Tumblr
January 28, 2013What Happens in the Dark
January 16, 2012Some published studies, more than a few, in my case, make you want to slap your forehead and say “Why did I think of that?” The most recent case for me is Zhong, Bohns and Gino’s (2010) study “Good Lamps Are the Best Police: Darkness Increases Dishonesty and Self-Interested Behavior” published in the flagship journal of the Association for Psychological Science, Psychological Science. You can view the abstract for free, here.
The key to one of these forehead-slap studies is that it is something that could be accomplished in most any lab space that you have. Certainly those of us at small colleges and universities have trouble getting access to the latest in brain-imaging technology, and some of us don’t even have graduate students to actually gather and analyse our data (or even do the initial write ups for our publications). But there any number of good ideas out there, for those willing to have them.
Association for Psychological Science
Zhong, Bohns and Gino have a good idea; they call it illusory anonymity. In a series of three experiments, they demonstrated that even the slightest change in illumination (i.e., making it a little dark) gave their participants (apparently) the illusion that they were more anonymous. This led to them being more, well, immoral, or at the least, selfish (thus, the title of the article).
In the first experiment, participants were either in a brightly lit room (12 florescent lights) or a visibly dimmer room (4 florescent lights), and put into a situation wherein they could easily cheat on a simple number puzzle. In previous research, people were able to complete about 7 out of the 20 ‘puzzles’ in 5 minutes. Participants were to be paid for each completed puzzle. The experiment was set up so that the participants had every reason to believe that their responses were anonymous. Therefore, they could cheat with some impunity, since the experimenters wouldn’t know (at least that’s what they were led to believe), and they would then make more money. Zhong, Bohns and Gino reasoned that the darker room would strengthen the particpants feelings of anonimity, and that those in the darkened room would be more likely to cheat to make more money. And that’s exactly what happend. While those in the bright room did cheat a little (overstating their performance by an average of .83 puzzles each), those in the darkened room cheated significantly more (overstating by an average of 4.21 puzzles each). Please note that there was no significant difference in the number of actual puzzles solved!
The second experiment was even easier; participants wore sunglasses (or clear lens) while supposed playing an on-line game wherein they had to divide $6.00 between themselves and an online ‘partner.’ Those wearing sunglasses (which, again, was supposed raise their illusory anonymity) gave significantly less money to their on-line partner, and significantly less than what would be a ‘fair’ division ($3.00 each). The clear-lens group did not significantly differ from a ‘fair’ division. In a third study similar to the second (with the same results), the sunglasses group also reported feeling more anonymous during the study.
Why? What about being in slight darkness might make one more selfish (or “self-interested, in the parlance of the study)? Why would someone in an anonymous on-line ‘game’ feel even more anonymous wearing sunglasses? This study can’t answer that question, but since there were no actual changes in anonymity whatsoever, it shows once again how factors of which we may not even be aware can have impacts on our behavior. And it reminds us to keep the lights on in the counting room. And finally leads me to think, once again, ‘why didn’t I think of that?’
The Martin Luther/Reformation Song
June 24, 2010
I cannot take credit for the Luther song. Not even close. However, I’ve done my bit to spread it around.
I first heard it, and about it, from one of my wife’s life-long friends, Regina (McHugh) Forrence, who learned it from her sister Peggy, who learned it (I believe) at Bishop McDevitt High School (Wyncote, PA, near Jenkintown). One of the nuns, Sr. Irene, developed it as a study aide for learning about the beginnings of the Reformation and of course the role played by Martin Luther. If fact, legend has it that there exists a whole sheet of poems and songs to help students learn various aspects of church history.
When I mentioned this song one day, years ago, during a faculty lunch, several of my colleagues, especially Sr. Patsy McDonald and Bill Portier, asked for copies. I dutifully requested the lyrics from my friend Regina, and passed them along.
Some how, probably two or three disk crashes ago, I lost my copy. A Google search of the intertubes shows not a single copy on line! This is not good. So, in the interest of perpetuating this particular mnemonic devise, I give you the Luther/Reformation Song, sung to the tune of Winter Wonderland. Enjoy.
The Luther/Reformation Song
Martin Luther, Augustinian,
Challenged Tetzel, a Dominican.
