SC - Re: sca-cooks V1 #199

[Philip & Susan Troy]

Lady Aoife Finn wrote:

> This topic hits rather close to home for me, as I just had a VERY unpleasant
> situation over this debate: For Aethelmearc Crown I published that I would
> be unable to cater to individual dietary needs, but ingredients lists and
> menus would be available ahead of time. Exactly ONE person contacted me with
> a request for ingredients lists and a menu. This fact did not stop an
> internationally known SCA Personage from writing a letter to the
> Reservationist stating that she would not attend with her husband because
> she had life threatening allergies, and couldn't risk eating food that
> wasn't custom-cooked. She went on to state that she had cooked for up to
> 400, still accomodating for other's allergies. She then ended the letter
> stating that she sent a copy of the letter of complaint to the King and
> Queen, Prince and Princess of Aethelmearc , and Seneschals of both
> Aethelmearc and the East. She Never, Ever contacted me, nor the Autocrat, my
> husband. And yet, apparently she felt strongly enough to ensure that my SCA
> future was impeded by her discomfiture.

Seems a bit vindictive. Those of us old enough to remember will be
reminded of Richard Nixon's proscription list of personal Enemies of the
State. Parties were thrown in Washington by those who felt they had been
enormously complimented. It's said that a  person is well judged by the
quality of his enemies. If this is the Gentle I think it is, I too have
been accused of "trying to murder" this Lady. She contacted the autocrat
of an event I cooked for three months before the event, asking about
potential allergens in the feast. The autocrat said he wasn't certain,
but thought I was planning to serve a fish dish, to which her antipathy
is well known, and that she should contact me directly, or talk to him
again closer to the event.

I never heard from her, and assumed there would be no problems, until I
received a message to the effect that this Lady and her husband were
deep in a heated discussion with the autocrat on the subject of fish,
and how we were trying to murder her. Apparently the Lady had
misinterpreted the autocrat's statements as meaning that there would be
no fish served. As it happens, the fish was in the form of chilled
fillets sealed in CryoVac plastic, and I simply waited until the last
possible second to remove the fish from its packaging and cook it, by
which time the Lady was able to finish her business and leave the site,
since she hadn't intended to stay anyway. It turns out that even the
Lady's husband withdrew his support from her argument when he learned
that she had never contacted me or followed up with the autocrat.   
 
> Obviously, there are some quit strong feelings out there on this issue.
> 
> Regardless of her "take" on the situation, I still feel that I did the right
> thing. I was publicly honest about how far I was willing to go, and provided
> my contact information in the event announcement. I am not a short-order
> cook nor am I a professional cook, and I do not have the luxury of working
> in a kitchen where I can just hand the reigns over to someone else while I
> stop to "custom cook" food for one person. I always publish a recipe
> leaflet, and a menu. I will happily send ingredients lists, and will even
> include alternate dish choices, in case something happens while cooking. I
> always ensure that vegetarians will come away with enough food including
> protein to make a healthy meal. That is as far as I am willing to go. That
> is as far as anyone should have to go for a feast with over a certain level
> of attendees or with a certain level of complexity.

Agreed. Past a certain point, the level of difficulty of providing
personal attention to each attendee at an event is in a sort of
geometrical proportion to the number of attendees. Four hundred is MORE
than twice as difficult as two hundred.

> So, tell me, am I wrong?

No. Most emphatically, in my opinion you were right. The extent to which
you were prepared to accomodate those with special needs is almost
irrelevant in comparison to the simple fact that you posted the
conditions under which you were working in advance for all to see, and
you kept your word, which is more than many people do.

It isn't the first time, nor will it be the last, that someone has
suffered for doing the right thing.

Adamantius
To be removed from the SCA-Cooks mailing list, please send a message to
SCA-Cooks-Request with the message body of unsubscribe.

============================================================================