Tapioca pudding: for or against, and why?
Posted by Jenelle at December 9, 2005 01:45 AM | TrackBackThat's some vile, vile stuff. Just because.
Posted by: Paul at December 9, 2005 07:00 AMYou know, I don't think I've ever eaten tapioca pudding. I must admit that just based on phonetics and the way the words feel in my mouth, I wouldn't want to eat that shit. Let us peruse Wikipedia, yes?
"Tapioca pudding is a common pudding (by the American definition of a custard-like dessert dish, not to be confused with the British definition of pudding as practically any cooked dessert item) with tapioca spheres added to a vanilla pudding. It can be discerned from other types of pudding by the small, translucent and almost caviar-like orbs of tapioca within."
"Tapioca is an essentially flavourless starchy ingredient, or fecula, produced from treated and dried cassava (manioc) root and used in cooking. It is similar to sago."
Firstly, Wikipedia is awesome. I love the editorial jab at the British criteria for dessert. Why do people make fun of British cuisine so readily? I'll tell ya why, because Brits and British culture are fucking AWESOME otherwise. At any rate. So now we know what tapioca is, and if the word alone doesn't make you squicky, surely the description of a pudding sprinkled with flavorless pustules must. And if you're still interested, we go from the word "tapioca" to the term "fecula". Repeat those words fve times, and I garantee ya you'll throw up in your mouth a little. Feculafeculafeculafecula...
Posted by: shank at December 9, 2005 08:25 AMI've never eaten it either but it makes a superb lubricant.
Posted by: Jim at December 11, 2005 10:42 AMAs I recall from my youth, it was pretty tasty. Though I haven't had it in decades and prolly wouldn't kmow it from banana pudding or rice pudding these days. Whatever.
Posted by: Tuning Spork at December 12, 2005 08:33 PM