![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
May. 27th, 2014 10:10 pm1. Almond Coconut Bread Take 2
Well, still turned a light blue inside. No idea why. It's not that color in the photograph.
And even with the pan buttered, it stuck to the bottom in places. I even tried to flour it like cake pans. Wondering if this would work better with almond flour? Although the coconut flour is higher in soluable fiber and better for you. Reduced the baking soda - which helped and whisked instead of beat it - also helped a bit. But I'm thinking 40 minutes is too long.
Took no more than a little over 15, and even that was more than enough.
See, here's the thing about recipes in cook books, you have to fiddle with them. Whoever put the measurements down - there's always something off. I used to fiddle all the time with the chocolate chip cookie recipe on the back of the Nestle package. Because I wasn't a fan of flour, I'd reduce it, increase the brown sugar over the white sugar, add more vanilla and use a combo of crisco and butter, later went with butter. As a result chewy, gooey, goodness.
Can't do that any longer of course. Maybe some day, when I can do sugar and chocolate again.
I'm hypoglycemic or have a tendency towards it - so have to drastically regulate my sugar intake.
At any rate - the bread is quite good with almond butter.
2. Started reading my cousin's self-published novel entitled Heart of a Star - it's okay. A bit young for me. Hard to really connect with or identify with the characters - who are all in their early 20s. A sign of middle age no doubt. Why people who are nearing middle age feel compelled to write about people in their early twenties, I've no clue.
Definitely an Oasis fanfic - read enough "real people fan-fiction" back in the day to pick up on it. She just sliced off the serial numbers and changed a few things. Few grammatical errors or typos, actually fewer than published books. Ironically the self-published books seem to have less errors than the published ones - or so I've noticed, at least in the romance and chick-lit genre. Urban Fantasy is better edited. Romance novels poorly edited. Not sure why that is. So the self-published ones are often better in that genre than the published.
There are a few things that jarred me out of the story. For example? The protagonist, Natalie, is attending boarding school in Philadelphia and well-traveled, yet considers Philadelphia the best city in the world. Uh no. Someone who hails from London or has been to London, England or various world cities, would not think that. Not that there is anything wrong with Philly, but it's not exactly all that memorable either. I know I lived in PA and wandered through Philly for most of my childhood and can barely remember it. Boston, it's not.
And yes, it's understandably defensive about it.
Also it's very melodramatic. Although that is true of most of this genre. The lead character usually has had an insanely horrific childhood - in this case she was raped and shot by her stepfather at the age of 8. And her real father is a famous British musician with a band that shot up in popularity only over the last few years. Now that she's turned 21, she's going to confront him - but hasn't told her five best buds, who are fans/groupies of the band. Turns out she's a musician too, just like her dad.
It is compelling. But I think there's one too many characters. I wish she'd limited the posse of friends on the road trip to maybe three or four. I'm losing track of whose who. Plus we have all the members of the band. And two points of view, the father's and Natalie's. With flashbacks. Ambitious first novel.
It may get better as it goes. Just 30 pages in so far.
I asked a friend why I feel the need to critique everything I read or watch, and they reminded me that I was an English major, actually an English Lit/Cultural Anthropology Major with a Law Degree - which is even worse. We're taught to critique things from the first session - it's drilled into your bones. I don't however tend to do it from a socio-political perspective like most of the people I've met online, which causes some friction at times. They'll see all the racism, sexism, homophobia, etc...while I'm busy pulling apart whether the plot works, the characters are developed, if the narrative structure is clear, and whether the characters actions further the plot. I'm also busy pulling it apart on a psychological, metaphysical and/or philosophical basis. As a result, I'm unfortunately oblivious to the socio-political perspective or don't really care that much. So, there was a rape...but why did he do it? Did it further the plot? Does it make sense? How does this change the characters? Can they stay together? Were there mitigating circumstances? Was it in character? Why did the writer make this choice? Meanwhile my online friends are just upset the hero raped the heroine and/or upset that the white anti-hero killed a black female slayer.
It's not that I don't see it - it's just that it doesn't upset me all that much - I'm more interested in analyzing the story-thread and whether it works. Again, I blame the educational background. The mind rips apart, while the heart sits there and sputters.
3. Loving this season of MAD MEN - which is quite good. And rather funny in places.
It's tighter this season than last season. And watching Don Draper fight his way back into power is rather fun. Also seeing him get pay-back from all angles. He's an anti-hero but weirdly compelling, reminds me of how I felt about Walt in Breaking Bad, although I like Draper better. Also prefer Mad Men to Breaking Bad - for two reasons: 1) Not as graphically violent. 2) Better and more female roles. Note I'm not saying its better written. It's not. The two are very different. Bad had in some respects better dialogue.
One of the benefits of watching as much crappy tv as I do, is I appreciate the well-written or smartly written television series. As I told a co-worker, who has similar tastes, you can really tell the difference by the dialogue. Dialogue is an art form.
