Skip to main content

How to murder a slice of toast

As I've indicated previously, I am not averse to a cooked breakfast. In fact I'd go as far as to say it's one of my favourite meals. When all else fails I have even been known to resort to one of those breakfast-in-a-bun things, though they are second best. (if you must have one, I'd highly recommend the Marks and Spencer Cafe 'all day breakfast ciabatta'. It's small and overpriced, but very tasty. Even better with a touch of brown sauce.)

Alongside the usual plate of goodies I like to see a piece of toast. And this is where things go wrong at many of the supermarket style eateries and some hotels, where all the breakfast components are laid out in a buffet. The better establishments prepare toast to order, but lesser places make toast ahead of time and leave it under an infra-red lamp. Result: it's limp and nowhere near hot enough. The essentials with toast are that you can hold a piece in your hand by the edge without it flopping about, and that it has a high enough surface temperature to melt the butter (or spread if you prefer - I'm not fussy). What you don't want is a cold, pale yellow layer of fatty substance on the surface. That's a sure sign of disappointment ahead.

So please take note, eateries. Make your toast to order. You know it makes sense.


  1. You must come to my place some time for breakfast. (Don't take that the wrong way).
    You'll find yourself well catered for.
    Those sausages, by the way, they look a bit.......... sub standard.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5.  However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's recent gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some ex

Which idiot came up with percentage-based gradient signs

Rant warning: the contents of this post could sound like something produced by UKIP. I wish to make it clear that I do not in any way support or endorse that political party. In fact it gives me the creeps. Once upon a time, the signs for a steep hill on British roads displayed the gradient in a simple, easy-to-understand form. If the hill went up, say, one yard for every three yards forward it said '1 in 3'. Then some bureaucrat came along and decided that it would be a good idea to state the slope as a percentage. So now the sign for (say) a 1 in 10 slope says 10% (I think). That 'I think' is because the percentage-based slope is so unnatural. There are two ways we conventionally measure slopes. Either on X/Y coordiates (as in 1 in 4) or using degrees - say at a 15° angle. We don't measure them in percentages. It's easy to visualize a 1 in 3 slope, or a 30 degree angle. Much less obvious what a 33.333 recurring percent slope is. And what's a 100% slope