Well I'm not sure I want to enter into a 3rd hand debate taking place somewhere else that I can't even access much less be quoted in it when I can't respond. Heaven knows there are sorts of canning forums out there on the web and they range from excellent right down to flat out dangerous in the info they provide. It is a user beware world out there. :) So I guess I begin by saying that I am far from the only person that makes that statement, here or elsewhere. Most experienced home canners that make the effort to remain current with the guidelines know it, And anyone who has ever taken a certified canning course has certainly heard it. Although "process for the time of the longest ingredient" was mentioned in some older books and while it is true that many recipes that include meat call for the meat processing times, not all do, it was never an official guideline. It is simply an assumption made by long ago home canners that took on a life of its own. They noted that 90 min was the max time called for (except seafoods) so assumed that time would be good for anything. They reasoned that if X mins was good then XX minutes was even better. They used that assumption to allow them to make whatever changes they wanted to in the recipe. The greatly flawed "Gee, I can safely can anything I want to if I pressure can it long enough" assumption was the result and is still used by many today simply to justify disregarding the guidelines and making up their own recipes. But all this was before the role of pH and density in canning were understood and when the resulting quality of the food was of little concern. Those issues should have put an end to the old assumption but didn't unfortunately. So it is "guess work" because it encourages the canner to make up their own recipes and processing times and it disregards both pH and density of the mixed ingredients and the end quality. Tested recipes instead test to balance safety AND quality. Good examples are in the NCHFP FAQs that address the "why can't I can my own recipe for ______" questions. These are low-acid mixtures which could support the growth of bacteria that cause botulism, so a process cannot be estimated or made up. It must be a tested process known to kill these bacteria in this product. Still it all boils down to personal choice, personal risk. Those that regularly advocate "time required for the longest ingredient" works are almost always doing it just to justify canning their own made-up recipes. That is their choice, their risk to take. Hope this helps clarify. Dave

Thursday nights are CORE night here (Clean Out the Refrigerator - Ewwww!) I had a handful of snow peas, a few stalks of asparagus, some half & half, 1/2 of a red pepper, the last of a hunk of asiago, and a lemon. So I made this: Lemon Shrimp Pasta Fresh asparagus, cut into 1 inch pieces (I had about six stalks) Snow peas (I had a handful) 1 tablespoon extra virgin olive oil 1/2 pound raw medium shrimp 1/2 cup chopped red pepper 1/4 teaspoon crushed red pepper flakes 1 cup half & half and 2 cups milk (I use powdered milk and use the shrimp stock for liquid) Zest and juice of 1 lemon 1/2 box (8 oz.) angel hair pasta 1/4 cup freshly grated Asiago cheese 1. Peel the shrimp, and add the shells to 1 cup of water with a dash of white wine. Boil the shells for about 15 minutes and turn off the heat. 2. Lightly steam the asparagus. Drain and set aside. 3. Heat the olive oil in a large skillet (medium-high heat). Add the red pepper and saute for about 2 minutes. Reduce the heat, and add the half & half, milk and the asparagus. Heat thoroughly. 4. Pick out the shells from the shrimp stock and add the peeled shrimp and the snow peas. Don't heat - the stock should still be hot enough to cook them. 5. Cook the pasta and drain. Return it to the pot and add the sauce and the shrimp. Toss the pasta with the lemon juice and zest. Sprinkle generously with the asiago. Turned out pretty good for a CORE meal! Of course, the half & half was bad (the cats liked it though) so I substituted a can of table cream.

