I still have not been able to face another attempt at Orangina jelly. Perhaps this reveals something about my character, that I fold in the face of difficulty. Or maybe that I have enough sense to know when to stop. Either way, I made a promise to try again. And I will. Someday.


In the meantime, I've found a recipe for chocolate sauce that I think will be a winner for holiday gift-giving. This weekend (pending morning sickness status) I'm hoping to give it a try. Don't you think it would be adorable wrapped up with an antique (or not) ice cream spoon or somesuch frill? It's also inspired me to try and find or create a peanut butter sauce recipe for canning. I just love peanut butter things (although I don't really love just plain 'ole peanut butter - is that weird?) and just the other day I enjoyed a double scoop of peanut butter cup ice cream before I remembered that, being in the family way, I'm not supposed to be eating peanut butter as it may impart serious allergies to my unborn. I'm not seriously worried, since I think these things are related to progressive exposure but I am going to watch myself from now own. We have predispositions to allergies in our house and I don't think I want to stack that particular deck against us more than it already is. Anyway, I think that a jar of peanut butter sauce and a jar of chocolate sauce is a really fine gift. Now, if you are in a gift-exchanging relationship with me, just pretend you never read this. Either that or start practicing your look of delighted surprise now so you'll be ready this winter.


The chocolate sauce recipe started a whole rumination on the issues of risk avoidance versus risk reduction versus risk elimination (as chocolate is not terribly acidic and generally isn't a candidate for longterm storage without pressure canning, which I do not do - yet) and my personal reactions to these things, as well as societal reactions. Someday soon I'll post something about it. Before we get to that, though, I have a more important topic for discussion: using brand names just 'cause you always have versus trying the knockoff.


My local Big Lots has canning jars packed in boxes carefully designed to cause the quick of glance to assume that the jars inside are, in fact, Ball brand (quite possibly the most famous, if not most popular, commercial canning jar) at a price of about 2/3 what you can find in a supermarket or discount mart. Now, I'm not generally brand loyal (tampons, cold remedies and yogurt seem to be the major exceptions) but there's something about the knockoff jars that is giving me pause. Is it the dire warnings of safety relative to home canning (maybe this discussion is related to risk avoidance more than I thought) or is it just the idea that, well, Ball makes canning jars and there's really no reason for anyone else to do it? My grandmothers, mom and aunts use(d) Ball and that's good enough for me. Maybe it's the idea that the "original" isn't that expensive, after all, and works fine so what did they do to the knockoff to make it cheaper? What corners were cut? Was it the seals - are the seals crappola? 'Cause canning is all about the seal (well, that and processing time). Is it the glass itself? A flaw in the glass can create the most difficult mess if the jar cracks or shatters in processing. I just can't convince myself to try the knockoff - that the savings would be worth whatever they've done to make the jars cheaper. Then again, there's really no reason not to other than it's counter to the way I've always done things and the way I've always seen things done.


I guess I feel this way about a lot of things. I may insist upon some stupid expensive foundation (for the increasingly rare days I put make up on at all) but my eyeliners are all Wet-n-Wild. If I saw an eyeliner cheaper than my usual $1.99 would I buy it? Probably not - the price would be lower than what I've assigned to what represents "quality". Anything lower would seem, well, cheap and probably not worth it. But if I saw a MAC eyeliner priced at $1.99 would I buy it? I don't know - what if it's only priced that way because there's something wrong with it? There are always stories about some luxury brand reducing their prices and seeing sales fall since the price change violated consumers' sense of price versus value. Sales rebound when the price is raised to its original heights.


There's probably an economic theory that explains all of this - the complicated price versus value versus perception of quality/desirability equations we all work through internally every time we buy something. Actually, I probably learned said theory in school. Damned if I can remember what it is, though.