Below is an article I had written about a dish called Kentucky Burgoo:
KENTUCKY BURGOOUnbeknownst to me until recently, Kentucky Burgoo or simply, "Burgoo", is a spicy stew that is similar to Irish or Mulligan Stew and especially Bruinswick Stew. Burgoo is a communal dish that is usually served during a social event in both the American South and the Midwest. However, it is believe that the dish first made its American appearance in the state of Kentucky.It is believed by many that Burgoo first originated in Europe - specifically France and Belgium. The name "burgoo" came from a mispronunciation of the French word "burgout", which is a kind of gruel; or perhaps it came from "ragout, which is a spicy vegetable/meat stew. I suspect that a ragout is more similar to the description of Kentucky Burgoo. It is also believed that a man named Colonel Gus Jaubart introduced the dish to the citizens of Kentucky around 1810, eight years after it became a state. Jaubart's Burgoo was a version of a stew - possibly a ragout - that was fed to French sailors at sea.However, the late Kentucky historian, Thomas D. Clark believed that Burgoo may have originated in the Appalachian region of late 18th century or early 19th century Virginia, where Brunswick Stew was popular. According to Clark, hunters would count their day's kill and cook it in a stew or soup with vegetables and highly seasoned spices. There are some who believe that Clark may have been referring to what was known as an "Appalachian Hunter's Stew" or the "Daniel Boone Stew".Below is a recipe for Kentucky Burgoo from the Simplyrecipe.com website:Kentucky BurgooIngredients3 tablespoons vegetable oil3-4 pounds pork shoulder or country ribs, cut into large pieces (3 to 4 inches wide)2-3 pounds chuck roast, stew meat, or other inexpensive cut of beef, cut into large pieces (3 to 4 inches wide)3-5 chicken legs or thighs (bone-in)1 green pepper, chopped1 large onion, chopped2 carrots, chopped2 celery ribs, chopped5 garlic cloves, chopped1 quart chicken stock or broth1 quart beef stock or broth1 28-ounce can of crushed tomatoes2 large potatoes (we used russets)1 bag of frozen corn (about a pound)1 bag of frozen lima beans (about 14 ounces)Salt and pepper4-8 tablespoons Worcestershire sauceTabasco or other hot sauce on the sidePreparationHeat vegetable oil on medium-high heat in a large soup pot (at least 8 quart size). Salt the meats well on all sides. When the oil is shimmering hot, working in batches brown all the meats. Do not crowd the pan or the meat will steam and not brown well. Do not move the meat while browning a side. Let the meat pieces get well seared. Remove the browned meats to a bowl.Add the onions, carrots, celery and green pepper to the pot and brown them. If necessary, add a little more oil to the pot. After a few minutes of cooking, sprinkle salt over the vegetables. When the vegetables are well browned, add the garlic and cook for 30 seconds more, until fragrant. Add back the meats, and the chicken and beef broths and the tomatoes, stir to combine. Bring to a simmer, cover, reduce the heat and simmer gently for 2 hours.Uncover and remove the meat pieces. Strip the chicken off the bone and discard skin if you want. Break the larger pieces of meat into smaller, more manageable pieces. The reason you did not do this at first is because the meats stay juicier when they cook in larger pieces. Return all the meat pieces to the pot and bring it up to a strong simmer.Peel and cut the potatoes into chunks about the same size as the meat pieces (if using new potatoes, you can skip the peeling, but russets you'll want to peel). Add them to the stew and cook them until they are done, about 45 minutes. When the potatoes are done, add the Worcestershire sauce, mix well and taste for salt. Add more Worcestershire sauce to taste if needed.Add the corn and lima beans. Mix well and cook for at least 10 minutes, or longer if you would like. Here is the point where you decide whether you want a burgoo that’s been hammered into a thick mass or a stew with bright colors in it. It is your call.To serve, taste one more time for salt, and add either Worcestershire or salt if you want. Serve with crusty bread or cornbread and a bottle of hot sauce on the side.