Indulgences’ worth gave argument birth
Which lead to Luther’s Thesis 95
When upbraided, he was aided,
By his clients, in an alliance
Of princes and press, who then more or less
Spread Luther’s revolution far and wide.
He denied that there were seven channels
By which the grace of God could come to us,
Taught that faith alone was quite sufficient
To keep a man from being lost.
Kept the Eucharist, kept Baptism,
Kept the Bible, dropped tradition.
He wouldn’t conform, so the Diet of Worms
Condemned him as a heretic at last.
Mom’s Family Calendar by Sandra Boynton
March 31, 2010Many years ago, I started buying calendars as Christmas presents for my wife and two daughters. For the girls, I usually chose dance calendars. For my wife Nancy, I tried for something artistic. However, one year, I happened upon a Sandra Boynton calendar called “Mom’s Family Calendar.” Our life hasn’t been the same since. And I mean that in a good way. You may not realize it, but you need this calendar.
2010 Boynton Mom Calendar
Boynton gained some degree of fame a greeting card regular, having any number of cards under the “Shoebox” label. She has since expanded. Oh, has she expanded. The Boynton empire now includes a website, books, music, plush toys, t-shirts, mugs, jewelry, calendars, and oh yes, cards. These all became famous due to her cute little animal drawing and the puns that go with them. I personally own some Boynton buttons, including “Happy Gnu Year,” and “Hippo Valentine’s Day.”
The Mom calender has the drawings, but the puns are all visual. But that’s not what’s life changing; it’s the size and scope of the months themselves. Each month has the usual two page spread, but in this case, the days are listed all along the left side in a column covering both pages, with five separate columns for your use. The first column is labeled “Mom,” of course, and you put what ever you need to at the tops of the other columns. Thus, there is a generously sized rectangle for every person (plus we have a “Family” column), given that you don’t have more than five people in your family. (If you do have more than five, you’ll have to figure that out; maybe more than one calendar?) The extra room (compared to traditional calendars, with page sized photo/art at the top and a traditionally presented month on the bottom) makes is so much easier to fill in the vital information you need to know to accomplish whatever it is that you’re supposed to do on that day. The weekends are a slightly different color, so it’s no problem keeping the weeks together. There are stickers that you can use to mark special days (birthdays, dentist, etc.), and even a pouch to put special (flat, paper) items in. This year the package included a magnetic ‘phone card’ to fill out and put on your refrigerator.
Children's Board Book
In our house, if it’s not on “THE CALENDAR,” it pretty much doesn’t exit. Anytime anyone says something to the effect of “I have an appointment at XXX,” the reply from the Mom is “Put It On The Calendar!” And it works.
Firefly/Serenity
March 6, 2010Joss Whedon wrote the Buffy the Vampire Slayer film, as well as creating the associated TV series. Soon after Buffy went away (in 2002) he created a short-lived series on Fox called Firefly which pretty much everyone missed, and which Fox really never gave much of a chance. This is a real shame, as it was excellent, and there was enough fan pressure (specifically, I’ve read, DVD sales) that a movie, Serenity, was made to wrap up some of the most important story lines.
- Firefly DVD Collection
I would recommend both. The original TV series run was only 14 episodes, which, due to some programming genius at Fox, were not even shone in chronological order! However, all 17 episodes that were filmed are available on the DVD. There are two great things about this show; its world and its characters.
The world Whedon creates is a future time when our Earth (on the show called “Earth-that-was”) has become uninhabitable; however, we have managed to spread out to another system, one with many planets and many moons, many of which have been terraformed for human habitation. (Interestingly, most of the characters swear in Mandarin, adding to the rich back history of this universe, which is only hinted at most of the time.) The ‘central planets’ have formed a relatively oppressive government (at least toward those not on the ‘central planets’) known as the Alliance, while those desiring to be left alone have established a variety of colonies throughout the system, some good, some not so good. In the relatively recent past there was a civil war when some of the outer planets, the Independents, tried to break away from the Alliance; they failed. Soldiers of the resistance are known as Browncoats. (One of the most popular websites about the show is Browncoats.com. You can even buy a browncoat!)
