How Do You Eat Spaghetti?



K

Kate Connally

Guest
Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>
> On Sun 26 Jun 2005 09:21:11p, Damsel wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>
> > When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4 inches
> > square on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta inside was folded
> > in half, so you were talking strands at least 5-1/2 feet long. One or
> > two were all that a fork could hold.
> >
> > We twirled the cooked pasta by holding the tines of our forks against a
> > soup spoon and twirling.
> >
> > I die inside, just a little, when I see someone chop their spaghetti
> > into little pieces. Never could get the hang of twirling against the
> > plate.
> >
> > How do *you* get 'sketti from the plate to your mouth?
> >
> > Carol
> >

>
> Like you, fork against spoon.


I'v never understood why some people feel the necessity
of a spoon. I have no trouble twirling against the plate.

Kate
 
K

Kate Connally

Guest
Damsel wrote:
>
> When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4 inches square
> on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta inside was folded in half,
> so you were talking strands at least 5-1/2 feet long. One or two were all
> that a fork could hold.


Good grief! How did you get them into the pot to
cook them if they were that long? Even folded in half
they'd be too big for any pot I've ever seen.

I've been around over 50 years and I've never come across
spaghetti that was more than about a foot long. Even
foot-long spaghetti is tough to get under the water all
at once, so I can't even begin to see how people would
manage anything longer. I suspect it was meant to be
broken into more manageable lengths when put in the
pot.

Kate
 
J

JimLane

Guest
sf wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 23:21:11 -0500, Damsel wrote:
>
>
>> We twirled the cooked pasta by holding the tines of our forks against a
>> soup spoon and twirling.
>>
>> I die inside, just a little, when I see someone chop their spaghetti into
>> little pieces. Never could get the hang of twirling against the plate.
>>
>> How do *you* get 'sketti from the plate to your mouth?

>
>
> I twirl it against the plate - spoons are for sissies.
>
> There are two things I NEVER order in a restaurant:
> spaghetti of any kind and chicken with bones in it.



No chicken with bones, but ribs with bones? DISCRIMINATION! ;->


jim
 
J

Joseph Littleshoes

Guest
Damsel wrote:

> Joseph Littleshoes <[email protected]> said:
>
> > Damsel wrote:
> >
> > One can of course use the electrical spaghetti fork, the battery
> > operated, pasta tool. That twirls the pasta for you.

>
> There actually exists a gadget like that?? Some people have too much
> time
> on their hands.


Yep, you can order them through "finger hut" type mail order places. I
have never tried one and cant say how well it works, but if its anything
like my battery operated martini stirer (an electric swizzle stick) it
probly is not really usefull.

> > > I still wind up with stray strands of pasta
> > > getting involved with the ones I started out with. :(

> >
> > There are different forms or shapes of pasta.
> >
> > One need not feed exclusively on "spaghetti".

>
> But, but, but ... I *want* spaghetti!


When it comes to commercal pasta i prefere a noodle rather than a
spaghetti. When i make my own pasta i tend to cut it thicker & wider
than comercial thus making it easy to 'spear', or otherwise anchor on
the fork for ease of conveyance from plate to mouth. For that matter i
am more likely to purchase fettuchini than i am spaghetti for no better
reason than ease of eating.

I like to use a vinegrette to dress pasta which make it more slippery
than a thick cream or tomato sauce.


---
JL
 
C

Charlie

Guest
Damsel wrote:
> When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4 inches square
> on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta inside was folded in half,
> so you were talking strands at least 5-1/2 feet long. One or two were all
> that a fork could hold.
>
> We twirled the cooked pasta by holding the tines of our forks against a
> soup spoon and twirling.
>
> I die inside, just a little, when I see someone chop their spaghetti into
> little pieces. Never could get the hang of twirling against the plate.
>
> How do *you* get 'sketti from the plate to your mouth?
>
> Carol
>

I keep waiting for wise acher to say something like they eat it in a
similar way the orientals eat soup... they put the plate up to their
mouth and using short quick strokes they just continuously shove it in. :)
 
J

Joseph Littleshoes

Guest
Kate Connally wrote:

> Damsel wrote:
> >
> > When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4 inches

> square
> > on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta inside was folded in

> half,
> > so you were talking strands at least 5-1/2 feet long. One or two

> were all
> > that a fork could hold.