Mollie, I don't think I can be of much use re.'coping' novels, although I'm sure that we could all write one ourselves! The type of books that deal with domestic matters, cooking, children, husbands etc are very unlikely to become 'literature' in the sense you mean. I read very few girlie novels, but have dipped into Judy Astley's work just as a light 'summer holiday' read. Her books are rather formulaic but entertaining and mostly centre around some middle-class woman, living in a pleasant London suburb . . . and then various themes. Straying husbands, bossy M-in-L's, difficult teenage children (and she really does modern English kids very well) holidays in Cornwall, hippy friends etc. She wisely write about what she knows and doesn't attempt for eg racial problems in Northern inner-cities slums . . .the sort of despressing work enjoyed by liberal-minded critics but not by the average 'punter'. Sheri, re your recommendation for Nancy Mitford and Mollie's 'domestic' theme. If you read Hons and Rebels by Jessica Mitford she mentions that the only housework the six daughters were ever expected to perform, under Nanny's watchful eye, was to fold up their nighties and put them under their pillows every morning.:-) Pat, I was 'introduced' to the works of Norah Lofts in the '60's when staying with friends in Suffolk. They knew her while she was living in Bury St Edmunds and her 'House at Old Vine' series was based on that town (to any US traveller to the UK a most attractive town with some beautiful houses and a Cathedral saved from the abbey ruins). Mollie, it is certainly true that many people over here don't cook 'proper' meals and rely on fast-food. Of course it must be said that supemarkets do offer 'short-cut- cookery' where veggies are ready washed/prepared, or chicken comes in legs/breast/wings etc rather than a whole bird and all this can be put together to form a meal. Perhaps this is just sanitised cookery, but at least it means, as cece says that my DD can come home from work and prepare a nourishing meal quickly. The first DS is now married to a Japanese girl so cookery has now become a Fine-Art in their home. Did anyone read an article about a cross US/UK medical survey which found that top white income earners in the US were less healthy than white bottom-income families in the UK, despite the $$$$'s spent on medical care by the 'privileged classes' in the US and the UK using the creaking National Health system. I was sent this info as a newspaper cutting by a US friend and had seen it in our English daily paper. Cindy I think Vera Brittan wrote on sad themes such as loss of her brother and men friends during WW1 and rather'heavy' Socialist stuff (her daughter became the well-known Labour MP, Shirley Williams). As to whether they went to Cornwall or not . . .! Here is a link that might be useful: Judy Astley

My recommendation to anyone new to clematis is to focus your initial efforts on creating a great planting situation. A well-planted clem can withstand all manner of neglect or abuse, even unintentional :-) It is a shame the FAQ's have deteriorated with the takeover by Houzz as they used to have all this info at hand! Dig a deep and wide planting hole in well drained soil. 18" wide by 18" deep is the suggested dimension but you can modify that based on the size of the plant. I grow on all my new clematis in a container until their roots fill a 1G nursery pot before planting so I usually opt for a larger hole. Amend the backfill with a reasonable amount of organic matter. I use a good quality compost. Site the vine in the hole so that the root crown or the soil level of the container is 4-6 inches below grade. Yes, you will be burying part of the stems and maybe even some low foliage. Note that all these recommendations are counter to accepted planting practices for other plants (hole no deeper than the rootball, do not amend and do not plant too deeply) but experience has demonstrated that clems do best with this added attention. The deep and well-amended hole and deep planting encourages the development of a very strong root system and the production of multiple vining stems from the root crown. Clems do not appreciate root competition so I would site away from other aggressively rooting plants unless they are planted almost simultaneously so the roots develop together. Also the "shaded roots" requirement is a bit of a myth. Clems need a consistently moist root run and that is often achieved by shading the root zone to prevent excessive soil moisture evaporation. But mulching well or covering the area with a low growing and shallow rooted perennial or groundcover will achieve the same thing, as will just making sure the vine gets the proper amount of irrigation. The last important advice is to cut the vines back hard for at least the first two growing seasons in the ground regardless of what pruning group they are in. This is also done to stimulate root development and to encourage more stemming from the root crown. It is often recommended to do so at the same time as the vine is planted but many gardeners are reluctant to cut back what maybe an already budded or flowering plant. I've done it both ways - cut back a brand new vine or just wait until the end of season - and I've not seen a big difference. Clems are pretty heavy feeders so fertilizing in spring as the buds form is also recommended. Any kind of rose or tomato fertilizer works well and alfalfa meal is also good as it encourages basal stemming. That should get you off to a good start :-) I would only add that you need to research the sizes of the vines you ordered and site accordingly. Montana rubens can grow to a massive size - I've posted photos of one near me that engulfs a tree and a 35' fence!!