Below is a small article about a dish that was created in the early 19th century called Chicken Marengo. The dish is associated with a battle fought during the Napoleonic Wars:
CHICKEN MARENGO
Chicken Marengo is a dish that is surrounded by a great deal of myth. The dish consisted of a chicken sautéed in oil with garlic and tomato, and garnished with fried eggs and crayfish. It is similar to Chicken à la Provençale, but with the addition of egg and crayfish. The latter ingredients are traditional to Chicken Marengo, but are now often omitted. The original dish was named to celebrate the Battle of Marengo, a Napoleonic victory that was fought on June 14, 1800.
According to popular myth, Chicken Marengo was first created after Napoleon Bonaparte defeated the Austrian army at the Battle of Marengo, south of Turin, Italy. His personal chef Dunand foraged in the town of Marengo for ingredients, because the supply wagons were too distant. Dunand created the dish from what he could gather. According to this story, Napoleon enjoyed the dish so much he had it served to him after every battle. When Durand received better supplies, later on; he substituted mushrooms for crayfish and added wine to the recipe. Napoleon refused to accept it, believing that a change would bring him bad luck.
This colorful story, however, has been proven to be a myth. Alan Davidson writes that there would be no access to tomatoes at that time, and the first published recipe for the dish omits them. Also, according to The Old Foodie blog, Dunand did not become Napoleon’s chef until after the event. And the dish was not mentioned in contemporary accounts or cookbooks until nearly two decades later.
Below is a recipe for "Chicken Marengo" from the Epicurious.com website:
Chicken Marengo
Ingredients
4 (6-ounce) skinless boneless chicken breast halves
1/4 cup all-purpose flour
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/4 teaspoon black pepper
1/4 cup extra-virgin olive oil
3 large portabella mushrooms, stems and gills discarded and caps thinly sliced
1 small shallot, finely chopped
1 garlic clove, minced
1/2 teaspoon dried thyme, crumbled
1/2 cup dry red wine
1 (14- to 15-ounce) can whole tomatoes, drained and chopped
1/2 cup beef or veal demi-glace*
1/2 cup water
Preparation
Put oven rack in middle position and preheat oven to 350°F.
Pat chicken dry, then combine flour, salt, and pepper in a large sealable plastic bag and add chicken. Seal bag and shake to coat, then remove chicken, knocking off excess flour. Arrange in one layer on a plate.
Heat oil in a 12-inch heavy ovenproof skillet over moderately high heat until hot but not smoking, then sauté chicken, smooth sides down, until golden, about 2 minutes. Turn over and sauté one minute more. Scatter mushrooms around chicken and transfer skillet to oven, then bake, uncovered, until chicken is just cooked through, five to ten minutes.
Transfer chicken to a plate, then add shallot, garlic, and thyme to skillet (handle will be hot) and sauté over moderately high heat, stirring, one minute. Add wine and boil, stirring and scraping up brown bits, until reduced by half, about 1 minute. Add tomatoes, demi-glace, and water and simmer until mushrooms are tender and sauce is reduced by half, about 4 minutes. Season with pepper.
Return chicken to skillet and simmer, turning, about one minute.