How to make a buck in such a universe, if you were on the losing side? Well, you could secure a semi-space worthy vessel and fly cargo, both legal and not-so-legal, from one world to another. The title of the show refers to the common nickname of the ship model upon which the cast spends the majority of their time. Which leads us to our characters.
Whedon’s genius has always been the characters he creates. In this case we have nine strong characters, each with his/her own place in the ‘Verse (as the universe is referred to). The Captain of Firefly-class ship Serenity is one Malcolm Reynolds, played with verve by Nathan Fillion. His first mate is a friend and fellow Browncoat from the civil war, Zoe Washburn (Gina Torres), who is married to the pilot ofSerenity, Hoban ‘Wash’ Washburne (Alan Tudyk). The rest of the crew is filled out by a spunky ship’s engineer, Kaylee Frye (Jewel Staite) and a barely-controlled tough, Jayne Cobb (Adam Baldwin). The rest of the cast play paying passengers; Shepard Book (some sort of holy man; Ron Glass), Dr. Simon Tam (Sean Maher), who has also secreted aboard his mystery-ladened sister, River Tam (Summer Glau), and last but certainly not least, Inara Serra (Morena Baccarin, currently making a splash as ‘Ana,’ leader of the aliens on ABC’s V), who plays a “Companion,” a traveling courtesan.
We follow this merry band on their adventures across various worlds (and in deep space itself). Whedon’s always clever, dead-on dialog is here too, and he consistently surprises us by breaking the conventions of the genre. In one of my favorite scenes, Zoe and Wash are breaking into a facility where Malcolm is fighting for his life with a bad guy. As they approach, Zoe says “Wait! This is something the Captain wants to do by himself!” Straining under the grip of the bad guy, Malcolm grunts, “No, it isn’t!”
The main story arc is about River Tam; what was done to her by agents of the Alliance, and why. That arc isn’t cleared up until the film, Serenity. I don’t want to give too much away (I’d rather you see it for yourself). If you know me, you know I love any movie where there’s some woman kicking butt, no matter how ‘bad’ it is (e.g.,Ultraviolet, Aeon Flux, Elektra,The Fifth Element, etc., etc.), and we have that in spades here. In any case, I recommend both the series (Firefly) and the film (Serenity), in that order. Give it a try; if you like science fiction, westerns, or just good story-telling, you’ll enjoy them both.
We’re About 9
February 15, 2010
Brian, Katie & Pat
We’re About 9 is Katie Graybeal, Pat Klink and Brian Gundersdorf. They live in the Baltimore area, which is not where I originally heard them (that would be the Falcon Ridge Folk Festival, a candidate for a future post). They all write songs, and they all sing on each others songs. For me, they epitomize modern folk music.
My journey to modern folk music was a long one, I suppose. Everyone, I think, has a favorite musical group growing up. And over the years, that preference is likely to change. I’m old enough that the first groups I liked were The Carpenters and Three Dog Night. This was due mainly to songs on the radio that got translated into albums in my hands. I’m not sure how it happened, exactly, but the first three albums I owned were “Close To You,” and “Harmony,” and Virgil Fox’s “‘On Top of’ Bach” (more about that in a later post as well).
My major focus through high school was ‘prog rock,’ and most importantly, Yes (a passion I’ve never really given up). However, a long stint as the Saturday night 10:00 PM to 2:00 AM DJ on my college radio station (WXAC-FM; which also tells you something about my social life in college), my list of what I like expanded to nearly every genre of music. Eventually, I began to listen to more folk music, and folk groups. Currently, at the top of my playlists are a bunch of female singer/songwriters (often referred to as ‘ecto‘ in honor of Happy Rhodes), and a few modern folk groups that emphasize melody, clever, often meaningful lyrics and group harmony. This list would include Dave Carter & Tracey Grammer, The Nields, Girlyman, and of course, We’re About 9.
The appeal of harmony singing is nothing new to me; looking back to my early favorites, harmony was clearly a key to the success of both The Carpenters (a brother/sister act) and Three Dog Night (three lead singers!; few, if any, original songs!). So the fact that the close harmonies of We’re About 9 appeal to me is no surprise. However, the melodies and subject matter of the songs in their catalog is also tremendously impressive.
