Author: Michele Minehart (Page 269 of 311)

it’s not so much a block of writing, or blogging, but just a general lack of anything interesting, which is a shame. i’m pretty sure that until this morning i hadn’t left the house since thursday night. really. at least 2 of those days, i never got dressed.

in some ways, i revel in the the nothingness. jj and i played some wii, i did a lot of catching up with facebook, and had some nap therapy. cooked a little bit, read a little bit, and drank more coffee than i probably should have. but those are all good things.

typically, such slowing down actually incites random thoughts of the blogworthy sort, but not really recently. i think the lack of interaction and meaningful discussion with friends or the like has kind of dulled my brain. that, or the lack of KLM couch & wine time. when you spend your days concerned over incoming teeth or nap schedules, you kind of forget to ponder the world’s perils. i really do miss having a job that requires thinking about “bigger things”. today my biggest thought was an annoyance at a guy trying to pass a drug screen who turned in a cold sample. seriously. you couldn’t even heat it up first?

i have been reading a bit more of Anne Lamott. i’ve developed a firm conviction that everyone should read at least one author that they don’t always agree with but can respect. Lamott is that to me. I love her style, her honesty, and many of the times, her views on the world. Sure, there’s lots of the practical side of her theology that i don’t get behind, but her heart is pure and i’m developing an appreciation for hearing a different type of story.

so, that’s the explanation for the dull posts as of late. if you’d like to contribute to the cure, you’ll just have to invite me for coffee and see where the conversation goes. then maybe i’ll be on a creative streak again.

i don’t know how i ever lucked out to get such a fab husband. i know, there’s been a lot of hubby bragging as of late, but it’s just going to continue on. tonight the honors are bestowed because of a delish dish he *insisted* upon trying from our exceptionally old issue of bon appetit. he loves himself a steak and will find any excuse to consume one… he happened upon a recipe and “needed” to try it. i was slightly less than excited.

but, when i’m wrong i’ll say it – and i was wrong. it was mostly a fear about so many strong flavors coming together on a singular slab of meat. i’m a person who likes to let one thing shine. jj, on the other hand, firmly believes that if you have 2 good things, if you add them both, it equals “better.” it’s good to know that neither of us is correct 100% of the time.

so our dish: steak with parmesan butter, balsamic glaze and arugula (we served it sans arugula).
“simple and sophisiticated” BA says (october, 2008 issue, page 53)
2 tbsp grated Parmesan cheese (if you use it from a green can and then claim this recipe sucks, i’ll personally slice off your 4th toe)
1.5 tbsp butter
1 12-oz rib eye steak (we did 2 steaks that equaled 16 oz)
1 tsp olive oil
1/4 cup balsamic vinegar
1/4 cup finely chopped shallots (thanks to google, i found that you can do a 2-part onion // 1 part garlic substitute because we do not possess a shallot)
1/2 tsp brown sugar

Mix grated cheese and butter i small owl. Season generously with salt and pepper; set aside. Sprinkle steak generously with salt and pepper. Heat oil in medium skillet over medium-high heat. Add steak; cook to desired doneness, about 4 minutes per side for medium rare. Transfer to plate. Add vinegar, shallots and sugar to skillet; boil until reduced to glaze, stirring constantly, about 1 minute. [the directions say to plate your 4 cups arugula and squeeze a lemon wedge over each plate. we omitted.] Top steak with parmesean butter. Drizzle slightly with glaze.

We served with my classy contribution of a twice baked potatoes. clearly arugula would be the bon appetit vegetable of choice.

what i loved was that the steak took no more than 20 minutes to prepare, and other than the shallots, which we substituted, we had everything on hand. we scratched the arugula because we’re newer to the good food thing and just can’t handle steak on a salad yet. someday… maybe that will make The List for 2011.

this evening’s dinner prompted me to consider to ponder the idea that good stuff is made of good stuff. i’m positive parm cheese from a green can would ruin the dish. i read a wonderful book, a homemade life (previously mentioned) and i frequently read her suggestions of best products to use in particular recipes. she always went for a real chocolate – not nestles. her husband was a connesseaur of vingear. vinegar!?! who knew there were people who had vinegarian preferences? but when they wanted something to be a class act, they didn’t use the meijer generic.

now, i’m a huge proponent of generic in many different things… but i have decided that cheapest is not always best, and there may be areas of my culinary life where i can begin to upgrade. i’m going to start with cheese (thus us having real parm on hand). wizenburg (author, above) is always adding a cheese here or there and it’s rarely “mild cheddar”. so each week my eyes have grazed the cheese counter of meijer, hoping a new gouda will be on sale. then i just need to find a way to consume it… perhaps these old issues of bon appetit will come to my rescue again.

i was in awe yesterday of the amazing advertising blitz for weight watchers, home gyms and diet pills, knowing that this is probably their “busy season.” everyone knows that jan 2 is the WORST time to try to get a treadmill at ping or the local gym. the resolutions abound and now i’m stuck doing those despised lunges until someone gets done with their 2 miles.

even more so, the products that offer the quick and easy fix catch my eye. we humans are silly, really. time and time again we learn that there’s no quick and easy fix that gives lasting and fulfilling results. but yet we try.

i was reading this morning in the story of 1 Samuel, the rise of king saul (israel’s first attempt at a king). there’s lots of background to the story that i’m sure i’m not aware, but the speech by samuel in chap 12 (13-15) caught my attention:
“So here’s the king you wanted, the king you asked for. God has let you have your own way, given you a king. If you fear God, worship and obey him, and don’t rebel against what he tells you. If both you and your king follow God, no problem. God will be sure to save you. but if you don’t obey him and rebel against what he tells you, king or no king, you will fare no better than your fathers.”

it might come off sounding like God is only for you if you do what He wants (“dance monkey!”), but really that’s not the heart of the matter that i think sam is trying to get at. i think the israelites wanted a quick fix and since all the other local tribes had kings, they wanted one too (i’d love to know other background on their desire for a king… i’ve read the chapter, but i have a feeling there’s more under the surface).

obedience is hard. doing the right thing can be hard. things like patience and peace and love for enemies don’t just naturally flow without some help. so i think the israelites are not unlike my dieting, ping-hogging friends after the new year: wanting somewhat immediate results in areas that require, as Nietzsche (i think? according to my googling i am correct) puts, a long obedience in the same direction. in other words, sure you can have a king, but if you don’t do the work of living as God has called you, you’re not going to see any different results.

i just recently posted some thoughts on pre-marriage counseling (or the lack thereof) and recieved some validating feedback, which made me feel on to something. then i got a comment from a woman who i deeply respect and has been married for more years than myself and all other commenters combined. she said (i’m paraphrasing) that it’s living a life of faith in God that keeps your marriage healthy, not a bunch of questions asked before you say i do.

i can agree with her. i’ll stand by my appeal for better pre-marriage counseling, and even marriage counseling that happens before you get to the marriage counseling you do right before you give up. i do believe that if marriage is an institution of God, then the people of God should be doing a lot more to protect and preserve it. we get all bent out of shape about homosexual marriage potentially “ruining” the image of marriage as God created… personally i think all the unhappy and discarded marriages of straight people wrecks a bit more havoc in that area… *end of soapbox*.

but back to original thoughts. i do have to agree that if we treat pre-marital counseling like we do weight watchers, that by answering a few simple questions we’ll be guaranteed a happy marriage without the work and energy of living a life of love and faith, then we’ll be sorely disappointed. however, i stand by my original thoughts in saying that we should be offering tools to help things start – and stay – on the right foot. but no tool, no pill, no king, will ever replace the need to live each day in the pattern of goodness that God has set before us.