"THE COUNT OF MONTE CRISTO" (2002) ReviewLet me make something clear . . . I have never read the literary version of "THE COUNT OF MONTE CRISTO", written by Alexandre Dumas. I have seen three movie versions – including this latest one starring James Caviezel. But I have never read the novel. So, for me to compare the literary version to this movie would be irrelevant. In short, "THE COUNT OF MONTE CRISTO" is the story about a French sailor named Edmond Dantès (Caviezel), who finds himself a victim of French political machinations, thanks to the Emperor Napoleon, a jealous first mate named Danglars, his best friend Fernand Mondego (Guy Pearce) and an ambitious local magistrate named J.F. Villefort (James Frain). Edmond ends up on an island prison called Château d'If, where he meets a fellow prisoner, a priest and a former soldier in Napoleon's army named Abbé Faria (Richard Harris). Faria is killed in an accident after informing Edmond about a fabulous hidden treasure. After Edmond uses Faria’s death to escape from Château d'If, he befriends a smuggler and thief named Jacopo (Luis Guzmán). The two find the treasure that Faria had talked about and Edmond uses it to establish the persona of the Count of Monte Cristo. His aim? To avenge himself against those who had betrayed him – Danglars, Villefort, Mondego and his fiancée Mercédès Iguanada (Dagmara Dominczyk), who had married Mondego after his arrest.I have to give kudos to director Kevin Reynolds and screenwriter Jay Wolpert for creating a first-class adaptation of Dumas’ novel. From what I have read, it is not an exact adaptation of the novel. As if that was possible. Not that I care whether it was or not. I still enjoyed the movie. Despite some of the changes to the story, "THE COUNT OF MONTE CRISTO" still managed to retain its emotional ambiguity. Villains such as Villefort and especially Mondego are not as one-dimensional ‘bad’ or ‘evil’ as one might believe. The origin of Villefort came from his father’s ego-driven ambition. As for Mondego, his dislike and betrayal of Edmond had its roots in his own insecurity and bouts of self-hatred, despite his position as an aristocrat. As for Edmond, he becomes so blinded by his hatred and desire for revenge that his actions nearly ends in tragedy for Mercédès and her adolescent son, Albert (Henry Cavill) – the only innocents in this tale of betrayal and vengeance. The cast was first rate. James Caviezel gave a superb performance as Edmond Dantès, the naïve French sailor who becomes a wealthy man bent upon vengeance. Caviezel took Edmond’s character and emotional make-up all over the map without missing a beat. And Guy Pearce was equally superb as the villainous Fernand Mondego, an arrogant aristocrat whose own jealousy and bouts of self-loathing led him to betray the only friend he would ever have. James Frain gave a solid performance as the ambitious Villefort, whose greed allows Edmond takes advantage of in order to exact his revenge. And I could say the same for both Dagmara Dominczyk, who portrayed Mercédès Iguanada, Edmond’s charming fiancée who found herself stuck in a loveless marriage with Mondego due to certain circumstances; and Luis Guzmán’s portrayal as the wise and loyal Jacapo. Henry Cavill gave a solid performance as Edmund's guileless, yet emotional son who gets caught up in the crossfire between Edmund and Fernand. And the late Richard Harris managed to create great chemistry with Caviezel as Edmond’s wise mentor, Abbé Faria.Cinematographer Andrew Dunn and production designer Andrew Dunn did a great job of transforming locations in Ireland and the island of Malta into early 19th century France. And they were ably assisted by Tom Rand’s costume designs. Along with a first-rate cast, Kevin Reynolds’ competent direction and Jay Wolpert’s script, this version of "THE COUNT OF MONTE CRISTO" turned out to be an entertaining movie filled with exciting action, great drama and excellent storytelling. A first-rate movie all around.
Below is a look at the fictional heroes created by Jane Austen in the six published novels written by her. So, without further ado . . .
JANE AUSTEN'S HERO GALLERY
Edward Ferrars - "Sense and Sensibility" (1811)
Edward Ferrars does not seemed to be highly regarded by many Jane Austen fans or literary critics. People seemed to take this mild-mannered, unambitious young man for granted and in some cases, dismiss him as weak. Although mild-mannered, I would never regard Edward as weak. I found him stalwart and willing to take responsibility for the consequences of his actions . . . even if this trait nearly led him into matrimony with the manipulative Lucy Steele.
1. Robin Ellis (1971) - He gave a charming and solid performance as the likeable Edward. After many viewings, I even learned to tolerate the stuttering he used for portraying Edward. Ellis and actress Joanna David had a nice chemistry, but it did not exactly blow my mind.
2. Bosco Hogan (1981) - I must admit that I had originally found his performance in the 1981 miniseries as somewhat tepid. But on second viewing, I realized that I had underestimated him. Despite his low-key portrayal of Edward . . . or because of it, I detected some rather interesting moments in Hogan's performance in which he effectively conveyed Edward's emotional state, while trying to suppress it. I am impressed.
3. Hugh Grant (1995) - At first, I was not impressed by Grant's portrayal of Grant. But on later viewings, I noticed that he injected a good deal of charm and humor into his performance. And he had some pretty good lines in the movie's first half hour. More importantly, he had great chemistry with leading lady Emma Thompson.