Paper Dust:: Star Dust
I would first point you to CD Baby, where you can buy pretty much all of their music. Check out the page for their album Engine, and give a listen to the snippet of the song Albany, Hijo, or Sketches For Alaina. (I wish you could hear a bit of Writing Again, as it’s one of my favorites.)
Or check out their newest album, Paperdust::Stardust. Give a listen to a few seconds of Daylight Savings, For One More, or (probably my favorite on this album) Miscreant Men.
If the snippets aren’t enough to convince you, they have a bunch longer snippets (and even a whole song or two) you can listen on the music page of their main website. Again, give Albany a listen (right at the bottom of that page), as well as Gravities, Another Love Song, and Brooklyn.
Somebody said (probably Martin Mull) that “writing about music is like dancing about architecture.” I don’t want to try and explain how good We’re About 9 are; listen and see if you agree.
The ‘Death’ of “Learning Styles”
February 4, 2010For many years, I’ve been skeptical of the idea that different students learn better due to them having differing “learning styles.” However, I have never had the opportunity or wherewithal to throughly research the question, and find out if my skepticism was well placed or not. A new (?) report, published by the APS (Association for Psychological Science) has done the heavy-lifting for me. In the occasional journal Psychological Science in the Public Interest (2008), Pashler, McDaniel, Rohrer and Bjork have reviewed all the literature available and concluded that, when it comes to actual learning, ‘learning styles’ just don’t seem to matter.
This issue of the journal is given over entirely to the Pashler, et al. review, subtitled “Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence.” The authors are succinct and to the point; the whole article comes in at about 14 pages, including illustrations. Even better, you can get the whole thing free in PDF form from the APS website, by clicking here. If you have any interest in this topic, you should go read it.
If you don’t want to read it right now, I’ll summarize. The idea that different people have different “learning styles” goes back at least 3o years, and is related to other “type” theories of personality (e.g., Jung’s theory as popularized by the near-ubiquitous Myers-Briggs Type Indicator). The fact that most psychologists have rejected type theories of personality (and specifically the Myers-Briggs) has not reduced their popularity in the general population. Nonetheless, Pashler et al. point out that if we are going to spend many, many dollars on tests (and teacher training) on the premise that each student’s Learning Style should be measured, and that these styles deserve their own instructional scheme, it would be nice to know that there’s an actual scientific basis for this notion.
It would also be nice to know exactly which set of ‘learning styles’ would be the correct set. In their 2004 review of learning styles Coffield et al. identified at least 71 different learning styles theories/schemes! So, Pashler et al. were commissioned by Psychological Science in the Public Interest to see if any scientific support exists for any learning styles theory.
- An interaction that might support a learning styles hypothesis
Before examining the evidence, Pashler et al. spend some time discussing exactly what could be considered acceptable evidence for the existence of learning styles. They point out that acceptable evidence would basically involve an interaction effect; a group presented with a teaching method that matches their learning style should do better than a group with a different learning style, and should also do better with their preferred learning style than with a different style. Pasher et al. present three different interaction effects that would support a Learning Styles hypothesis, and also about 10 different interactions that would not lend support to the hypothesis (I refer you to the original to see these; they are included in the PDF).
Pashler et al. then go forth looking for these ‘style by treatment’ interactions. However, looking for studies that met their criteria for acceptable evidence, they found exactly one. That’s right, one (Sternberg, Grigorenko, Ferrari & Clinkenbeard, 1999). And although that study showed some tenuous evidence for one learning styles scheme (analytical/creative/practical), Pashler et al. point out some methodological flaws that would prevent us from considering this one study anywhere near convincing, let alone definitive.
In all the other studies that met the criteria, Pashler et al. found neutral, or more often, negative evidence for learning styles. Given the thousands of studies and numerous book that have been written on the subject, this result seems near impossible.
What we have then is an entire educational structure (and commerce base) without a scientific foundation. A quick google.com search on ‘learning styles’ give more than 1.8 million hits. That’s 1,800,000 hits.
Pashler et al. don’t claim that evidence for learning styles is impossible, or that learning styles don’t exist; they’re simply pointing out that, like UFOs, ESP, and the Flying Spaghetti Monster, there’s no evidence to support the concept.
I want to avoid having this summary be longer the actual abstract (or the paper itself, for that matter). Again, if this issue is of any concern to you (if, for example, you are a taxpayer whose taxes are funding “learning styles” education), I urge you to read the original report and draw your own conclusions.
