bread and roses

What my gender dysphoria feels like

2017-03-25T18:31:37Z

Copying this from a comment I made on Facebook in order to have it easily accessible for future noodling. This is of course only how I experience dysphoria, not how anyone else does. The original discussion was, in part, about the extent to which dysphoria would still exist in the absence of gender stereotyping. I have made some minor edits for clarity.

I'm not "in the wrong body"; this body is very much part of me, and there are things I really like about it. But there are parts that feel stunted, like they never fully developed like they were "meant" to, and at times they ache as if they were still desperately trying to. Descriptions of phantom limbs from amputees often resonate with me. I assume this would not go away in a perfect society. It has got worse with perimenopause and seems to show some cyclical variation, so I imagine there's a hormonal factor involved.

Also, some of the parts I really like are the very ones that cause people to guess my gender wrong, and that causes a real psychological tension. I have to choose every day whether I want the cognitive dissonance of hiding those parts as if I were ashamed of them, or the cognitive dissonance of leaving them visible and being misgendered. This part would clearly improve if societal etiquette changed so that it was understood to be rude to guess someone's gender without being told, or at least rude to voice the guess.

Then there's a gender role/performative component, which expresses itself as a feeling that I'm constantly failing at "being a girl" by looking wrong, acting wrong, thinking wrong and just generally Being Wrong. This part has improved considerably since I gave myself permission to stop trying to be one, but there's a residue that would probably require societal permission to get rid of. For me, full societal recognition of nonbinary gender(s) would probably do it, but total abolition of the gender binary would also work for me (and for agender people? but maybe not for strongly binary-identified people?) Even then, there may be a biochemical component that would not disappear, because I feel the looking wrong part is linked to my bulimia, and that gets worse with certain nutritional deficiencies and could presumably still happen without sexism. Society not being so damn fat-shaming would surely help, though.

Summary: In a perfect society I'd probably still have body dysphoria and maybe a small amount of psychological discomfort. I might still define as trans because although we wouldn't be assigning gender at birth any more, I might still have self-assigned as a girl before the hormones kicked in enough for the body dysphoria to become noticeable. But I'd have much less cognitive dissonance and everyday life would be much more comfortable, so none of these issues would be the grave threats to mental health that they are now. This entry was cross-posted from Dreamwidth, where there are currently comment(s). View DW comment(s).

PSA and request

2017-02-18T08:37:47Z

I am not really using LJ or DW any more - I don't have that much time for social media at the moment and find that Twitter is currently the platform that best fits into the rest of my life. If you'd like to stay in touch and have a Twitter account that I am not yet following, please drop me a comment with your Twitter handle or follow me at @sashajwolf. I am planning to start using that account for my (relativey few) Pagan tweets as well as general stuff and will be setting up a Pagan reading list there, so if I'm currently following you from @druidsass, you will probably shortly get a follow request or notification from @sashajwolf as well.

This entry was cross-posted from Dreamwidth, where there are currently comment(s). View DW comment(s).

With apologies to Jimmy Perry and Derek Taverner, my first attempt at a filk

2017-02-03T14:05:24Z

Who do you think you are kidding, Mr Bannon,
If you think we'll stand for Trump?
We are the people who'll stop your little game,
We are the people who'll make you think again,
'Cos who do you think you are kidding, Mr Bannon,
If you think the left is done?
Refugees, disabled, Muslims, Earth protectors, queers,
All genders and all races march in solidarity,
So who do you think you are kidding, Mr Bannon,
If you think we'll stand for Trump?

Prompted by a Twitter conversation with @vogelbeere.

Good news

2016-05-24T09:35:53Z

My mother's tumour was not malignant. It was caused by a gallstone getting lodged somewhere it shouldn't and the body trying to protect itself by growing tissue around it. She's healing well from the operation and will be fine just as soon as her digestive system gets used to its new arrangements ;-)

This entry was cross-posted from Dreamwidth, where there are currently comment(s). View DW comment(s).

