How To Make A Stew

Stews almost always evoke memories of childhood. The thing is sometimes these memories are good and recall excellent meals, and sometimes they are bad and eating them was seen as a chore, if not even a punishment. I think this is because, although everyone at least tries to make stew, it does actually require some skill to produce well. The making of a stew transforms inexpensive ingredients into a magnificent product with a long period of time and careful cooking. I will give you the general method of how to produce a good stew as well as some guidelines for recipes.

The Meat

A quick rule of thumb - if it makes a good steak, don’t use it for stew. The tender cuts of meat are not only too expensive to use in a stew, many of them do not have enough meaty flavour to make good use of them. The tougher cuts of meat typically are marbled with a fair amount of intramuscular fat and connective tissue that takes a couple of hours of cooking to break down. But when it does break down, the meat becomes very tender and soft. My favourite piece of meat is beef or veal cheek. This can be difficult to find so, when it is not available, I choose either short rib or blade, which is a cut from the shoulder. Chuck or sometimes cross rib are also decent options. Cuts of meat from the hind quarters are often sold as pot roasts or stewing meat, and generally have the term “round” in their name, such as top round, bottom round, eye of round, etc. I generally avoid these cuts, as they are both tough and lean cuts so they are not flavourful enough for stew. Similar rules apply to meats other than beef, but this is what I will focus on as it is the most common. When trimming meat for stew, most people remove all the fat and cartilage from the meat. This is not necessary and it deprives the stew of good flavour.

Beef cheek - those bits of connective tissue do not need to be removed

The white layer is silverskin, not fat

Silverskin, shown on the back of the cheek here, should be removed, and if the fat is really thick it should trimmed back a little, but most connective tissue will break down and a little bit of fat is a good thing. Then cut the meat in equal size pieces. Smaller pieces will cook faster, but I find the texture personally more pleasing with large pieces. It also makes the browning stage go faster.

Vegetables

Almost any vegetable will work in a stew. Since the meat takes a long time to cook, and because I make stews more often in winter, I tend to use hard, winter vegetables, such as carrots, parsnips, squash, turnips, beets or similar hard, dense vegetables. These vegetables should be cut into fairly large chunks so they do not cook too quickly and can be added at the beginning. If most of these vegetables are overcooked it will not be too problematic. It will not have the ideal texture, but should hold together and the flavour will be there. Squash is an exception, as it cooks a little faster and tends to break down into mush. Potatoes can be a good option as well, but they will release a fair amount of starch and also cook a little faster. For these ingredients, the meat will need to be cooking for at least 1 hour before adding these vegetables. Other, quick cooking vegetables need to be added towards the end of the cooking process. Most often I use mushrooms, which I add a half hour before the end of the cooking. You can use any variety of fresh or dried mushrooms. Any other tender vegetables you would want to add, such as peas, corn, beans, etc., should be added in the final stages of cooking, as it is important that they maintain their texture. Other options includes greens such as spinach, collards, swiss chard or Asian greens like bok choy. Collards and similar deep greens should be added with at least 1 hour to go, while spinach just needs to be wilted at the very end. I avoid cabbages as I do not like how they taste with long cooking.



Searing

This is a very important step that is often skipped, resulting in weak flavour. When meat is exposed to very high heat, chemical reactions take place that brown the outside of the meat. The process is similar to, but not the same as, caramelization and is called the Maillard Reaction. Some chefs and food “experts” claim that searing meat seals in juices. You should know that this is not true at all. As meat cooks, water will always be expelled from the meat. When high heat searing, you will not see the water because it is evaporating instantly. While searing does not retain more meat juices, the real reason for doing this is that it generates deep flavour than can not be accomplished through stewing alone. The basic rules for searing or browning meat are to keep the heat high, don’t move the meat around in the pan, and don’t crowd the pan. Each piece of meat should only be moved to brown another side of the piece. If the pan gets too dry, add more oil.

This is what properly browned meat should look like - note all the space around each piece

An additional step I like to do after browning the meat involves searing parsnips. I often use parsnips in my stews and I find the flavour is much better if they are caramelized. So I cut the parsnips on the bias so there is a lot of surface area and brown them for about 30 seconds per side.