And yes, the title of this post was meant to be confrontational. 🙂
References:
Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D. & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning Styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9 (3), 106-119.
Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning. A systematic and critical review. London: Learning and Skills Research Center.
Sternberg, R.J., Grigorenko, E.L., Ferrari, M., & Clinkenbeard, P. (1999). A triarchic analysis of an aptitude-treatment interaction. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 15, 1-11.
Pushing Daisies
January 25, 2010In fact, you almost certainly missed Pushing Daisies, my favorite show of 2007-2009; if more of you had watched it, it wouldn’t have been cancelled! Of course, I’ve actually come to expect my favorite new TV shows to be cancelled, while stuff I refuse to watch (e.g., American Idiots Idol, any reality show you care to name) go on and on and on. Pushing Daisies was the most charming show on the air since, well, perhaps ever. I think ‘charming’ is the right word; the mix of fantasy, romance, comedy and crime drama makes it unique in the annals of TV fare.
Cast of Pushing Daisies
Although the premise of the show is somewhat convoluted, Jim Dale’s narration (yes, this show included narration) was able to tell the whole story in just a few seconds at the beginning of each episode. Basically, Ned, usually referred to as “The Piemaker” and played by Lee Pace, discovers as a young boy that if he touches something dead, it comes back to life. However, he doesn’t immediately realize that if that formerly-dead thing stays alive for more than one minute, something (or someone) else must die, usually of about the same size (at one point in the second season, Ned reanimates a bunch of bees, much to the detriment of a building full of water bugs). The other big caveat, and the one that gives the show its romantic tension, is that if Ned at any time touches the formerly-dead, it dies again, this time for good. On the other hand, if he can avoid touching the formerly-dead, it seems they can hold on forever; Ned’s childhood dog Digby is still living with him as an adult, seemingly as lively as the day he was resurrected, even though his master only ever pets him with a wooden hand. Due to, no doubt, the short run of the show, this aspect of the premise is never explored.
Ned 'The Piemaker' played by Lee Pace
When local a private eye Emerson Cod (played by Chi McBride) discovers The Piemaker’s secret, he realizes that Ned’s ability would be a big help in his work; it would be much easier to solve murders if you could simply ask the dead person who did it! He forms an alliance with Ned to do just that, and nearly every episode includes a visit to the morgue to try and solve a crime in the one minute that Ned can safely reanimate an often comically dead victim.
The romance of show the begins in the very first episode when Ned and Emerson visit a funeral home to try to discover who killed a young woman who was killed on a cruise ship; O Coincidence! This particular young woman is Charlotte “Chuck” Charles (Britian’s Anna Friel), Ned’s boyhood next-door neighbor and crush, whom he has not seen since his mother’s funeral when he was eight. Ned is so enamored of Chuck that he decides not to re-touch her (the funeral director who dies as a result is corrupt, so I guess it’s OK).
Anna Friel as Charlotte "Chuck" Charles
Talk about love unrequited! Ned now has a girlfriend that he can’t even touch! This leads to the third leg of an unlikely triangle, the pining waitress in Ned’s pie shop (The Pie Hole, of course), Olive Snook, played by the incredible Kristin Chenoweth. Olive is in love with Ned, and is quite distressed by the arrival of Ned’s new, ah, ‘friend?’ ‘girlfriend?’ It’s not clear to anyone exactly what their relationship is, since they never seem to even touch. Hilarity ensues.
No really, it does! The show is sweet and forgiving, and the characters win our hearts every time. The show’s love of the English language is another reason to watch; this is a show where you really will want to re-hear some of the dialog, just to make sure you heard it right the first time. The way that the principle romance plays out over the two seasons of the show is never forced, nor exactly what you’d expect. Of course the circumstances of Ned’s ‘ability’ and the way that he is reunited with his childhood sweetheart lead one to wonder exactly how long the two main characters can hold on to this seemingly doomed love affair.
Kristin Chenoweth as Olive Snook
There are lots of subplots: What about Chuck’s maiden aunts (wonderfully acted by Ellen Greene and Swoosie Kurtz)? Where is Emerson’s daughter? Why won’t Ned explain what happened to Chuck’s father? And of course since we have the weekly crime to solve, lots of guest stars (Paul Reubens, Molly Shannon, Fred Willard, David Arquette, Stephen Root, and on and on) appear.
