(I'm writing this last night, because by the time you are reading this I will either be in 1) the swimming pool 2) pitching for a piece of work at a PR agency 3) drinking pint sized cups of coffee - or vodka - in a bar somewhere because the pitch went well/badly.)
So, yeah. Sandwich rules. I like Styx's contribution. Nothing like a too fussy sandwich to become something that you don't really want. One of those ones where they put that big watercress in it before you can stop them. You know the deal. One of my rules I've just thought of is no fruit. Or more than one cheese. Both are wrong, on levels I am sure I do not need to go into with you my learned readers. (I will be very interested to hear from blokewho's thoughts on sandwiches, which he tells us occupied his whole weekend. Good on you blokewho. (Sounds like a Fall single.) Not least of all because blokewho - well last time I saw him, which you all know is ages ago - was a vegetarian, so looking forward to him trying to fight his corner with a hummus wrap against the mighty roast beef or coronation chicken sandwich.
A story: I have good friends who used to live in the centre of the hip part of San Francisco. They were always saying that when I visited I should go to their local sandwich shop where I would encounter the sandwich vending equivalent of Good Cop Bad Cop. I couldn't really get my head around this concept, until I visited said shop where I was confronted by Good Sandwich Seller: "What would you like sir? We have some very good pastrami in fresh. With apricot? Coming right up. Good choice if I may say so." And the next day in the same shop the Bad Sandwich Seller, possibly the most difficult, opinionated, inflexible man on earth: "You what? You want egg salad with a tomato? What the fuck are you thinking there buddy? Why not some cheese? We got all sorts of cheese. What? Cheddar with onion? Are you out of your fuckin' mind buddy? Do you expect me to put that in between two pieces of bread? What? What do I recommend? That you get the fuck out of my shop before I come around the counter and batter you with these gherkins." All deeply true, as could be confirmed by my two friends if they read this blog, which they sadly don't. The politics of sandwich purchasing took on a whole different meaning in that shop, which I hope is still running.
Another story from same friends in California: Another friend was in a really cheap fried chicken bar waiting for his really cheap fried chicken fix. In front of him, a very grand old Californian dame was ordering:
Grand Old Dame: "I'll have five of your whole roasted chickens."
Stoner Girl Behind Counter: "Will that be for here, or to take away?"
Grand Old Dame: "Do you honestly think I would sit and eat in a dive like this?"
Stoner Girl Behind Counter: "Hey fuck you bitch. I don't know your life."
I'm sorry to report that the manager was summoned, and Stoner Chick was fired on the spot.
Sandwiches. Fried Chicken. It's a jungle out there, and sometimes I just don't know how we keep from going under..da da da da da.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
I think Styx's rule on ingredients is far too restrictive, missing out, as it does, on condiments. I can easily conceive of a sandwich involving mayonnaise, mustard and mango chutney. And then there's ketchup, branston pickle, thousand island, horseradish... Just Say No to Unnecessary Sandwich-Related Restrictions.
Strangely, it was California's version of a sandwich - 57-ingredient-stuffed, carraway-seeded, wholemeal onion loaves - that was the inspiration for my three ingredients rule.
And don't be so bloody pedantic, "Anon"! One can mix condiments beforehand, thus making them into a single ingredient, e.g. coleslaw. Mustard-mayonnaise is already available in shops and if you want to mix that with mango chutney, that's your funeral ... I think more than two condiments is wrong. Partnerships work, not so menages a trois.
Now, on to the highly controversial HHN stricture of "no fruit". This excludes the tomato, of course, but is that such a bad thing? They go quite well with egg and some cheeses (yes, Emmenthal, I'm mainly thinking of you), but they make my mouth itch and always leave a sandwich rather soggy. Cucumber has to go as well, but that's no loss to anyone. All in all, a lightly qualified thumbs-up to "no fruit", the qualificaion being the status of jams and pickles (?).
Finally, has anyone, anywhere, EVER put broccoli in a sandwich?
You rang my Lord?
Tell me it ain't so!
Broccoli ... in a sandwich ...?
WITH WHAT!?
Lashings of imagination of course big boy
(Right, off to get my pitchfork)
BURN THE WITCH!
Oh Styx, I think thee dost protest too much - though it is very sweet X
No, I say, NO!
I've never put broccoli in a sandwich .... honest ... promise, like .... never!
Stop messing with my mind, there's not much of it left.
Oh Styx, sweet, sweet Styx, don't you know that just a little nibble of brocolli will do wonders for your whole body
It's worth pointing out that in the same paragraph as the stricture about 'no fruit', hhn refers to the 'mighty...coronation chicken' which, as any fule kno, contains either apricot or raisins, and sometimes both.
Ah, the Coronation Chicken Conundrum! I tried to explain this earlier with reference to the law of sandwich composites, but hey ho, genius is often misunderstood ...
Coronation Chicken is a single sandwich ingredient, thus not a fruit, even if it does contain fruit. However, when HHN refers to asking for apricot with his pastrami sandwich .... well, what can I say? We must hope he is using artistic licence, otherwise he is exposed as a hypocrite, a fraud and a DAMNED LIAR!
Oh Styx, so angry, so brutal, so forceful. Ooh, I love that kind of machismo in a man. Does strange things to me for sure my sweetness
Sigh!
It's hard to maintain this level of machismo faced with your mellifluous tone, but I try, really I do. So much effort, but so worth it!
Styx, while I see your point, the Styx Law of Sandwich Composites seems unnecessarily reductive. Coronation chicken, if plonked between two slices of bread from out of a tub in your local sandwich shop, is indeed a single ingredient. But if you tried to make the same sandwich at home, you'd start with loads of ingredients - certainly more than three. And however you look at it, it's going to have fruit in it, breaking the 'no fruit' rule.
And going back briefly to the is-a-wrap-a-sandwich debate, I note that: "The British Sandwich Association defines a sandwich as: Any form of bread with a filling, generally assembled cold - to include traditional wedge sandwiches, as well as filled rolls, baguettes, pitta, bloomers, wraps, bagels and the like, but not burgers and other products assembled and consumed hot." Je reste ma valise.
I'm willing to compromise (oh yes) and call it a 'no-fruit' guideline. HHN can write a coda containing the exceptions.
Is that sufficient to reconcile our differences, or must it be war?
No, let's not have war. What would that be good for?
Post a Comment