PSA: Spoon shortage

2016-05-17T07:15:45Z

If I seem a bit distracted at the moment or don't reply to things I normally would, this is why:

We learned last week that my mother has a pancreatic tumour, suspected to be malignant, that is also pressing on her gallbladder and colon and causing a variety of problems as a result. She is having a fairly major operation today to try to remove it, following which the lab will confirm whether it really is malignant or not. Even if it is, the doctors are hopeful that she may have caught it early enough not to need chemo, and she really could not be in better hands than in the German health system, but this is obviously a scary time for her and for the family. She will be in hospital for 2-3 weeks and then in a rehab clinic for an undetermined period. She has asked that, rather than visiting now when all I can do is sit by her bedside, I go to stay with her for a while when she comes out of rehab and will need support with shopping, cleaning etc while she finishes convalescing. So I will be doing that. But meanwhile, this is taking up pretty much all my emotional processing spoons. I still want to be supportive of my friends who are also going through hard stuff at the moment, but getting the words out is much more difficult and takes longer than usual - so if I don't reply to things, please know that it's not because I don't care.

This entry was cross-posted from Dreamwidth, where there are currently comment(s). View DW comment(s).

Hugo Thoughts

2016-01-01T17:45:16Z

I’ve been keeping a running list throughout the year of things that struck me as Hugo-worthy, and since nomination time will be coming round soon, I thought I’d share it for anyone who wants to check out things they might have missed. It is not a suggested slate, which is why it doesn’t contain a neat five items per category, and skips categories I didn’t follow closely enough for anything to have struck me. My standard for “Hugo-worthy” is largely “this delighted me;” quite probably you are delighted by different things, and/or apply a different standard entirely, and that is fine. Feel free to add your suggestions in comments or to point me towards your nomination posts.

Best Novel. A science fiction or fantasy story of forty thousand (40,000) words or more.

Kirsty Logan, The Gracekeepers
N.K. Jemisin, The Fifth Season

Best Novella. A science fiction or fantasy story of between seventeen thousand five hundred (17,500) and forty thousand (40,000) words.

Bao Shu, What Has Passed Shall In Kinder Light Appear, tr. Ken Liu, Fantasy & Science Fiction March/April 2015

Best Short Story. A science fiction or fantasy story of less than seven thousand five hundred (7,500) words.

Sabrina Vourvoulias, The Way of Walls and Words, http://www.tor.com/stories/2015/04/the-ways-of-walls-and-words-sabrina-vourvoulias
Scott Alexander, Universal Love, Said the Cactus Person, http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/21/universal-love-said-the-cactus-person/
Iona Sharma, Nine Thousand Hours, http://strangehorizons.com/2015/20150420/hours-f.shtml
Brian Dolton, This Is the Way the Universe Ends: With a Bang, Fantasy & Science Fiction March/April 2015
Emily Devenport, Postcards from Monster Island, Clarkesworld April 2015
@TlfTravelAlerts, untitled, https://twitter.com/TlfTravelAlerts/status/641333085133492226
Karen Heuler, Egg Island, Clarkesworld October 2015
Margaret Ronald, Let’s Tell Stories of the Deaths of Children, http://www.strangehorizons.com/2015/20151012/children-f.shtml . CN for the obvious.
Rachel Manija Brown, What to Pack on a Trip to the Underworld When You Might Not be Coming Back, http://rachelmanija.livejournal.com/1211325.html

Best Related Work. Any work related to the field of science fiction, fantasy, or fandom, appearing for the first time during the previous calendar year or which has been substantially modified during the previous calendar year, and which is either non-fiction or, if fictional, is noteworthy primarily for aspects other than the fictional text, and which is not eligible in any other category.

Jess Zimmerman, C.S. Lewis’ Greatest Fiction: Convincing American Kids That They Would Like Turkish Delight, Atlas Obscura 3 December 2015 http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/cs-lewis-greatest-fiction-convincing-american-kids-that-they-would-like-turkish-delight

Best Graphic Story. Any science fiction or fantasy story told in graphic form appearing for the first time in the previous calendar year.

