c4countdown

Okay, so we've now proved that if you chop a sarnie in half you get two sarnies, but can a sandwich be upside-down?

At lunch today, I was grossly offended by my colleague eating his Italian olive-bread roll the wrong way up, yet he was unconcerned! The dimples of the bread clearly delineated which way was up, so that wasn't ambiguous.

Even the standard two-slices-of-bread-with-stuff-in sandwich has a right way and a wrong way because the butter/marg should be on the bottom, then your topping(s), then any sauce as desired. Although I do know of weirdos who butter both slices of bread, but that could be for the third sandwich thread. Anyway, a poll!

Definitely the buttered slice on the bottom. That stops the sauce/pickle or whatever you've used soaking into the bread and making it go all mushy.

Debbi Flack wrote:Definitely the buttered slice on the bottom. That stops the sauce/pickle or whatever you've used soaking into the bread and making it go all mushy.

Also true for toasties.

Debbi Flack wrote:Definitely the buttered slice on the bottom. That stops the sauce/pickle or whatever you've used soaking into the bread and making it go all mushy.

I can understand Ian's consternation at the aesthetically-displeasing orientation of the olive-bread roll, but I only ever use normal bread myself, and I butter both sides, so it's the same one way up as the other.

Even if I cut it in half (to make two sandwiches).

Butter indeed. I see no need in putting in an extra layer of slime.

I rotate my sandwiches 90 degrees towards me and eat them face on. Top? Bottom? Pah! It's all about front and back.

Matt Morrison wrote:I rotate my sandwiches 90 degrees towards me and eat them face on. Top? Bottom? Pah! It's all about front and back.

You wear a bib then?

Hmm with my usual peanut butter sandwiches, it's impossible to have it upside down, as both slices of bread are buttered. However, it annoys me if my mum cuts the bread in triangles, when there is an obvious bred shape to the slice (i.e. with a dimple in one side, and straight edges on all other).

Adam Dexter wrote:Hmm with my usual peanut butter sandwiches, it's impossible to have it upside down, as both slices of bread are buttered.

Not true. You (or your mum) will always spread the peanut butter on just one of those buttered sides.
With a heavy filling like peanut butter, this can give the sandwich a different 'feel', a different 'heft' if you will, depending on which way up it is, as the peanut butter is stuck more to one side.
And for a filling which is more 'sloppy' than 'sticky', the slice which hasn't been spread onto can suffer from 'sandwich slip' if you hold it the wrong way up.
So if you persist in taking this frivolous attitude to sandwich dynamics in the future, I suggest you spread half of your filling on each slice so as to avoid any embarrassing sandwich mishaps.

When I was younger I would butter both slices of bread. I find the idea of only buttering one a bit weird, to be honest.

Now I very rarely use butter, relying on whatever sauce is to hand for lubrication.

(and yes I know you're all going to jump at the chance to quote that 'hilariously', but it was semi-deliberate, so nyer)

Ian Volante wrote:Even the standard two-slices-of-bread-with-stuff-in sandwich has a right way and a wrong way because the butter/marg should be on the bottom, then your topping(s), then any sauce as desired. Although I do know of weirdos who butter both slices of bread, but that could be for the third sandwich thread.

WTF? I have genuinely never in my life met anyone who butters only one slice of bread when making a sandwich. And I'm a lot older than you, so I've met a lot more people than you have. Buttering one slice? For heaven's sake, why?

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Ian Volante wrote:Even the standard two-slices-of-bread-with-stuff-in sandwich has a right way and a wrong way because the butter/marg should be on the bottom, then your topping(s), then any sauce as desired. Although I do know of weirdos who butter both slices of bread, but that could be for the third sandwich thread.

WTF? I have genuinely never in my life met anyone who butters only one slice of bread when making a sandwich. And I'm a lot older than you, so I've met a lot more people than you have. Buttering one slice? For heaven's sake, why?

But but...I don't see why you'd need to butter both sides, it's just wrong!

As Phil said, it's unthinkable only to butter one slice of bread, but there's definitely a difference of opinion going on. I think "Sandwiches Part III: A Step Too Far" can't be far away.

I don't eat butter, so a sandwich is always the right way up for me.

Matt Morrison wrote:

Adam Dexter wrote:Hmm with my usual peanut butter sandwiches, it's impossible to have it upside down, as both slices of bread are buttered.

Not true. You (or your mum) will always spread the peanut butter on just one of those buttered sides.

Why only one? I do it on both... just to waste more peanut butter!

JimBentley wrote:I think "Sandwiches Part III: A Step Too Far" can't be far away.

Can we please just split the forum into two completely separate sites, one for the normal people and one for those who butter both sides?

I don't like butter and I don't like sandwiches.

Matt Morrison wrote:

JimBentley wrote:I think "Sandwiches Part III: A Step Too Far" can't be far away.

Can we please just split the forum into two completely separate sites, one for the normal people and one for those who butter both sides?

Would it be 2 different sites, or 2 halves of the same site though?

Gary Male wrote:

Matt Morrison wrote:

JimBentley wrote:I think "Sandwiches Part III: A Step Too Far" can't be far away.

Can we please just split the forum into two completely separate sites, one for the normal people and one for those who butter both sides?

Would it be 2 different sites, or 2 halves of the same site though?

I'm joining the ranks of those questioning the need for butter. I took tea at the Ritz recently (not a regular haunt, but we were slumming it) and the smoked salmon sandwiches were just salmon and bread. Spartan and delicious.