Braising Liquid

When the meat is finished browning, add onions to the same pan and saute the onions until soft. At this point, add garlic and cook for about 1 minute until it is fragrant. If you are adding tomato paste and/or paprika, they should be added next and cooked for 1-2 minutes. Then add another tablespoon of oil and 2 tblsp of flour and cook, stirring constantly, for another 2 minutes to cook the rawness out the flour. Then slowly add red wine, stirring to make sure the sauce thickens evenly. Add stock or other liquids, if using, and bring everything to a boil. Any other spices and any dried herbs should be added at this point, as well as salt and pepper. Taste the sauce - it should be well balanced but very powerful. Remember that lots of liquid will be released from the meat and vegetables, which will dilute the sauce. Add the meat back to the stew, along with the longest cooking vegetables, particularly the carrots. If you are using parsnips without browning first, which I do sometimes, add them now as well. Many stewing and braising recipes will tell you cover the food entirely with liquid, or at least 2/3 of the way up. This is not necessary. All that is needed is for everything to be coated with some liquid going up maybe halfway. It will probably seem much too thick but, with the liquid that will be released from the meat, there will be plenty of liquid at the end. Just be careful when bringing the mixture to a boil that you keep mixing and make sure nothing burns or scorches. Once the stew goes in the oven this is no longer a concern.

Yes, there is enough liquid in here

It became this with no liquid added

Cooking and Timing

Bring the stew to a boil, then put in a 275 F oven to cook. Be sure that the cooking pot is oven safe and has a tight-fitting lid. Depending on what meat you used and the size of the pieces, it will take anywhere from 2 - 6 hours, but I have found that most stews I make require about 4 hours of cooking. If you are using vegetables like squash or beets in the stew, add them about 1 hour into the cooking process. At about the 2 hour point, you should check the doneness of the meat for the first time. Press the meat against the side of the pot with a wooden spoon. If the meat is hard and rubbery, it is not ready yet. When it is ready, the meat should pull apart with direct pressure from the spoon. When the meat is almost ready, I often add chopped mushrooms. Sometimes it is a good idea to saute the mushrooms first, but I don’t bother. When the meat is done, check the seasoning and add finishing touches. Possibilities include fresh herbs, tender vegetables or liqueur, such as brandy. Some vegetables you add will benefit from different cooking times, which would require careful timing and a knowledge of how much more time the meat will need. For someone just starting out I recommend a very simple version, based on the French classic Boeuf Bourgingnon.

5 lbs stewing meat, trimmed
olive oil
3 onions
1 head garlic
5 carrots, large chunks
1 lb parsnips, cut in large pieces on bias
2 tblsp tomato paste
1 tblsp Hungarian paprika
2 tblsp flour
1 bottle red wine AND 1 tblsp beef stock concentrate
OR
3/4 bottle red wine AND 1 cup beef broth
1 tsp thyme
1 tsp rosemary
3 bay leaves
½ tsp cayenne
salt and pepper
½ lb mushrooms, quartered
chopped parsley (optional)

Trim meat and cut vegetables. Sear the meat, then parsnips if you want. Add onions, then garlic, then tomato paste and paprika as directed above. Add more oil and flour and cook, stirring, for 2 minutes, then add wine and beef stock. Add the herbs and spices, salt and pepper and taste. Then return the meat to the pan along with the carrots and parsnips. Bring to a boil, put a lid on the pot and put it in a 275 degree oven for about 4 hours or until meat is tender. With ½ hour left in cooking time, add mushrooms. When meat is tender, add chopped parsley, if using, and serve over mashed potatoes.

Pretty much the recipe above with rutabaga (a form of large turnip) added

Now you can see that, start to finish, my stewing method takes a lot of time. That said, I believe this is an excellent dish for entertaining. The reason is almost all the work involved is done hours in advance, leaving you free as a host. Because it is cooked slowly, there is a substantial margin for error, meaning that a little extra time won’t hurt anything, in fact the flavour will probably improve. Of course it tastes amazing the following day, so you could even do much of this a day ahead and just reheat and finish it. This also works fairly well as a pot luck, as it reheats fairly well and only needs one pot. I have probably already said this, but it deserves another mention. The possibilities for variation are endless - in the meat, the vegetables, the liquids and the seasonings.