Ms Marvel vol.2
F. Lee, Transmajicka, http://fleebites.tumblr.com/post/116325914030/some-of-you-might-have-noticed-i-dropped-off-the
Susan Walker and Wendy Xu, Mooncakes, http://mooncakescomic.tumblr.com/post/130986680250
Sydney Padua, The Thrilling Adventures of Lovelace and Babbage

Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form. Any television program or other production, with a complete running time of 90 minutes or less, in any medium of dramatized science fiction, fantasy or related subjects that has been publicly presented for the first time in its present dramatic form during the previous calendar year.

Sense8: “Art is Like Religion”, written by The Wachowskis and J.M. Straczynski, directed by James McTeigue (Netflix in association with Anarchos Productions; Javelin Productions; Studio JMS; Georgeville Television; and Unpronounceable Productions)
Sense8: “W.W.N.Double D?”, written by The Wachowskis and J.M. Straczynski, directed by James McTeigue (Netflix in association with Anarchos Productions; Javelin Productions; Studio JMS; Georgeville Television; and Unpronounceable Productions)
Sense8: “We Will All Be Judged by the Courage of Our Hearts”, written by The Wachowskis and J.M. Straczynski, directed by Dan Glass (Netflix in association with Anarchos Productions; Javelin Productions; Studio JMS; Georgeville Television; and Unpronounceable Productions)
“Exit Chip”, written and directed by Joshua Thornton-Allen, from a short story by Benedict Smith. I am trying to find out if there is anywhere people can watch this online at the moment; it's mostly been on the festival tour.
Doctor Who: “Sleep No More”, written by Mark Gatiss, directed by Justin Molotnikov (BBC)
Doctor Who: “Heaven Sent”, written by Steven Moffatt, directed by Rachel Talalay (BBC)

Best Editor Short Form. The editor of at least four (4) anthologies, collections or magazine issues (or their equivalent in other media) primarily devoted to science fiction and / or fantasy, at least one of which was published in the previous calendar year.

Neil Clarke (Clarkesworld)
Niall Harrison (Strange Horizons)

Best Professional Artist. An illustrator whose work has appeared in a professional publication in the field of science fiction or fantasy during the previous calendar year.

Liu Junwei, see e.g. http://clarkesworldmagazine.com/artbio_105/
John Jennings, http://jijennin70.tumblr.com/
Rachel Kahn, see e.g. http://www.strangehorizons.com/2015/20151012/children-f.shtml
Leah Piken Kolidas, see e.g. http://strangehorizons.com/2015/20150420/hours-f.shtml, http://www.bluetreeartgallery.com/new-art.php

Best Semiprozine. Any generally available non-professional periodical publication devoted to science fiction or fantasy, or related subjects which by the close of the previous calendar year has published four (4) or more issues (or the equivalent in other media), at least one (1) of which appeared in the previous calendar year, which does not qualify as a fancast, and which in the previous
calendar year met at least one (1) of the following criteria:
(1) paid its contributors and/or staff in other than copies of the publication,
(2) was generally available only for paid purchase

Strange Horizons, http://www.strangehorizons.com/

Best Fan Writer. Any person whose writing has appeared in
semiprozines or fanzines or in generally available electronic media during the previous calendar year.

O. Westin (@microsff)

Best Fan Artist. An artist or cartoonist whose work has appeared through publication in semiprozines or fanzines or through other public, nonprofessional display (including at a convention or conventions), during the previous calendar year.

Chiara Bautista, https://www.facebook.com/chiarabautistaartwork

This entry was cross-posted from Dreamwidth, where there are currently comment(s). View DW comment(s).

Rethinking my Hugo voting

2015-04-21T09:25:12Z

I'm beginning to have doubts about the voting strategy I outlined in my previous post on the Hugos (LJ/DW), where I said I would place No Award ahead of any slate nominees that had not distanced themselves from the slate, even if they were not themselves actively involved in the disgusting hate speech that some of the ringleaders have spewed over our fandom. Essentially there are two things giving me pause:

Firstly, Vox Day has said that he will treat No Award as a victory for the Rabid Puppies. Not that he necessarily gets to declare unilaterally what the victory conditions are, but it does suggest that my previous approach of ranking No Award ahead of almost all slate candidates would not send the message I wanted it to. Arguably nothing would, because Vox Day will try to spin just about anything into a victory, but if there's no way of achieving your goal, it makes all the more sense to redefine what you're trying to do.