>
> Good grief! How did you get them into the pot to
> cook them if they were that long? Even folded in half
> they'd be too big for any pot I've ever seen.


Our local Italian deli sells them, one is even a thin tubular, hollow
spaghetti, not a cannelloni but a long tubular spaghetti. it also sells
regular solid spaghetti in those lengths that are meant to be broken up,
but can be cooked whole in a tall stock pot. But even when cooked and
served whole are usually served with a carving knife and the pasta is
cut up into manageable pieces as it is served.

>
>
> I've been around over 50 years and I've never come across
> spaghetti that was more than about a foot long.


The Chinese method of making long spaghetti like noodles produces 4 - 5
foot long strands.

> Even
> foot-long spaghetti is tough to get under the water all
> at once, so I can't even begin to see how people would
> manage anything longer. I suspect it was meant to be
> broken into more manageable lengths when put in the
> pot.


That is how it is most often cooked but it can be cooked whole in a tall
pot. It quickly softens and folds itself into the water. I have done
so as a kind of practical joke on people. 1 whole strands can be laid on
a plate and look like a ordinary dish of pasta till the person tries to
eat it and they find it is one long strand. Most people figure out very
quickly to cut up the pasta into manageable bites but i have seen people
struggle with it for several minutes, wrapping the whole thing up on a
fork till they have a big unwieldy ball of pasta on their fork.

The long pasta is probly the basis of the 2 people eating the same
strand of spaghetti cliché like the scene in the Disney movie "Lady and
the tramp".
---
Joseph Littleshoes
 
J

Joseph Littleshoes

Guest
Kate Connally wrote:

> Damsel wrote:
> >
> > When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4 inches

> square
> > on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta inside was folded in

> half,
> > so you were talking strands at least 5-1/2 feet long. One or two

> were all
> > that a fork could hold.

>
> Good grief! How did you get them into the pot to
> cook them if they were that long? Even folded in half
> they'd be too big for any pot I've ever seen.


Our local Italian deli sells them, one is even a thin tubular, hollow
spaghetti, not a cannelloni but a long tubular spaghetti. it also sells
regular solid spaghetti in those lengths that are meant to be broken up,
but can be cooked whole in a tall stock pot. But even when cooked and
served whole are usually served with a carving knife and the pasta is
cut up into manageable pieces as it is served.

>
>
> I've been around over 50 years and I've never come across
> spaghetti that was more than about a foot long.


The Chinese method of making long spaghetti like noodles produces 4 - 5
foot long strands.

> Even
> foot-long spaghetti is tough to get under the water all
> at once, so I can't even begin to see how people would
> manage anything longer. I suspect it was meant to be
> broken into more manageable lengths when put in the
> pot.


That is how it is most often cooked but it can be cooked whole in a tall
pot. It quickly softens and folds itself into the water. I have done
so as a kind of practical joke on people. 1 whole strands can be laid on
a plate and look like a ordinary dish of pasta till the person tries to
eat it and they find it is one long strand. Most people figure out very
quickly to cut up the pasta into manageable bites but i have seen people
struggle with it for several minutes, wrapping the whole thing up on a
fork till they have a big unwieldy ball of pasta on their fork.

The long pasta is probly the basis of the 2 people eating the same
strand of spaghetti cliché like the scene in the Disney movie "Lady and
the tramp".
---
Joseph Littleshoes
 
W

Wayne Boatwright

Guest
On Mon 27 Jun 2005 12:04:53p, Kate Connally wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>
>> On Sun 26 Jun 2005 09:21:11p, Damsel wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>
>> > When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4 inches
>> > square on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta inside was
>> > folded in half, so you were talking strands at least 5-1/2 feet long.
>> > One or two were all that a fork could hold.
>> >
>> > We twirled the cooked pasta by holding the tines of our forks against
>> > a soup spoon and twirling.
>> >
>> > I die inside, just a little, when I see someone chop their spaghetti
>> > into little pieces. Never could get the hang of twirling against the
>> > plate.
>> >
>> > How do *you* get 'sketti from the plate to your mouth?
>> >
>> > Carol
>> >

>>
>> Like you, fork against spoon.