This stew had Asian seasonings (like oyster sauce, soy and sesame) was cooked with beets and was finished with green onions.

In future I may post recipes of other stews, or braised meat dishes that I prepare using the same methods. I will most likely refer back to this post, as this is the general method behind many meals.

Multi-Party Politics

Recently, a friend in the United States has expressed frustration with the political situation and has been seeking information about the pros and cons of multi-party government systems. I would like to discuss this issue, with a focus on the US and Canada, about which I know the most, and some discussion of what little I know about some European governments.

The obvious advantage of a 2-party system is that it is easier to get a majority in the legislature, which should make laws easier to pass. It also ensures the country’s leader is endorsed by a majority of the population.

In general however, I believe multi-party systems are a better option. If you do not happen to agree with the position of either party in the United States, you have no options. In Canada there are three parties that run everywhere in the country (and an additional very powerful party in Quebec only) and have significant representation in parliament with a fourth party beginning to emerge with significant vote totals, though they do not yet have any representation in government. As a result, we have not had any one party with majority control since 2004. Despite this, things still get done and they have gotten done with minority governments in the past. In fact, Canada’s most significant piece of legislation was created by a coalition government. This was the Canada Health Act, which guaranteed our universal health care. This measure was promoted by the New Democratic Party (NDP), Canada’s “third party”, which leans to the left and was supported by the larger, centrist, Liberal Party, led by Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau. On a side note, I firmly believe Pierre Trudeau was Canada’s best prime minister. In addition to bringing about universal health care, it was during his leadership that Canada received its own constitution, finally achieving complete independence from England. Included in the constitution was the Charter of Rights, which I already posted about some time ago (see the post titled Rights and Freedoms, posted September 29). Trudeau was also a key figure for gay rights in Canada. It was Trudeau that removed homosexuality from the criminal code. In explaining his reasoning, he used a line that has become very famous: “The government has no place in the bedrooms of the nation”.

The obvious drawback of a multi-party system is the threat of repeated, frequent elections when no majority can be reached. To try to avoid this, coalitions are often formed, as has happened recently with the British government. It seems to be going very well there, as the Conservatives are being tempered by the Liberal Democrats. Then again coalitions can bring their own problems too. An example of this is Israel. In addition to the 2 largest parties, there are numerous small parties with representation in the Knesset, some representing radical elements of society, especially the religious right. To hold power, one of the main parties usually requires coalition support from these fringe groups, and I believe that these compromises hurt possibilities for peace with their neighbours, as these parties tend to insist on growing the settlements and promoting other contentious issues. A method some countries use to get around the issue is to require a minimum percentage of the national vote to be able to get seats in their parliament. Germany is an example of this and Italy has apparently recently done this as part of a plan to reform their notoriously messy political setup.

Part of the blame for Italy’s political troubles derived from the multitude of small political parties that made up their parliament. To get anything done, many behind the scenes deals would have to be made. That would seem to be a recipe for corruption, and that is what they got. Their system also does not have the people directly elect individual representatives but rather vote for parties, a system called proportional representation. When used in a small country like Israel, it is the only way that makes sense, but in larger countries that have distinct regional differences throughout the country, this method poses problems. Germany has used a mix of direct regional representatives with at-large politicians chosen from party lists. Canada and the UK take a different approach, simply choosing all members of parliament individually in their local districts, called ridings. While I believe our system would work a little better with a mixed system, and I would like to see Canada move to some semblance of a mixed proportional system, the current system is a little more similar to what happens in the United States.