Well, still turned a light blue inside. No idea why. It's not that color in the photograph.
And even with the pan buttered, it stuck to the bottom in places. I even tried to flour it like cake pans. Wondering if this would work better with almond flour? Although the coconut flour is higher in soluable fiber and better for you. Reduced the baking soda - which helped and whisked instead of beat it - also helped a bit. But I'm thinking 40 minutes is too long.
Took no more than a little over 15, and even that was more than enough.
See, here's the thing about recipes in cook books, you have to fiddle with them. Whoever put the measurements down - there's always something off. I used to fiddle all the time with the chocolate chip cookie recipe on the back of the Nestle package. Because I wasn't a fan of flour, I'd reduce it, increase the brown sugar over the white sugar, add more vanilla and use a combo of crisco and butter, later went with butter. As a result chewy, gooey, goodness.
Can't do that any longer of course. Maybe some day, when I can do sugar and chocolate again.
I'm hypoglycemic or have a tendency towards it - so have to drastically regulate my sugar intake.
At any rate - the bread is quite good with almond butter.
2. Started reading my cousin's self-published novel entitled Heart of a Star - it's okay. A bit young for me. Hard to really connect with or identify with the characters - who are all in their early 20s. A sign of middle age no doubt. Why people who are nearing middle age feel compelled to write about people in their early twenties, I've no clue.
Definitely an Oasis fanfic - read enough "real people fan-fiction" back in the day to pick up on it. She just sliced off the serial numbers and changed a few things. Few grammatical errors or typos, actually fewer than published books. Ironically the self-published books seem to have less errors than the published ones - or so I've noticed, at least in the romance and chick-lit genre. Urban Fantasy is better edited. Romance novels poorly edited. Not sure why that is. So the self-published ones are often better in that genre than the published.
There are a few things that jarred me out of the story. For example? The protagonist, Natalie, is attending boarding school in Philadelphia and well-traveled, yet considers Philadelphia the best city in the world. Uh no. Someone who hails from London or has been to London, England or various world cities, would not think that. Not that there is anything wrong with Philly, but it's not exactly all that memorable either. I know I lived in PA and wandered through Philly for most of my childhood and can barely remember it. Boston, it's not.
And yes, it's understandably defensive about it.
Also it's very melodramatic. Although that is true of most of this genre. The lead character usually has had an insanely horrific childhood - in this case she was raped and shot by her stepfather at the age of 8. And her real father is a famous British musician with a band that shot up in popularity only over the last few years. Now that she's turned 21, she's going to confront him - but hasn't told her five best buds, who are fans/groupies of the band. Turns out she's a musician too, just like her dad.
It is compelling. But I think there's one too many characters. I wish she'd limited the posse of friends on the road trip to maybe three or four. I'm losing track of whose who. Plus we have all the members of the band. And two points of view, the father's and Natalie's. With flashbacks. Ambitious first novel.
It may get better as it goes. Just 30 pages in so far.
I asked a friend why I feel the need to critique everything I read or watch, and they reminded me that I was an English major, actually an English Lit/Cultural Anthropology Major with a Law Degree - which is even worse. We're taught to critique things from the first session - it's drilled into your bones. I don't however tend to do it from a socio-political perspective like most of the people I've met online, which causes some friction at times. They'll see all the racism, sexism, homophobia, etc...while I'm busy pulling apart whether the plot works, the characters are developed, if the narrative structure is clear, and whether the characters actions further the plot. I'm also busy pulling it apart on a psychological, metaphysical and/or philosophical basis. As a result, I'm unfortunately oblivious to the socio-political perspective or don't really care that much. So, there was a rape...but why did he do it? Did it further the plot? Does it make sense? How does this change the characters? Can they stay together? Were there mitigating circumstances? Was it in character? Why did the writer make this choice? Meanwhile my online friends are just upset the hero raped the heroine and/or upset that the white anti-hero killed a black female slayer.
It's not that I don't see it - it's just that it doesn't upset me all that much - I'm more interested in analyzing the story-thread and whether it works. Again, I blame the educational background. The mind rips apart, while the heart sits there and sputters.
3. Loving this season of MAD MEN - which is quite good. And rather funny in places.
It's tighter this season than last season. And watching Don Draper fight his way back into power is rather fun. Also seeing him get pay-back from all angles. He's an anti-hero but weirdly compelling, reminds me of how I felt about Walt in Breaking Bad, although I like Draper better. Also prefer Mad Men to Breaking Bad - for two reasons: 1) Not as graphically violent. 2) Better and more female roles. Note I'm not saying its better written. It's not. The two are very different. Bad had in some respects better dialogue.
One of the benefits of watching as much crappy tv as I do, is I appreciate the well-written or smartly written television series. As I told a co-worker, who has similar tastes, you can really tell the difference by the dialogue. Dialogue is an art form.