Beans

It's been an unusu-
ally cold and rainy March here in Southern California. Actually, I don't mind it. I like the weather to change, and despite popular folklore, Southern California weather does change, just not in synch with the rest of the world -- which pretty much describes Southern California.
To ward off the chill, and because Rob and I are trying to eat healthy food, I decided to make a bean soup. Navy beans are one of Rob's favorite, so I made a soup that incorporated them and the root vegetables that are available this time of year. Incidentally, I just discovered yellow carrots at the Ojai farmer's market and I added them to a pot roast a week ago. They were really good, tender and sweet, but not quite as "carrot-y." I used them in the soup, along with regular carrots and parsnips. I used ham hocks to add saltiness, because the root veggies tend to be sweet.
After I made the soup, I decided to add the lemon and Tobasco because the soup was need to be "lightened" in my opinion. I think the added zing really added to the flavor.

Navy bean/root vegetable soup

1 pound dry Navy beans, rinsed and prepared by boiling for two minutes in water that covers them by about two inches. Then turning off the heat and letting the beans sit for at least a hour, then rinsed one final time.
1 onion, chopped
4 garlic cloves chopped fine
1 tablespoon canola oil
8 cups water
4 smoked ham hocks
4 carrots (see above), diced
4 turnips, diced
6 bay leaves
Salt and pepper to taste
juice of one lemon
Tobasco sauce to taste
Saute onion and garlic a Dutch oven until fragrant in and starting to become translucent. Add drained, prepared beans and water. Add ham hocks, carrots, turnips and bay leaves. Bring to boil, then lower heat to simmer and cover. Cook for about 5 to 6 hours, or until beans are soft and starting to break. Cool in refrigerator overnight and skim off fat that forms. Reheat and add lemon juice and Tobasco. Taste and salt and pepper to correct flavor.

I had coveted the Le Creuset Dutch oven and when my daughter bought be a clay cooker at Sur La Table (my favorite cook's store -- pricey, but worth it), which I already owned, I returned it for the Le Creuset. My husband was amazed at how much it cost, but I've found that it is what I've been missing for years. It is so great for soups and stews. Just like Caller ID, I can't understand why I waited so long.

BTW

I just had to comment on this year's Oscar gowns. I know it's off topic, but it's my blog and I can do what I want (do what I want to, you--oo would to if it happened to you)
Total disappointment. No one was transcendent. Uma was the best and Reese was classic, but the rest just managed to make it to doesn't suck.
Here's my take:
Jennifer Aniston: Really not up to Jenny's usual standard. Just an ahhhnnnn dress. And the jewelry was a bit dowage-y. Sure, she's young and fresh and can carry it off, but it isn't flattering, it's distracting.
Jennifer Garner: The dress was kind of sack-y. It really had an unhappy flow and the color was blah and did nothing for her (a theme for the evening),
Hillary Swank: Speaking of doing nothing for her, Hilary's dress didn't do anything for her. She has a fabulous body, but the top was too low and made her head look huge and weird.
JLo: First, what was with the whole swishing of the side chiffon panels of the dress when she walked out? It looked really contrived and silly. Second, the hair, makeup and green dress color combined to make her look kind of lizard-y.
Salma Hayak: What was up with the strap crossing her boob? She has fabulous boobs and her right one was deformed by the dress. What kind of design was that?
Sandra Bullock: Almost. But the sheer, black material that looked like pantyhose on the top really didn't add to the dress.
Naomi Watts: Everyone has gone on about the tattered aspect of the dress, but what was with the thing growing out of her side? Here's a new rule: if a dress has something growing out of it (Charize Theron READ THIS), don't buy it. And her dress was all rolled up at the hips making them look huge. On so many levels, this was a horrible dress.
Charlize Theron: Ewwwwwwwwwwww. Aside from the 747 perched on her shoulder, the whole criss/crossing really didn't work.
Maggie Gyllenhaal: Whatever you're going for, you didn't get there. A big Neah-ru.
Nicole Kidman: The dress was classic, but the hair was dull and drab, which gave the whole outfit a kind of half-hearted feel.
Rachel Weitz: She was among the best, pregnant or not. This was a classic look that that became her.
Keira Knightly: This was a lovely dress, although I could have done without the fan-thing on the boob (there was a kind of conspiracy against boobs in this year's dresses.)
Amy Adams: The dress would have been cool without the weird thing in front (See above note about things growing out of dresses.)
Michelle Williams: She carried off the color, but she had to fight it. A dress should be complimentary, not something you have to overcome. And the fan-y thingies on the side really didn't work. (What's up with fan-things?)
Felicity Huffman: Either show it or don't. No half-faking it with sheer material, especially when it is seamed. She has the body for the full-on plunge -- get the sticky tape out and go for it.
Jessica Alba: Looked classically perfect in a way the perfectly offset her Latina beauty.
Ziyi Zhang: That dress was perfect for her. I saw a larger version and it really needed to be worn by such a tiny woman.

Rob was all, "Why are you going online?" and getting excited during the Academy Awards. I explained it's kind of like my Super Bowl. Award ceremonies aren't about the stupid awards. Most people outside of Hollywood don't care if their favorite star has one an Oscar or not. No, awards shows are about the gowns. Actually it would really streamline things if we could just eliminate the men (except for Johnny Depp, who is the only interesting man around fashion-wise), and just have the women parade in the gowns.
OK, there is also the thrill that someone will really screw up and it will be a huge hairy deal, and you will have seen them do it live. (C'mon, you know how many people brag about seeing Janet Jackson's tittie.)
So shows like this afford us middle-aged, middle-class women the ability to look at women half our age and a tenth our size strut around in gowns and jewels they won't even let us in the room to examine. And we can be catty and say that the gown that cost as much as four months' mortgage is "just OK, nothing special."
Cool, ain't it?