This is where the possible benefits of two party systems return. Most elections are understood by the people as a choice between the current governing party and making a change. When there are many small parties, they can split the total vote opposed to the current government, thus ensuring the incumbent wins again, even though a majority of the voters did not want to continue with the status quo. We see a lot of this in Canada. Our current prime minister, conservative Stephen Harper is liked by about 35% of the population, and despised by most of the rest, myself included. However, this opposition is split between the Liberals, the NDP and the Green Party. This scenario often allows the Conservatives to continue to win elections, albeit without a majority of seats (I fully realize there are other dividing issues that influence how votes are split, but this will get me too far off track). Americans seem to prefer a binary, either/or solution. When an exception appeared in 2000, the response was telling. Ralph Nader entered the presidential race as a third-party candidate and did succeed in attracting more votes than a third party candidate ordinarily would. Since the race between the two leaders, Bush and Gore, was so close, even the relatively small number of votes cast for Nader greatly influenced the final results. It is widely believed that Nader’s votes came from people who would otherwise have voted for Gore, allowing Bush to win (of course this analysis sets aside the controversy over electoral college votes and the general weirdness of what happened in Florida). During the next presidential election, in 2004, many people wanted Nader not to run. He ran anyway, but he received far fewer votes this time around. Of course by then it was clear that the American people were divided more or less 50-50, with very strong convictions over which leader to choose. The people clearly did not want a third option that might risk easing the way for the candidate they opposed.

So what options are there for those who might like to have a choice other than the obvious two in the US. Perhaps if a third party can find a way to get candidates elected to the house, it will become genuinely impossible to get any legislation enacted without some form of compromise, something that is generally avoided in the current situation. You would not expect the politicians to be less partisan, as that does not happen even in multi-party systems, but at least the government will have to find some way to incorporate diverse opinions and policies rather than the current obstinacy. But whether the desire for representation is more important for enough Americans than the preference for clear black and white solutions is an open question. Furthermore, there is an attitude among some people that every new idea that comes from outside America, especially from Europe, is evil and dangerous, while the American solutions are always the best. With this in mind, we will probably never see any dramatic changes to the political model there.

Finally, for those of my readers from European countries, I want to say that my research on European governments has been minimal so, if I got things wrong, feel free to let me know. I would also like to know your thoughts on this issue, wherever you may live.

A Quick Post - Happy Hanukkah

Sorry I haven’t been posting much lately. I’ve had a bit of a stressful time with work and in other ways over the last few weeks. There are more posts coming in the next few days, including one that might prove very interesting. In the meantime, the Jewish holiday of Hanukkah has begun. While Christmas decorations are ubiquitous, and often verge on the extreme and/or ridiculous, we do not tend to do much of any decoration for Hanukkah. That is why I found this sight quite interesting. Walking down a major street in Montreal yesterday, I saw this van parked and just had to take some pictures. Yes, the menorah is strapped to the roof. I don’t think you can tell from the pictures, but there are light bulbs on the two raised branches, the positions for the first day of Hanukkah. I can only imagine that they are lit at night and light bulbs will be added each night. I wonder what kind of scene this will be next week in the evening. I also wonder how this would affect the handling?

Turkey Mole

To my American friends, Happy Thanksgiving. In Canada our Thanksgiving is in October, but most of the traditions are the same. Whenever you celebrate, in the aftermath of Turkey Day, there is often the dilemma of what to do with all the leftover turkey. Sandwiches are all well and good but, especially if you have a lot of leftovers, it’s nice to have another meal that tastes nothing like the original. In my family, we would cook 2 large turkeys on Thanksgiving (for 3 of us!), leaving a very large amount of uneaten turkey. We would debone all the leftover turkey and portion it into packages and freeze them. One of the dishes we would make with the turkey was Mole, a Mexican specialty.

Turkey Mole

3 lbs cooked boneless turkey

Mole Paste
1/4 cup peanut oil
½ cup raisins/dried fruit
1/4 cup peanuts
1 cup almonds
3 pasilla chiles
2 ancho chiles
2 guajillo chiles
OR
1 cup chili powder
1/4 cup sesame seed
2 tsp cumin
2 tsp coriander
2 ounce melted unsweetened chocolate
1 tblsp molasses
½ tsp cinnamon
salt & pepper

1 tin canned tomatoes or 2 cups tomato sauce
2 cups chicken or turkey stock

2 large onions, diced
1 head garlic, minced
1 cup fresh bread crumbs

flour tortillas
sour cream (optional)

There are many ways to cook this, but I am presenting an adaptation of the recipe my mother made(and still makes), since it the easiest to prepare and is appropriate for the season, as many people have leftover turkey they need to find a use for. There are many ways to make this differently. Sometimes I use fresh raw turkey breast for this, but to do that I need to use a substantially different technique and remove most of the liquid. In the summer, I like to add a variety of fresh produce, including fruit, such as plums or cherries, having these sweet elements take the place of tomato.

