
beans turned out to be sold in gigantic bags at Smart & Final. I
still haven't seen them in smaller bags at a regular grocery store.

I also bought a couple of cans of something called Santa Fe Recipe,
which S&W says is pinto beans, small red beans, yellow kernel corn and
diced onion in a southwestern sauce. I'll try that with the ribs.


--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.

On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 19:20:31 GMT, notbob wrote:

> On 2010-11-13, sf > wrote:
>>
>> Did I beat ya to it, nb?
>>
>> http://oi51.tinypic.com/25he1d4.jpg
>
> I don't have any dried red beans, but I have some canned red beans,
> which I didn't buy. Can I add some andouille sausage, sauted trinity,
> and creole seasoning and put over rice, it will that be a waste of
> time?
>
> I've never made RBAR, but like Popeye's over salted version.
>
> nb

the ratarains product tastes very much like popeye's to me:

<http://shop.zatarains.com/zatarains%AE-red-beans-rice-p-882.html?=>

it's pretty cheap.

your pal,
blake

On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 21:42:08 GMT, "Randy Johnson" >
wrote:

>
> On 16-Nov-2010, notbob > wrote:
>
> > I've never made RBAR, but like Popeye's over salted version.
> >
> > nb
>
> If you like Popeye's Red Beans and Rice, you might like Zatarain's boxed
> mix; just add one can of beans to it, otherwise it is really Rice with a
> Red Bean or Two.

Were you hinting that Zatarain's is salty?

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.