This show has so many delights in store for you, I almost envy those who will see it for the first time.
I’m not the only one who loves this show; there are plenty of fan sites out there (you might try The Piemaker), and best of all, you can purchase both seasons on DVD for a reasonable price at Amazon.com, or borrow them at Netflix.com. Even better, right now you can watch the first season for free (well, for the price of a few commercials) on the WB network site, of all places. I urge you to give it a shot (start with the first show, the “Pie-Lette”); you’ll thank me later.
Ned and Chuck Not Kissing
Dropbox.com
January 19, 2010
If you’re like me, you have a computer in your office, and another at home. If you want to work on something at home, you probably find a way to haul the files home, at one time on floppy disks (ask your parents what those were, kids), or now on USB memory stick of some type. It works OK, but you have to remember to sync up the files yourself when you get back to they office; otherwise, you end up with two (or more!) versions of the same file floating around.
Likewise, if you work on something at home, you have to carry it in to the office (or perhaps email it to yourself). If you’re lucky, you might even have a laptop in your office you can haul home, and work that way, but you have to remember to haul it back, and you still won’t have the files on your home computer.
Well, fear not! Those days are over with the arrival of Dropbox.com. After downloading and setting up your ‘dropbox’ on (for example) your office computer, you drag all the files you might want to work on both computers to your new ‘dropbox’ folder. Then, go to your other computer, download and set up dropbox, using the same name and password.
That’s it! You now have a folder that will automatically synchronize the files from one computer to the other. In addition, the files are backed up on-line as well, and can thus be accessed from anywhere in the world on a computer with internet access!
It’s fast, too. I set up my Dropbox over Christmas break, when I had my laptop at home. It took less than one minute for my home computer to inform me that it had a new version of a file after I had saved it on my laptop.
You get two gigabytes of storage for free! This is quite a deal, as I now have all my Word documents, Excel spreadsheets and PowerPoint files in my Dropbox, syncronized across my home and office computers. I’ve also ‘informed’ Word, Excel and PowerPoint to look for and store files in my ‘Dropbox’ from now on. These types of files are relatively small; I’m only using 1.4 gigs of my 2 gig limit. When I finish editing a file in my office and go home, the newly edited file is there, waiting for me at home. Amazing!
This also means that I have, effectively, backed up my files on-line! Even if you’re not syncing your files across two computers, your Dropbox acts as an on-line, off-site backup for your most important files. And let’s not forget that it’s free!
And that’s not all! You can also make selected folders or files in your on-line Dropbox public. This means that instead of copying or uploading (for example) your picture files to some site so that your friends and family can see them you can simply drag them to a folder in your Dropbox, and you done! You can also restrict access to only those who you want to see them. There’s a nice tour/video available at the site to explain how it all works.
So, what’s in it for the company? Well, as I mentioned, your document files are probably not that large. However, if you decide to have picture, video or music files in your Dropbox, you’ll likely run through your 2 gigs quickly. I have nearly 4 gigs of picture files on my personal computer, and I’d be embarrassed to even tell you how many gigs of music. No problem! Dropbox will gladly sell you much more storage space. A 50 gig account (which would be enough for my current documents, pictures and music) will run you $9.99 a month, or $99 a year. A 100 gig account is about twice as much, $19.99 a month, or $199 a year. This is quite a good deal, IMHO, given the convenience of the whole thing.
If you do decide to give it a try, consider using this link. It would help me out; if someone tries Dropbox on your recommendation, they’ll up your free storage to as much as 3 gigs! If a few of you do, I can consider setting up a public folder for my pictures. 🙂
I can’t remember the last time I found a piece of software this useful, that was this easy to set up, and that has worked this flawlessly (to date, at any rate). You should consider giving Dropbox a try.
Empress-Garden Restaurant
April 17, 2009
[ This version of a Chinese restaurant has been closed for sometime. There is another in its place I have not visited.]