There are many ingredients, which may be intimidating, but the technique to make this dish is quite simple and straightforward. Leftover turkey is the best choice for this dish. If you do not have any, simply roast some turkey breast, let it cool, then shred the meat. The specific dried chiles called for may be difficult to find, but many compromises are possible. The most flavourful of the chiles is the pasilla, though the easiest of these to find would probably be anchos, so you may use either one of those alone. Before these chiles were as available, we used to use store-bought chili powder. It seems chili powder is not as good as it used to be, but if you have a brand that you like, it will work well, just use a large quantity and you may want to slightly reduce the amount of cumin and coriander, as chili powder usually contains these spices. One more note. When grinding chiles, I remove the seeds and veins and then taste the powder. This should be quite hot, but if not grind some of the seeds to boost the heat.

Combine all the mole paste ingredients in a food processor and blend until it forms a thick, semi-smooth paste, almost like a soft dough. Set aside.

Saute diced onions until soft, then add garlic and saute 30 seconds more. Add spice paste and cook for a minute or two. This will allow all the flavours to intensify and release. Then add tomatoes and stock. When the paste is incorporated into the liquid, add bread crumbs and allow sauce to thicken. If the sauce is still runny add more bread crumbs. When combined add the turkey. Transfer everything to a casserole or baking dish and bake at 350 degrees until everything is bubbling, about 20-30 minutes. Serve with tortillas and whatever garnishes you like. Salsas, guacamole, sour cream - that sort of thing.
One additional note. The mole in the picture was one I made this summer using a slightly different recipe and a home made salsa that combined corn, heirloom tomatoes, tomatillos, poblano peppers and vinegar. The mole from the recipe above will likely be thicker than the one pictured.

Being Gay and Jewish - Revisited

Some months ago I wrote about the conflicts present in being both gay and Jewish, especially for those who are Orthodox Jews. I wrote about a statement of principles adopted by a group of Orthodox rabbis that expressed understanding love, and acceptance - to a point - of gay people within the Jewish community. For those of you who haven’t read that post yet, it is from August 19. Since then, I have read a book and seen a movie on this subject which show different side of this issue, which aren’t quite so encouraging.

The movie was a documentary entitled “Trembling before G-d”. The reference to G-d is because the Orthodox adhere to the law that the name of god cannot be uttered. The Hebrew notation referring directly to God in the Torah is essentially unpronounceable, and when the passages are recited, substitute words are used. This concept, when transferred to English, leads to the use of “G-d”. The movie recounts the story of Gay Orthodox Jews trying to maintain their faith while still accepting themselves as Gay and living a normal life. Many of the religious authorities spoken to in the documentary, while they often expressed sympathy, would not accept that living as a gay person could be anything other than a sin and a violation of Jewish Law (Halakha). One rabbi, who cared and wanted the best for one of his congregants, still advocated change therapies. He had suggested this many years ago and now, when the congregant talked to the rabbi years later after no result from these “therapies” the rabbi could only suggest trying again, or celibacy. Apparently accepting his orientation as a part of who he is was not an option. This is a very different attitude from the statement of principles, but then the movie was made a few years ago, and the statement of principles was put out in 2010. This movie did win some awards when it was originally released and got a lot of attention, and may have even spurred the religious community to get together and begin working on a more acceptable state of affairs, which led to the statement of principles.

I wrote a brief note in my blog when I began reading the book but was waiting to finish the book before I share my thoughts about it. Now I am ready to give my review of this incredible work.
Mourning and Celebration: Jewish, Orthodox and Gay Past & Present by K. David Brody tells the story of Yankl Bradawka, a character conjured by the narrator/author, a gay Jewish man living in Montreal in present day. Yankl lives in 19th Century Poland in a shtetl, a small village generally occupied by the Jewish community. Yankl is a Hasidic Jew, a member of the orthodox community, as is everyone else in his village. The difference is that Yankl is gay. He desires men and has no attraction to women. The book chronicles his search for a way to fulfill his needs while trying to avoid discovery of his inclinations, which no one in his era can acknowledge as anything but unimaginably sinful and abhorrent.