>
> I'v never understood why some people feel the necessity
> of a spoon. I have no trouble twirling against the plate.
>
> Kate
>


Because I do have trouble twirling against the plate. If you had the same
trouble, you'd understand.

--
Wayne Boatwright Õ¿Õ¬
____________________________________________

Give me a smart idiot over a stupid genius any day.
Sam Goldwyn, 1882-1974
 
W

Wayne Boatwright

Guest
On Mon 27 Jun 2005 12:04:53p, Kate Connally wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>
>> On Sun 26 Jun 2005 09:21:11p, Damsel wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>
>> > When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4 inches
>> > square on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta inside was
>> > folded in half, so you were talking strands at least 5-1/2 feet long.
>> > One or two were all that a fork could hold.
>> >
>> > We twirled the cooked pasta by holding the tines of our forks against
>> > a soup spoon and twirling.
>> >
>> > I die inside, just a little, when I see someone chop their spaghetti
>> > into little pieces. Never could get the hang of twirling against the
>> > plate.
>> >
>> > How do *you* get 'sketti from the plate to your mouth?
>> >
>> > Carol
>> >

>>
>> Like you, fork against spoon.

>
> I'v never understood why some people feel the necessity
> of a spoon. I have no trouble twirling against the plate.
>
> Kate
>


Because I do have trouble twirling against the plate. If you had the same
trouble, you'd understand.

--
Wayne Boatwright Õ¿Õ¬
____________________________________________

Give me a smart idiot over a stupid genius any day.
Sam Goldwyn, 1882-1974
 
O

Ophelia

Guest
"Wayne Boatwright" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> On Mon 27 Jun 2005 12:04:53p, Kate Connally wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>
>> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun 26 Jun 2005 09:21:11p, Damsel wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>>
>>> > When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4
>>> > inches
>>> > square on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta inside was
>>> > folded in half, so you were talking strands at least 5-1/2 feet
>>> > long.
>>> > One or two were all that a fork could hold.
>>> >
>>> > We twirled the cooked pasta by holding the tines of our forks
>>> > against
>>> > a soup spoon and twirling.
>>> >
>>> > I die inside, just a little, when I see someone chop their
>>> > spaghetti
>>> > into little pieces. Never could get the hang of twirling against
>>> > the
>>> > plate.
>>> >
>>> > How do *you* get 'sketti from the plate to your mouth?
>>> >
>>> > Carol
>>> >
>>>
>>> Like you, fork against spoon.

>>
>> I'v never understood why some people feel the necessity
>> of a spoon. I have no trouble twirling against the plate.
>>
>> Kate
>>

>
> Because I do have trouble twirling against the plate. If you had the
> same
> trouble, you'd understand.


... and why is that a problem! Some to the spoon, some to the plate...
it all gets in the same place:))
 
W

Wayne Boatwright

Guest
On Mon 27 Jun 2005 01:16:55p, Ophelia wrote in rec.food.cooking:

>
> "Wayne Boatwright" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> On Mon 27 Jun 2005 12:04:53p, Kate Connally wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>
>>> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sun 26 Jun 2005 09:21:11p, Damsel wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>>>
>>>> > When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4
>>>> > inches square on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta
>>>> > inside was folded in half, so you were talking strands at least
>>>> > 5-1/2 feet long.
>>>> > One or two were all that a fork could hold.
>>>> >
>>>> > We twirled the cooked pasta by holding the tines of our forks
>>>> > against a soup spoon and twirling.
>>>> >
>>>> > I die inside, just a little, when I see someone chop their
>>>> > spaghetti into little pieces. Never could get the hang of
>>>> > twirling against the plate.
>>>> >
>>>> > How do *you* get 'sketti from the plate to your mouth?
>>>> >
>>>> > Carol
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> Like you, fork against spoon.
>>>
>>> I'v never understood why some people feel the necessity
>>> of a spoon. I have no trouble twirling against the plate.
>>>
>>> Kate
>>>

>>
>> Because I do have trouble twirling against the plate. If you had the
>> same trouble, you'd understand.