Secondly, I've been researching all the slate nominees to try to understand which of them are actively peddling hate and prejudice; which are more passive participants; and which are actively opposed to what the Puppies stand for, but have still been nominated by them for whatever reason, as happened to Annie Bellet and others. Doing that research has led me to spend time in corners of the Internet that I never normally visit, and it's been quite interesting. Horrifying, at times, but perhaps less so than you might think, and always interesting. And one conclusion I've reached is that, while there is definitely a whiff of troll about Vox Day, and more than a whiff of privilege and entitlement amongst the wider group of slate proponents, there is also a genuine disagreement about what matters in storytelling.

I have been making a point of reading the work of all the nominees - even those I consider to be active hate-peddlers and am therefore very unlikely to put on my ballot at all - just to better understand what's going on here. For the most part, I bounce off the slate nominees for stylistic reasons long before I have the chance to do so for anything to do with the content and whatever political implications it might have. There are probably only two or three categories where knowing that something was on a slate might make me rank it significantly differently than I would do on merit; my notes on most of the slate nominees so far say things like "dull", "boring", "unoriginal", "couldn't finish it," none of which are words I associate with Hugo-worthy works. That didn't surprise me too much, because I went in with the impression that some of the slate nominations were just trollage, and finding non-Hugo-worthy works on the slate is certainly consistent with that.

But in tracking down the works and researching their authors, I also found people discussing their work and their reasons for nominating it, in places where I got the impression they felt they were amongst their own tribe and not needing to self-censor too much, and some of what they said there did surprise me. I'm not going to link, for a variety of reasons not least of which is that I think what impressed me was not any one discussion or small set of discussions, but the whole experience of immersing myself for a few weeks in a part of fandom that is not mine. What I found was that there is more of a genuine difference in aesthetic preference than I'd previously realized.

I've seen a lot of comments along the lines of "if they like military SF so much, what's their problem with Ann Leckie's Hugo? Oh yeah, it's that it plays with gender." But actually, while Ancillary Justice with unambiguous genders would be a very different book, it would still not be one the Puppies would appreciate. It's not just her content that makes her different from the kind of military SF the Puppies like, it really is her writing style. The gender ambiguity does throw them to varying degrees, I think, but I'm coming to believe that in many cases their thought process isn't simply "ugh, gender ambiguity, gross, but I can't say that without getting shot down, so let's say it's about ethics in Hugo nominations." For some of them it probably is that - the way Gators were brought in suggests it - but for others, I think it's genuinely "this style is so far removed from what I like that not only do I not understand how anyone else could possibly like it, I actually think it's Objectively Bad Writing. Therefore people who nominate this must be doing it to promote some other agenda, and since it has gender ambiguity in it, or since the author is a woman/a feminist/etc, I'm going to guess that agenda is feminist," when really, the authors and nominators are just quietly and in good faith getting on with writing and nominating the sorts of things their lived experience leads them to find interesting. Whereas I think on my side of the fence, we collectively and I individually have a tendency to read a Puppy recommendation and think "this style is so far removed from what I like that not only do I not understand how anyone else could possibly like it, I actually think it's Objectively Bad Writing. Therefore people who nominate this must be doing it to promote some other agenda, and since there are some racist/sexist/homophobic tropes in this work, or since the author is associated with the Puppies, I'm going to assume that agenda is racist/sexist/homophobic/just plain trollish." But it's at least possible that really, the authors and nominators are just quietly getting on with writing and nominating the sorts of things their lived experience leads them to find interesting, and while I deplore the system(s) of privilege that makes their lived experience one where unexamined prejudicial tropes seem normal and natural, and I dislike slates on principle, despite all that these authors and nominators aren't necessarily acting in bad faith.

So what I'm taking from all this reading is that actually, people's ideas of what constitutes good writing diverge more than I thought possible, and perhaps the way to deal with all of this mess is, after all, just to deal with the issue we were supposed to be voting on in the first place, which is "What were the best SFFnal works of 2014?" and its implied corollary, "What makes a good SFFnal work?". That's a matter of aesthetic philosophy, and philosophical questions are better illuminated by debate and evolving consensus than disposed of by majority vote, but if we view the vote as a contribution to the debate rather than something that settles the question once and for all in victory for one party and crushing defeat for another, perhaps we will yet be okay. Assume good faith, rank the works in order of perceived merit, and see what happens next.