It is difficult to write about the book without having the review turn into a spoiler, as the twists and turns begin early and drive the plot turns later in the book. One thing this book does very well is that it highlights the conflict that still exists today between biblical and religious rules and being who you are. Yankl is a religious scholar and thus is well aware that his religion condemns what he desires. He sees his condition as a curse and prays to God to be able to love women and live like everyone else. But he has also come to realize that when he is with a man, he feels complete and in love and questions how that can be sinful. Of course living in his era and community, it is next to impossible for him to fulfill his needs and he seems destined to a sad and lonely life. He also faces an arranged marriage, something he dreads, and more so when he realizes that he likes his intended bride as a friend but is revolted at the prospect of a romantic engagement.

I don’t recall having as emotional a reaction to any other book I have read than I had to this book. There were a few times when I cried reading this, and many more times when I almost broke down. The first half of the novel was particularly powerful for me, as in those sections I recognized many of the feelings that Yankl was experiencing and have felt those feelings of different and abnormal. Just as the author invented Yankl to place himself in his own family a century ago, I could imagine myself there as well, as some of my grandparents were born in the shtetl maybe a generation or two after the time period of the novel. My coming out experience was very positive because the people I care most about are accepting and understanding. Now I realize how difficult it might have been if I was born in another time. I was also drawn to the character of Yankl’s mother. Here we see a woman who in modern times, would almost certainly have been accepting and supportive. She truly loves her son, and has suspected for some time that something is “wrong”. The times and her worldview simply cannot allow her to conceive that two men could possibly have love for each other and that there are other valid relationships apart from heterosexual ones. But even though she does not understand, her love for her son remains. The author is very skilful in remaining true to the attitudes people would have had at the time but, through several characters, plants the seed of our modern sensibility. The facts they are presented with seem to contradict the established wisdom and at times some of the characters begin to wonder if they might be wrong. They are only passing thoughts, but we can see how we started to get where we are today. Another creative aspect is that, through the people Yankl meets, we are introduced to many faces of modern gay life. We see bisexuality, exploitation, true love, casual physical relationships, despair and suicide and even, very rare at the time, a straight man who is a true friend and not judgmental.

I would highly recommend this book even for those who are not Jewish or gay. Many Yiddish terms are used, as that was the language of the shtetl and a few Yiddish terms are still a part of modern Jewish parlance. However when he uses Yiddish terms or talks about Jewish rituals and practices, he explains them in such a way that there should be no difficulty for a non-Jew to understand. There is also a glossary of terms and the end of the book if something is still not clear. Even though some of the situations described apply more to Jews, most of the experiences would be the same for Christians or anyone else living at that time.

For more information, reviews or to buy the book, visit the author’s website at http://www.MourningAndCelebration.com

I suppose the true lesson of the book is that, while it has only recently been possible to be openly gay, we need to understand that homosexuality did not begin in the 20th century. There have always been gay people, who had to find some way to live their lives as best they could. One way Jews may have had a more difficult time is that, especially in medieval times, Christians had an option that Jews did not: the convent or monastery. While celibacy is certainly not ideal, becoming a priest, monk or nun was at least a way where they could live without being pressured into marrying someone they could not satisfy. It was also considered a noble calling. Jews did not have a similar option. Religious leaders, such as rabbis were expected to marry and have a large family. Celibacy has never had a place in Jewish society, which means there was no escape for anyone with no sexual desire for women.

Despite the history of intolerance, and the reluctance even in modern times of the orthodox Jewish community to be supportive of homosexuality, times are changing and tolerance is building. The author of the book is an Orthodox Jew and is active in his Orthodox congregation. His rabbi supports him fully. He wrote an endorsement that appears at the beginning of the book and the book is sold at the synagogue. And as I have mentioned at other times, other branches of Judaism tend to be more tolerant and gay-friendly.