>
> .. and why is that a problem! Some to the spoon, some to the plate...
> it all gets in the same place:))


It takes too long1 :)


--
Wayne Boatwright Õ¿Õ¬
____________________________________________

Give me a smart idiot over a stupid genius any day.
Sam Goldwyn, 1882-1974
 
O

Ophelia

Guest
"Wayne Boatwright" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> On Mon 27 Jun 2005 01:16:55p, Ophelia wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>
>>
>> "Wayne Boatwright" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:Xns[email protected]
>>> On Mon 27 Jun 2005 12:04:53p, Kate Connally wrote in
>>> rec.food.cooking:
>>>
>>>> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun 26 Jun 2005 09:21:11p, Damsel wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>>>>
>>>>> > When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4
>>>>> > inches square on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta
>>>>> > inside was folded in half, so you were talking strands at least
>>>>> > 5-1/2 feet long.
>>>>> > One or two were all that a fork could hold.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > We twirled the cooked pasta by holding the tines of our forks
>>>>> > against a soup spoon and twirling.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I die inside, just a little, when I see someone chop their
>>>>> > spaghetti into little pieces. Never could get the hang of
>>>>> > twirling against the plate.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > How do *you* get 'sketti from the plate to your mouth?
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Carol
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>> Like you, fork against spoon.
>>>>
>>>> I'v never understood why some people feel the necessity
>>>> of a spoon. I have no trouble twirling against the plate.
>>>>
>>>> Kate
>>>>
>>>
>>> Because I do have trouble twirling against the plate. If you had
>>> the
>>> same trouble, you'd understand.

>>
>> .. and why is that a problem! Some to the spoon, some to the
>> plate...
>> it all gets in the same place:))

>
> It takes too long1 :)


wot? When it is only 1 foot long:)))))))))))

But you manage with a spoon yes? :))
 
N

Nexis

Guest
"Damsel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4 inches
> square
> on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta inside was folded in half,
> so you were talking strands at least 5-1/2 feet long. One or two were all
> that a fork could hold.
>
> We twirled the cooked pasta by holding the tines of our forks against a
> soup spoon and twirling.
>
> I die inside, just a little, when I see someone chop their spaghetti into
> little pieces. Never could get the hang of twirling against the plate.
>
> How do *you* get 'sketti from the plate to your mouth?
>
> Carol



It depends on who's watching! lol
If I'm in a restaurant, I twirl against a spoon or the dish it's served in.
If I'm at home, sometimes I twirl, sometimes I only twirl it enough to get
it on the fork so it won't fall off, and slurp up the ends. The kids relax
and have fun and everyone gets a little messy, but it's good!
When I first read your subject line, I was thinking it would be about the
sauce and degrees of noodle done-ness and such hehe.

kimberly
 
W

Wayne Boatwright

Guest
On Mon 27 Jun 2005 01:38:24p, Ophelia wrote in rec.food.cooking:

>
> "Wayne Boatwright" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> On Mon 27 Jun 2005 01:16:55p, Ophelia wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>
>>>
>>> "Wayne Boatwright" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]
>>>> On Mon 27 Jun 2005 12:04:53p, Kate Connally wrote in
>>>> rec.food.cooking:
>>>>
>>>>> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun 26 Jun 2005 09:21:11p, Damsel wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4
>>>>>> > inches square on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta
>>>>>> > inside was folded in half, so you were talking strands at least
>>>>>> > 5-1/2 feet long.
>>>>>> > One or two were all that a fork could hold.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > We twirled the cooked pasta by holding the tines of our forks
>>>>>> > against a soup spoon and twirling.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I die inside, just a little, when I see someone chop their
>>>>>> > spaghetti into little pieces. Never could get the hang of
>>>>>> > twirling against the plate.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > How do *you* get 'sketti from the plate to your mouth?
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Carol
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Like you, fork against spoon.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'v never understood why some people feel the necessity
>>>>> of a spoon. I have no trouble twirling against the plate.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kate
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Because I do have trouble twirling against the plate. If you had
>>>> the same trouble, you'd understand.
>>>
>>> .. and why is that a problem! Some to the spoon, some to the
>>> plate... it all gets in the same place:))

>>
>> It takes too long1 :)

>
> wot? When it is only 1 foot long:)))))))))))
>
> But you manage with a spoon yes? :))


LOL! Yes, no problem using the fork with a spoon. Nicely done and neatly
eaten.