Few people think of Littlestown, PA as a restaurant destination, including yours truly. However, the renovated Empress-Garden has changed that evaluation in a major way. No longer just a Chinese restaurant, on offer are a variety of relatively unusual (for Adams County, in any case) south-east Asian dishes, from places like Indonesia, Hong Kong, Malaysia and Thailand. In addition, while once thought of by many (well, me at least) as a ‘take out only’ operation, the renovated Empress-Garden now has a pleasant interior that can accommodate many dining needs.
If you’re wondering exactly what’s on offer, fear not; the entire menu is available on-line, which can save time at the restaurant, especially since there so many unusual dishes to choose from. The appetizer/soup menu alone includes not just the usual and expected Chinese egg rolls and wonton soup, but also Chicken Sate (Indonesia), Tuna Pastel (Malaysia), Tom Yum Gong (Thai, served for 2), Mei Fun Soup (Singapore, also for 2), and Gado Gado Jakarta ( Indonesia).
The entrees are equally diverse. For example, not only will you find the usual fried rices, but also Nasi Goreng Bali (an Indonesian fried rice ), Royal Pad Thai and Singapore Mei Fun. Under entrees, the usual Chinese dishes are represented, (Lemon Chicken, General Tso’s Chicken, Beef & Chicken Szechuan Style, Kungpao Delight, Dragon & Phoenix), but peak at the ‘Pacific Entrees’ list and find Chicken Katsu and Beef Sukiyaki from Japan, Bali Island Pork and Beef Rendang from Indonesia, Thai Spicy Basil Shrimp, Spicy String Beans and Red Curry Dishes, and Malaysian Golden Fried Baby Calamari.
There are a whole series of combo platters available, and with all the possible substitutions that you can make, the variety is staggering. Here you can choose among four appetizers (spring or egg roll, shrimp toast, or crab rangoon), three varieties of rice (chicken or pork fried, or white), and more than 20 entrees, many of which can be ordered with your choice of pork, chicken, beef or shrimp. As it says right on the menu, the variety is nearly endless.
Nasi Goreng Bali (Indonesia)
Everything we’ve had at Empress-Garden has been superb. On our last visit I had the Nasi Goreng Bali, a sweet-ish fried rice the comes with one each beef and chicken satay, as well as a well-fried egg. This will not remind you of your usual, run-of-the-mill pork fried rice. Nancy was feeling like Thai and had the Royal Pad Thai. You might find better in a full-on Thai restaurant, but then you’d have to travel a lot farther than Littlestown; it was very good. And Ronnie had the Malaysian Golden Fried Baby Calamari; I usually take a pass on calamari, as I find it chewy and tough; this dish was nothing like that. With just a hint of batter, the calamari was tender and delicious. I also tried the Tuna Pastel (deep fried tuna in a pastry shell), and as you can see, I couldn’t even wait for the picture before diving in. Although made from canned, not fresh, tuna, they were an interesting change from the usual fried/steamed dumplings.
Royal Pad Thai
Another pleasure of Empress-Garden has been the consistently pleasant and accommodating staff. I don’t remember a cheerier waitress; just having her wait our table put us all in a good mood. If you’re distracted by the very presence of small children (we are not, having ‘been there’), be prepared, as a couple of kids, apparently belonging to the cooks, seem to have free run of the place. However, they are quiet and certainly did nothing to detract from our evening.
Golden Fried Baby Calamari (Malaysian)
Empress-Garden is only too happy to accommodate groups, including setting up a buffet with your choice of meals. Groups of 10 or more can get a ‘package price,’ which I assume means ‘per each pricing.’
Tuna Pastel (belonging to an impatient diner)
Now, there is one other feature of Empress-Garden that we cannot avoid; the cost. I still can’t believe how inexpensive the meals are here. The combo platters are all $7.25 (less for vegetarian); the entrees range from $6.25 for some of the rice dishes to $10.95 for some of the beef dishes (Beef Rendang, for example). That’s it. I couldn’t find anything on the menu for $11. With two appetizers, a pot of tea and ‘Chinese donuts’ (i.e., warm, deep fried dough rolled in sugar; yummy!), the meal for three described above came in under $40. How can you afford not to eat here? So, get thee to Littlestown and try something different; it’s not just a Chinese restaurant!
Empress-Garden Restaurant, 214 S Queen St # B, Littlestown, PA 17340.
You May Have Missed... 