Remembrance Day

Today, November 11, is Remembrance Day in Canada. It commemorates the end of World War I and, by extension, all wars and the sacrifices made by our war veterans. In recent decades Canada has not been known as a country that fights a lot of wars, but Canada has a very distinguished record of service. In the early years, Canada’s army was simply an extension of the British Army, even after independence in 1867. This changed during World War I. Canadian units were assigned many difficult missions and fought in many well known battles, particularly Vimy Ridge and Passchendaele. By the time of World War II, Canada was able to declare war separately of their own accord, rather than being automatically entered when Britain was at war. The Canadians were a very important part of the D-Day invasion and were the primary forces involved in the liberation of Holland. Canada was also active in the Korean War. From the 1960's through the 1990's Canada was not involved in any combat operations, but became known as a very active peacekeeping force within the UN, present in many war zones around the world. More recently, Canada has become involved in the war in Afghanistan, once again taking an active combat role.

In addition to my own pictures, in this post I will be using some pictures made available through the Canada Remembers project for the purpose of education and sharing with others. Pictures that came from the website will be identified as such.

Courtesy of Veterans Affairs Canada

Canada’s symbol for Remembrance Day is the poppy, worn pinned to the lapel. The poppy is a reference to World War I and “In Flanders Fields”, a poem written by Canadian battlefield surgeon Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae. He wrote the poem in 1915 at the battle of Ypres, an area commonly known as Flanders. McCrae noted that wild poppies had already started to grow among the newly buried graves of the dead from that battle. Later that year, the poem was published in a British journal and gained instant attention. McCrae died of pneumonia in a military hospital in 1918. Starting in 1922, the Royal Canadian Legion started the poppy campaign to raise money for the legion and Canadian veterans. A major part of this that has kept up to this day is the sale of poppy pins to affix to the lapel, traditionally worn over the heart.



I have a special connection to John McCrae. My hometown is Guelph, Ontario - the same place where McCrae was born and raised. His home is currently a museum, the McCrae House at 108 Water St., Guelph, affiliated with the Guelph Civic Museum. The McCrae House features memorabilia personal to McCrae and general war-related items. For three years of elementary school, I attended John McCrae Public School, located 2 blocks from the McCrae house. For remembrance day, the students would go to the McCrae House and take part in the ceremonies held there. We all memorized “In Flanders Fields”, which is recited at many Canadian remembrance day ceremonies.

Courtesy of Veterans Affairs Canada

Today I attended the remembrance day ceremony held on the grounds of McGill University in Montreal. Normally, such services are held at the city’s war memorial, known as the cenotaph. Currently, the park where it is located, Place Du Canada, is being renovated, so the ceremonies are being held on the McGill campus, inside the main gates known as the Roddick Gates. In a way, it is very appropriate, as John McCrae studied and later taught medicine at McGill before joining the army upon the outbreak of World War I. The ceremonies always occur in the late morning, leading up to the official commemoration of the end of the war at 11am, when a minute of silence is observed. Shots were fired, and many veterans and other dignitaries laid wreaths in front of a large cross erected to stand in for a cenotaph, where wreaths are usually laid on Remembrance Day. The event was quite well attended with a good mix of military veterans in uniform and civilians of all ages. There were school groups and a large number of young people - most likely university students as this was taking place on the McGill campus. With the size of the venue and number of people present it was hard to get good photos but I was able to get a few decent shots.





For more information about the role played by Canada’s military and more about John McCrae, visit the department of Veteran’s Affairs Canada at
http://www.vac-acc.gc.ca

Finally, I personally would like to thank the veterans and those who died serving our country. For those of you from other countries who may have served in your own nation’s military, I would like to extend my respect and admiration for the sacrifice you have made.

Courtesy of Veterans Affairs Canada

In closing, I present the full text of “In Flanders Fields”

In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved, and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders Fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders Fields.

- John McCrae

Restaurant Review - Ferreira Cafe

I realize that when I wrote restaurant reviews from my trip to Washington they were very well received and I enjoyed them as well. Up until now I have not done any reviews of restaurants in my home of Montreal. The reason is that, since I do not reveal my real name and I work in the industry, the reader would have no way of knowing whether I am actually promoting the restaurant I work for. However, there are so many wonderful restaurants here that I would like to share my opinions. Since I have no plans at present to disclose where I am actually working I have decided on the following protocol: I will not review any restaurant where I currently work or have worked in the past. With that out of the way, I will move on with my first review.