--
Wayne Boatwright Õ¿Õ¬
____________________________________________

Give me a smart idiot over a stupid genius any day.
Sam Goldwyn, 1882-1974
 
T

The Joneses

Guest
Damsel wrote:

> Joseph Littleshoes <[email protected]> said:
>
> > Damsel wrote:
> >
> > One can of course use the electrical spaghetti fork, the battery
> > operated, pasta tool. That twirls the pasta for you.

>
> There actually exists a gadget like that?? Some people have too much time
> on their hands.
> > > I still wind up with stray strands of pasta
> > > getting involved with the ones I started out with. :(

> > There are different forms or shapes of pasta.
> > One need not feed exclusively on "spaghetti".

> But, but, but ... I *want* spaghetti!
> Carol


Shhhhh, don't tell my DH's Italian relatives - I break the speghetti one
normally gets in the grocery in half. fits better in the pots I gots. And one
doesn't waste one's precious energy twirlin'. Makes for smaller bites.
Edrena
 
D

Damsel

Guest
"Gabby" <[email protected]> said:

> "Damsel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> > When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4 inches
> > square
> > on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta inside was folded in half,
> > so you were talking strands at least 5-1/2 feet long. One or two were all
> > that a fork could hold.

>
> I remember the spaghetti folded in half so that they looked like giant U's,
> but no box we bought was as long as you describe -- perhaps 12" at most so
> the spaghetti that finally made it into the pot unbroken would have been at
> most 24" long. Your brand may well have been different.


I started thinking after I posted. The boxes were more like 2" in length.
Otherwise, they never would have fit in the cupboard. The boxes were kept
in a lower cabinet, and filled it from front to back. When you're a kid,
everything seems larger than life. :)

Carol

--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon
 
D

Damsel

Guest
sf <[email protected]> said:

> On 27 Jun 2005 01:38:02 -0500, Bob wrote:
>
> > I twirl against the plate. This generally results in a ball of pasta
> > roughly the size of a tennis ball stuck on the end of the fork.

>
> Jeeze, Bob... keep it to 3-4 strands! Plunging your fork into the
> middle of the spaghetti and twirling will always end up in a tennis
> ball sized mass.


Same thing happens to me when I try to twirl against the plate. Even
though I'm over on the side, strands from the main group keep jumping into
the fork and making a pasta tennis ball.

Carol

--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon
 
D

Damsel

Guest
"Shaun aRe" <[email protected]> said:

> It just sorta leaps up at me since I'm so attractive ',;~}~


"Sketti-Face! Sketti-Face! Sketti-Face!"

Carol

--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon
 
W

Wayne Boatwright

Guest
On Mon 27 Jun 2005 01:51:37p, Damsel wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> "Gabby" <[email protected]> said:
>
>> "Damsel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]
>> > When I was a kid, we got boxes of spaghetti that were about 4 inches
>> > square on the ends, and around 3 feet long. The pasta inside was
>> > folded in half, so you were talking strands at least 5-1/2 feet long.
>> > One or two were all that a fork could hold.

>>
>> I remember the spaghetti folded in half so that they looked like giant
>> U's, but no box we bought was as long as you describe -- perhaps 12" at
>> most so the spaghetti that finally made it into the pot unbroken would
>> have been at most 24" long. Your brand may well have been different.

>
> I started thinking after I posted. The boxes were more like 2" in
> length. Otherwise, they never would have fit in the cupboard. The boxes
> were kept in a lower cabinet, and filled it from front to back. When
> you're a kid, everything seems larger than life. :)


Everything? :)

--
Wayne Boatwright Õ¿Õ¬
____________________________________________

Give me a smart idiot over a stupid genius any day.
Sam Goldwyn, 1882-1974
 
S

Sheldon

Guest
Damsel wrote:
> "Bob" said:
>
> > I twirl against the plate.


> I've tried that, but I still wind up with stray strands of pasta getting
> involved with the ones I started out with. :(


I'm a twirler, but I twirl against the palate, and no forkin'... get my
face right down close to your steamy hot 'sketti mound and pull a
serious lip vacuum while twirling with my talented tongue....
slurp-slurp, faster and faster, non stop until your plate is squeaky
clean. And then ya do the hot sauce-seege! ;)

Sheldon