4. Dan Stevens (2008) - He conveyed more emotion and charm into his performance than his predecessors and it worked for him. And like Grant before him, he had great chemistry with his leading lady Hattie Moran.
Colonel Christopher Brandon - "Sense and Sensibility" (1811)
There are some critics and fans who believe that the quiet and always loyal Colonel Brandon was wrong for the much younger Marianne Dashwood. Personally, I found him a major improvement over John Willoughby. And despite his quiet demeanor, he seemed to be just as emotional as she . . . but with more control.
1. Richard Owens (1971) - His performance slowly grew on me, as the miniseries progressed. I thought he gave a pretty good performance and did a solid job in slowly revealing Brandon's feelings for Marianne.
2. Robert Swann (1981) - He must be the most emotional Colonel Brandon I have ever seen on screen. At least once his character's feelings for Marianne were finally exposed. Personally, I liked his take on Brandon very much, even though most fans do not seem to care for his performance.
3. Alan Rickman (1995) - He made an excellent Colonel Brandon. I was impressed by how he revealed the character's romantic nature behind the stoic facade. I also feeling that Brandon is one of the actor's best roles.
4. David Morrissey (2008) - He is the last actor I could imagine portraying the reserved, yet passionate Colonel Brandon. And yet, not only did he did a great job in the role, he also gave one of the best performances in the miniseries.
Fitzwilliam Darcy - "Pride and Prejudice" (1813)
Unless I am mistaken, Fitzwilliam Darcy must be the most popular leading man created by Jane Austen. There are times when he seems more popular than the novel's leading character, Elizabeth Bennet. Although he is not my favorite Austen leading man, I must say that he is one of the most fascinating. However, I found his "redemption" in the story's third act a bit too good to be true.
1. Laurence Olivier (1940) - He gave a very good performance as Fitzwilliam Darcy and was properly haughty. But there were times when he displayed Darcy's feelings for Elizabeth Bennet a little too openly . . . especially in the movie's first half.
2. David Rintoul (1980) - His Mr. Darcy was probably the most haughty I have ever seen on screen. There were moments when his portrayal seemed a bit too haughty, especially scenes in which his feelings for Elizabeth should have been obvious. But I believe he still have a first-rate performance.
3. Colin Firth (1995) - He received an Emmy nomination for his portrayal of Mr. Darcy in the 1995 miniseries. And I believe he fully deserved it. Hell, I would have given him the award. He did a great job in portraying the character's complexity with a balance I have never seen in the other actors who portrayed the same character.
4. Matthew McFadyen (2005) - He gave a very good performance as Mr. Darcy. However, I think Joe Wright's script emphasized a bit too much on the character's shyness and inability to easily socialize with others.
Charles Bingley - "Pride and Prejudice" (1813)
I have always found this character as sociable, charming and very likable. However, he has never struck me as complex as Fitzwilliam Darcy. And to be honest, I found his willingness to allow Mr. Darcy to dictate his social life a little irritating. But I suppose this should not be surprising, considering he is from a class lower than his friend.
1. Bruce Lester (1940) - I did not find his performance particularly memorable, but I must say that he gave a charming performance as young Mr. Bingley. And he had a nice, strong chemistry with Maureen O'Sullivan's Jane Bennet.
2. Osmund Bullock (1980) - He gave a nice, solid performance as Mr. Bingley. But I found his portrayal even less memorable than Bruce Lester's. That is the best thing I can say about him.
3. Crispin Bonham-Carter (1995) - I thought he gave a very warm and friendly performance as Mr. Bingley. In fact, he seemed to be the epitome of the literary character. I also enjoyed how the actor conveyed Mr. Bingley's attempts to hide his discomfort at either the Bennet family's behavior, or his sisters'. My only complaint is there were times when he came off as a bit too broad and theatrical.
4. Simon Woods (2005) - I cannot deny that he gave a first-rate performance. But I believe the latter was hampered by a script that portrayed Mr. Bingley as somewhat shy. I never had the impression from Austen's novel that the character was a shy man.
Edmund Bertram - "Mansfield Park" (1814)
Oh dear. I might as well be frank. I have never liked the Edmund Bertram character. He never struck me as completely negative. He was capable of great kindness - especially toward his cousin Fanny Price, who was basically an outsider. He had decent moral values and he knew what he wanted to do with his life. But he was such a prig . . . and a hypocrite. Even worse, he failed to become aware of his own shortcomings and develop as a character.