View Larger Map
This week, my mom was in town for a visit and we ate at Café Ferreira, an upscale Portuguese restaurant on Peel Street in downtown Montreal. I had eaten at Ferreira once before I moved to Montreal, five years ago. I was very impressed then, though I don’t fully remember what I ate, just that it was beautifully prepared and very busy (I had to have my meal at the bar).

Five years later, they are still packed pretty much all the time. We went on a Wednesday night, typically not a very busy night and they had no tables available (we did not have a reservation) and like the last time, they had space at the bar. I was skeptical about not having any tables as the restaurants was only about half full when we arrived, at about 6. However, within 20 minutes every single seat was full and shortly after that, all the seats at the bar were also occupied by diners (good thing we came early). Obviously reservations are a must just about any time.

The menu emphasizes fish and seafood, though apparently the chef is also renowned for his skill with grilled and roasted meats as well. I began with pan seared octopus with potato puree and my mom had the caldo verde, a traditional Portuguese kale soup. The octopus was perfectly cooked and amazingly tender, even the smaller thinner pieces of tentacles, a sign of great skill as octopus becomes tough and rubbery if even slightly overcooked. The potato puree had bits of cilantro inside, which served as a form of palate cleanser. Unfortunately the potato came out cold. I believe it was intended to be served warm rather than hot, but as we did have a bit of a wait, it may have been sitting a while. The soup was very nice, but the star of that dish was the small amount of Portuguese sausage that garnished the soup. Not sure if it was chorizo or linguica or some other sausage (I’m not as familiar with the different sausages as I should be) but the depth of flavour was amazing.

For mains, we both had fish and we both shared each dish. The two items we ordered were salt cod with caramelized onions and potato puree, and fresh black cod with porcini mushrooms and a port reduction. Black cod is also sometimes known by the names of Butterfish or Sablefish; it is very common in the Pacific Northwest. I was obviously inspired to try the salt cod because of my recent experiments with cooking it myself, about which I posted. The salt cod was prepared beautifully, with no discernable saltiness remaining. The fish, onions, potatoes and a light tomato sauce on top contributed to making a very comforting dish. A few olives of garnish added a little saltiness back in the dish, which I felt was a good choice. But the black cod was probably the better dish, as it was phenomenal. The cod was perfectly cooked, moist and almost creamy inside. The porcini mushrooms were a perfect match with the mild cod and the port sauce tied everything together. One note - my mother was not quite as impressed with the salt cod as I was, but primarily because she began by tasting the black cod dish, which was a much stronger flavour, while I did the opposite.

For dessert, I chose a warm fig tart with sweet potato ice cream and my mom had an almond tart with pear sorbet (it was listed on the menu as a poached pear). We also each had a glass of tawny port with dessert. The fig tart was amazing, with an intense taste of figs, and it also had some very tasty slices of dried fig with it. The ice cream was very good and complemented the tart. The almond tart was very good, though the pear sorbet could have had a more intense flavour.

The service was very pleasant, especially considering we were waited on by the bartender, who was obviously quite busy running the bar as well as serving all the dining customers at the bar. We did have to wait a while between courses, to the point where it became very noticeable. Still it was a very busy night, so the kitchen probably was somewhat backed up. At least the quality remained good.

One warning about this restaurant. Be prepared to drop quite a lot of money - the prices are very high. Most of the main courses are over $30CAD with some dishes over $40. I can understand why however. They use high end ingredients and where they don’t - as in the salt cod dish - the price is substantially lower. Also the portions are generous, so they are not gouging you with those high prices - it is simply what it costs to get this much food of this caliber. The wine list offers primarily Portuguese wines with several available by the glass. The wines can also get expensive but I find this is the case many places in Montreal. They are also open for lunch Monday to Friday and have a late night menu as well. Despite a few small mistakes, I very highly recommend this restaurant - if you can afford it.