Except the active hate peddlers. I will be leaving all of them unranked below No Award, because there is no way I will willingly be party to asking POC fans to watch their fandom honour a man who thinks they're not fully homo sapiens, no matter how good or bad his work may be.

This entry was cross-posted from Dreamwidth, where there are currently comment(s). View DW comment(s).

How I intend to vote in the Hugos, and why

2015-04-08T07:05:43Z

I've seen a number of people discussing the best way to vote in this year's Hugos, given the fiasco of the year's nominations. I will be voting this year for the first time, and the methodology I intend to use is slightly different from anything I've seen discussed elsewhere - possibly because I haven't known where to look, but still, it seemed like it might be worth writing up.

I haven't voted in the past because the Hugos are voted on by members of WorldCon, and well, I'm too introverted and have too strong a preference for reading over listening to be much of a con-goer, and I always thought buying a membership for a con you don't plan to attend was a bit of an odd concept. (Here's the registration page to buy memberships for this year, if you need it.) But, well, the Hugos are not just about WorldCon; when I was growing up as an awkward geeky fat kid, they were also a symbol of a community where I felt at home, even if I engaged with it mostly through print media and the occasional chat with the owners and other fans at Glasgow's science fiction bookshop, where I would beg my father to take me every time we were in town visiting my grandparents. It has never been as diverse a community as it should be, but it has been mine, and ever so slowly, it has been getting better. Those behind the Puppies want to reverse that, and I won't let them do that without a fight, or at least without trying to reduce the harm they do as much as possible. I understand why some fans feel their efforts will be better invested elsewhere than in trying to save something that wasn't that wonderful to start with, but we each have to make our own choices about how best to eke out our reserves of time, money and energy, and this is one of the choices I am making.

So here's what I intend to do:

1) Read/watch as much of each nomination as I can bear.

2) Research each Puppy nominee enough to place them into one of three categories:
a) Those who have publicly distanced themselves from the views behind the slate. Some people are on the slate against their will, and I don't want to penalize them purely for that. They are not damaging to the kind of fandom I want to see. If they've made it clear that they are in this category, I want them to have as much chance of winning as anyone else.
b) Those who have actively and publicly participated in hate speech. Those people are actively destructive to the kind of fandom I have been and want to be a part of; I don't want to contribute to anything that might signal to them that their behaviour is acceptable there, and I certainly don't want them to win a Hugo.
c) Those who don't care enough to protest their inclusion on the slate, or aren't engaged enough in fandom to notice. I would rather these people not get the recognition of a Hugo, because, other things being equal, I think creators who engage with the fan community and speak out against Puppiness are better for the health and vitality of that community than those who don't; but if we have to have a Puppy winner, obviously I'd prefer these people to the hate speakers.

3) Vote for non-Puppies, and Puppies who have distanced themselves (2 a), in order of merit as I perceive it.

4) Put No Award ahead of all other Puppies.

5) Below No Award, rank non-hate-speaking Puppies (2 c) in order of merit as I perceive it, in the hope that if we must have a Puppy as a category winner, we at least get one that is passively rather than actively vile. I think most of my readers are sufficiently familiar with IRV (instant runoff voting, which is basically what the Hugos use) to understand that anything ranked on your ballot - even below No Award - counts above anything that is not ranked at all; but if anyone is confused about this, this is the best explanation I've seen.

6) Leave hate-speaking Puppies (2 b) off my ballot entirely, because at that point, I don't care how good or bad the writing is - they're all as bad as each other in terms of the damage I'm trying to reduce.

This entry was cross-posted from Dreamwidth, where there are currently comment(s). View DW comment(s).

Philip A. Shaw: Pagan Goddesses in the Early Germanic World

2013-04-21T22:04:27Z

This book has been causing a certain amount of excitement on some of the pagan blogs I read, so I thought I would review it separately from my normal booklist for easier linkage.