To all these numpties questioning the need for butter at all, just try spreading marmite or peanut butter onto bread without such lubrication. You'll tear it to shreds.

Matt Morrison wrote:To all these numpties questioning the need for butter at all, just try spreading marmite or peanut butter onto bread without such lubrication. You'll tear it to shreds.

I'm sure there's a good analogy for this, but I can't think what.

Matt Morrison wrote:To all these numpties questioning the need for butter at all, just try spreading marmite or peanut butter onto bread without such lubrication. You'll tear it to shreds.

I do that with Marmite, and it works if you're careful.

What I hate is that if someone makes you a sandwich and they put butter in without it being requested. If I wanted cheese, Marmite and buter I'd ask for that. But I just asked for cheese and Marmite. Next time should I ask for cheese, Marmite and negative butter?

Likewise having to ask for a negative slice of lemon when you ask for water in restaurants pisses me of.

If I was part of a sandwich, I would be quite fastidious about whether I was to face up or down.
(Subject to mood and taste of course)

Gavin Chipper wrote:

Matt Morrison wrote:To all these numpties questioning the need for butter at all, just try spreading marmite or peanut butter onto bread without such lubrication. You'll tear it to shreds.

I do that with Marmite, and it works if you're careful.
What I hate is that if someone makes you a sandwich and they put butter in without it being requested.

Yeah, understandable. I also don't want the taste of butter in my sandwich. I should have pointed out it use it solely for lubrication, and not even slightly for taste, a very thin spread indeed.

Although I've used the word "butter" a couple of times, I actually use margarine in sandwiches. It spreads more easily and is more neutral-tasting, but has the necessary lubricative properties.

Butter vs margarine should probably be explored further in "Sandwiches 4: The Wrongening".

Ralph Gillions wrote:If I was part of a sandwich, I would be quite fastidious about whether I was to face up or down.
(Subject to mood and taste of course)

BTDTBTTS

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Ralph Gillions wrote:If I was part of a sandwich, I would be quite fastidious about whether I was to face up or down.
(Subject to mood and taste of course)

BTDTBTTS

Butter Toast Delicious Toast Butter Toast Toast Sandwich?

Phil Reynolds wrote:

Ralph Gillions wrote:If I was part of a sandwich, I would be quite fastidious about whether I was to face up or down.
(Subject to mood and taste of course)

BTDTBTTS

Do feel free to post details Phil

Gavin Chipper wrote:

Matt Morrison wrote:To all these numpties questioning the need for butter at all, just try spreading marmite or peanut butter onto bread without such lubrication. You'll tear it to shreds.

I do that with Marmite, and it works if you're careful.

What I hate is that if someone makes you a sandwich and they put butter in without it being requested. If I wanted cheese, Marmite and buter I'd ask for that. But I just asked for cheese and Marmite. Next time should I ask for cheese, Marmite and negative butter?

Likewise having to ask for a negative slice of lemon when you ask for water in restaurants pisses me of.

I'm of a similar opinion about mayonnaise, mustard and salad. Why does it appear to be so bloody hard to make a ham sandwich without filling it with this extraneous shit?! It was nice before. Bah.

JimBentley wrote:Although I've used the word "butter" a couple of times, I actually use margarine in sandwiches. It spreads more easily and is more neutral-tasting, but has the necessary lubricative properties.

If it's just spreading that's the problem, use spreading butter. So much better tasting than marge.

There's a sure way to tell the difference between butter and rubbish. Make a chip butty, with thick butter (on BOTH sides of the teacake/whatever you want to call the bread); add tomato sauce to taste, as many chips as the teacake will hold, and large amounts of vinegar. The vinegar interacts with the butter to produce a altogether new taste sensation; it has no effect on margarine. The best spreading butters have the same effect.

I'm from Lancashire, I know about chip butties. Our chippies have been selling them for 100 years.

Ralph Gillions wrote:Do feel free to post details Phil

Um, I don't think so. (Note to self: must stop posting when I get in from a night of heavy drinking.)

Edit: Ralph - see my PM.

David Roe wrote:

JimBentley wrote:Although I've used the word "butter" a couple of times, I actually use margarine in sandwiches. It spreads more easily and is more neutral-tasting, but has the necessary lubricative properties.

If it's just spreading that's the problem, use spreading butter. So much better tasting than marge.

There's a sure way to tell the difference between butter and rubbish. Make a chip butty, with thick butter (on BOTH sides of the teacake/whatever you want to call the bread); add tomato sauce to taste, as many chips as the teacake will hold, and large amounts of vinegar. The vinegar interacts with the butter to produce a altogether new taste sensation; it has no effect on margarine. The best spreading butters have the same effect.

I'm from Lancashire, I know about chip butties. Our chippies have been selling them for 100 years.

I didn't realise that eating a sandwich was so complicated. I just have a slice of home made bread with butter and strawberry jam. As I am eating, I work my way to the strawberry which is perched right on the corner of the slice. As I bite into it, I get a feeling of extreme pleasure, and at my age, any exitement I can get is very welcome.

JimBentley wrote:Although I've used the word "butter" a couple of times, I actually use margarine in sandwiches. It spreads more easily and is more neutral-tasting, but has the necessary lubricative properties.

Butter vs margarine should probably be explored further in "Sandwiches 4: The Wrongening".

Speaking of margarine, I don't know how many of you watched QI the other week, but apparently margarine is given the same status that Richard Brittain gives satellites.

Ian Volante wrote:Okay, so we've now proved that if you chop a sarnie in half you get two sarnies ........

I do not think that is proved at all!