1. Nicholas Farrell (1983) - Despite my dislike of the character, he was excellent as the "Dudley Do-Right" Edmund. In fact, I think he was the best Edmund ever. And that is saying something, considering the excellent performances of the other actors who portrayed the role.
2. Jonny Lee Miller (1999) - He also gave a first-rate performance as Edmund. More importantly, he was given a chance to convey the character's growing attraction to his cousin, thanks to Patricia Rozema's screenplay.
3. Blake Ritson (2007) - After watching his performance as Edmund in the 2007 movie, I am beginning to suspect that an actor worth his salt could portray the role with great success. And that is exactly what Ritson managed to do.
George Knightley - "Emma" (1815)
George Knightley must be the most mature Austen hero I have ever encountered - not only in age, but in temperament. But due to his sly wit and admission of his own shortcomings, he has always been a big favorite of mine.
1. John Carson (1972) - Many have pointed out his age (45 years old at the time) as detrimental to his portrayal of Mr. Knightley. However, I found his performance and screen chemistry with his leading lady, Doran Godwin, that I honestly did not care. I still do not care. He gave an excellent performance.
2. Jeremy Northam (1996) - His portrayal of Knightley seemed to be the epitome of level-headed charm. And I especially enjoyed how he managed to convey Knightley's jealousy of Emma's friendship with Frank Churchill with some memorable brief looks.
3. Mark Strong (1996-97) - I have to give him kudos for conveying a great deal of common sense and decency into his portrayal of Mr. Knightley. He also had very good screen chemistry with the leading lady. But . . . I found him too intense and too angry. He made a somewhat scary Mr. Knightley.
4. Jonny Lee Miller (2009) - I really enjoyed his portrayal of the level-headed Mr. Knightley. He managed to convey a great deal of charm and wit into his performance with great ease. I am almost inclined to view his performance as my favorite.
Reverend Henry Tilney - "Northanger Abbey" (1817)
If I had to choose my favorite Austen hero, it would have to be him. Henry Tilney. Despite the fact that he is a clergyman, Henry is charming, clever, witty and sardonic. The type of man who could keep me in stitches forever. And he still manages to be complicated. What can I say? I adore him.
1. Peter Firth (1986) - His portrayal of Tilney nearly ruined my love of the character. I do not blame him. Firth gave it his all and also one of the best screen kisses I have ever seen in a period drama. But thanks to screenwriter Maggie Wadey, Firth's Henry ended up as an attractive but condescending one, instead of a witty and playful one.
2. J.J. Feild (2007) - His portrayal of Henry restored my love of the character. Field was fortunate not to be hampered by a transformed Henry. And I adored how he captured every aspect of Austen's literary character - the charm, wit, playfulness and common sense. And Field added one aspect to his performance that I adore . . . that delicious voice.
Captain Frederick Wentworth - "Persuasion" (1818)
If I must be honest, Frederick Wentworth is tied with George Knightley as my second favorite Austen hero . . . but for different reasons. He had the charm, humor and looks to attract the eye of any red-blooded female. However, his character was marred by a penchant for lingering anger and so much insecurity, especially eight years after being rejected by Anne Elliot. Wentworth has to be the most insecure Austen hero I have ever come across. That is why I find him so fascinating.
1. Bryan Marshall (1971) - I really enjoyed how he conveyed Frederick's extroverted sense of humor and charm. But I never got a strong sense of his character's insecurity, along with his lingering anger and love for the leading lady, until the last act of the miniseries' first half.
2. Ciarán Hinds (1995) - He did an excellent job in conveying all of the complicated aspects of Frederick's personality. However, there were moments when I felt his performance could have a little more subtle. However, I still enjoyed his take on the character.
3. Rupert Penry-Jones (2007) - Some have complained that his take on the character seemed a bit too introverted. I have to agree . . . at least in the television movie's first half hour. But I thought he did an excellent job in portraying Frederick's insecurity, anger and lingering love for the leading lady.