The full title is Pagan Goddesses in the Early Germanic World: Eostre, Hreda and the Cult of Matrons. A large part of Shaw's intention in writing it is to begin to challenge a perception that pre-Christian Germanic paganism was homogeneous by examining the claim that Eostre was a pan-Germanic goddess known in Germany as Ostara. Eostre is known to us from a single historical source, Bede's De Tempore Ratione, written to explain the names and timing of various Christian feasts. Hreda is mentioned in the same source.

Shaw begins with an introduction to the linguistic models and methods he intends to use. He then gives an overview of some relevant features of Romano-Germanic religion, focusing in particular on votive inscriptions to the Matronae (matrons, who may be goddesses, ancestors or deified ancestors; inscriptions to similar figures also occur in Romano-Celtic religion.) Shaw points out that these often have names related to particular localities or kin groups, but that some inscriptions refer to the Matronae of a wider group such as a tribe or group of tribes. He notes that the latter type of inscriptions seem to be set up by worshippers who are at some distance from their home area, implying that a worshipper who was outside their home locality, but e.g. still within or near the territory of their tribe, might offer to the Matronae of the tribe as a whole rather than those of their home area.

This leads into Shaw's chapter on Eostre. He begins by setting out Bede's claim that two of the Anglo-Saxon months were named after Eostre and Hreda respectively. He then outlines how the existence of a goddess Ostara was extrapolated from Bede's remarks and the form of the word for Easter in certain Germanic languages, and notes that some scholars have reacted against this extrapolation by doubting that Eostre existed at all. Some other scholars, however, have suggested that Eostre could be etymologically related to the Austriahenae, a group of Matronae to whom a large number of inscriptions have been found near Morken-Harff in Germany. Based on a linguistic and etymological analysis of the words Austriahenae, Eostre and other relevant terms, Shaw rejects the suggestion that Eostre's name relates to a word related to "dawn" or "spring". Rather, he concludes that while Austriahenae and Eostre are not the same entity(ies), they are probably the result of the same naming convention; both effectively refer to the matron(s) of a group that identified themselves as "eastern", probably geographically and/or in relation to neighbouring groups. Thus, Eostre may well have been the matron of a local Kentish group, and this would be consistent with the fact that dialects outside Kent appear to have had a different name for this month. He also notes that copies of Bede's writings seem to have been sent at a very early stage to the diocese of Mainz, which is in the part of Germany where we find the earliest occurrences of a word related to our "Easter" . Thus, it is possible that Bede himself, or other Anglo-Saxon missionary activities around Mainz, are responsible for the use of related words for Easter there.

A chapter on Hreda follows, adopting a similar approach, but here Shaw finds the evidence much less clear. He does not rule out the possibility that her name is related to a word meaning "quick", but he also notes that this word is itself a fairly common element in human names of the period. This means we cannot conclude that Hreda was some sort of "goddess of speed"; she may simply have been the matron of a kin group whose name used this element. Alternatively, there is some evidence that the name may be related to an ethnic designation referring to Goths or a Gothic sub-group. Against the background of the known naming conventions, therefore, both etymologies appear to point to a group matron rather than to a functional goddess.

Shaw's scholarship appears to me to be very careful and thorough, and the book is both short (less than 100 pages if you disregard the indices and endnotes) and extremely readable for an academic work. I highly recommend it to anyone who has an interest in historical British, Germanic and/or Celtic paganisms.

This entry was cross-posted from Dreamwidth, where there are currently comment(s). View DW comment(s).

The staff of life

2009-06-26T21:32:05Z

Over the past couple of weeks, I've been getting really into breadmaking. I liked the idea of starting with as few ingredients as possible, and I'd read that slow-rise breads are easier to digest, so rather than using commercial yeast, I spent about a week making a sourdough starter. After spending some time on the Internet and discovering that there are as many ideas about how to do this as there are bakers, I did it this way: I washed out an old plastic jug that fits comfortably in our fridge. I whisked together one cup of organic white flour and one cup of hand-hot water, put the mixture in the jug and left the jug in the warmest spot in my kitchen, by the oven. Then I fed more flour and water (half a cup each) once a day and gave it a good stir. Once it started smelling yeasty and throwing off lots of hooch (a mildly alcoholic liquid that is a by-product of the yeast fermentation), I refrigerated it till I was ready to make bread (that way you don't need to feed it every day, which isn't worth doing unless you're also going to bake every day - otherwise you'll go through flour at a frightening rate). Done! Some starters get really frothy and may double in size between feeds, but mine never did. Some websites will tell you this means the starter hasn't worked, but as it turns out, that's wrong - different yeasts just behave differently, and I found people online with perfectly successful starters that looked exactly like mine.

To make the bread itself, I take the starter out of the fridge at least eight hours before I want to start baking. Half gets poured into another jug and kept for making pancakes. The remaining half stays in the jug and gets a feed of one cup of flour and one cup of water to wake it up. Then I leave it in its spot by the oven and go off to do whatever I need to do with my day.

When I get back, I "proof the sponge": pour the starter into a bowl, feed it again with another cup of flour and another cup of water, cover it and leave it to sit for two to three hours. Meanwhile, I give the jug a good wash and let it dry.

Now I can make the actual bread dough. First, I put the oven on to maximum to heat. ETA: I now also put a bowl of water in the bottom of the oven to keep the air moist, which seems to improve the rise. I remove the bowl at the end of the second rise, before actually baking the bread. Two cups of the sponge go in a larger bowl; the rest goes back in the jug and gets put in the fridge to wait till the next time I need some starter. I add two tablespoons of melted butter, four teaspoons of sugar and two teaspoons of salt to the sponge. Then I mix in three cups of organic strong white flour and knead the mixture till it all comes together. I roll it into a ball and put it aside for a moment while I lightly oil the bottom of the bowl. I put the dough back in the bowl and turn it over a few times so that it gets a light covering of oil to stop the top drying out, cover the bowl with a tea towel, turn off the oven and put the bowl inside, giving the dough a nice warm place to rise. I go away again and do something else for two or three hours - like typing this post! I have a loaf rising right now, but more about that later.

Then I get the dough out, turn the oven back on, knock the dough back by thumping it on a floured table (R says I bully it!), knead again, form it into a vague loaf shape, oil the pan I'm going to bake it in, put the dough in and oil it again, turn the oven back off, put the pan in and leave it for the second rise. (This is a slightly misleading name and could fool people into thinking that their bread hasn't worked - the dough expands all right, but not all of the expansion is necessarily upwards. Sourdough breads often make quite shallow loaves.) This can be between three hours and seven hours, depending on when I want to eat the bread. Finally, I bake the bread for about 40 minutes at 200C. Leave it to cool for a bit, enjoy the smell of bread filling the house, and then eat.

I can't say how much satisfaction I've been getting from this. It's a simple enough process to be quite soothing, but complex enough to give a real sense of achievement - and it has such tangible results. The bread has a lovely tangy taste. Taking sandwiches to work made from bread I created myself gives me a lovely little boost when I go to the fridge at lunchtime, and it tastes better and is probably healthier than commercial bread (much of which is made using a quick-rise process that destroys many of the nutrients). I especially like timing it so that there's fresh, still-warm bread for breakfast, but getting it ready for tea-time works too. Bake twice a week, which looks quite feasible, and I could stop buying commercial bread for myself altogether (I'd still be buying it for the rest of the family, who have sandwiches more often than I do.)

The loaf that's rising in the oven at the moment will probably be the last white one I make for a while. I'm trying out one more tweak to improve the second rise - putting a bowl of water in the oven with the dough - and then I'm going to move on. White is easiest to make, so it's a good one to start with, but I want to start adding wholemeal and rye flours - entirely apart from the benefits of fibre, I was mostly raised on German rye bread, and the bread is one of the things I still miss about Germany. After that, flavours and textures: spices, herbs, oats, seeds. And new ideas for the half of the starter that gets discarded: apparently you can use it to make English muffins, American muffins, bagels, pizza bases and probably more. I can tell I'm going to have a lot of fun with this...

This entry was cross-posted from Dreamwidth, where there are currently comment(s). View DW comment(s).