SC - contests, cooking, and music

[Stephen Bloch]

Unlike the last half dozen posters in this thread, I've never INTENDED
to "stay out of this discussion" :-), but only to catch up on other
people's comments before posting my own.  Let's see....

Rhi wrote:
>I didn't realize that posting things that
>I have used in feasts that turned out to be popular, without having first 
>researched them, was such a heinous crime here.  I thought the list was for 
>trading ideas, pardon my ignorance.
>
>Sometime when I get enough time to thoroughly research my recipes, I might rejoin 
>this list.  In the meantime, you can all stop the e-mail, I won't make the same
>mistake again.

Posting unresearched recipes is not a crime, and I don't believe
anyone has been punished for it.  People have, however, been asked
whether the recipes are period; if you choose to take that question as
punishment, that's your business.  I know that I have at times asked
that question in an overly abrupt manner that could easily be taken as
an accusation.  I apologize for this, and I'll try not to do it in the
future.

Yes, the list is for trading ideas, ideas relevant to SCA cooking.  And
while "anything that works well served to a hall of 250 diners" is
arguably relevant to SCA cooking, I take it as axiomatic that "anything
that works well served to a hall of 250 diners AND was cooked and eaten
in Medieval Europe" is MORE relevant to SCA cooking.

Fekete Hollo Noemi wrote:
>... one of those cooks that prefers that those I cook for get enough to
>eat and enjoy the feast rather than worry about how period the recipes are.

And Gunthar wrote:
>We all need to be a little more careful and
>remember that not everyone who subscribes to the cooks list even wants to be 
>perfectly period but instead wants to make their guests happy.

What "instead"?  Of course, we're not going to get "perfectly period" no
matter what we do, so let's substitute the phrase "as period as I
can".  Where is the conflict between an "as period as I can" feast and
making the guests happy?  Where is the conflict between the diners
getting enough food and enjoying it, and the dishes being period?
A dish that isn't from an appropriate time and place doesn't get served.
A dish that doesn't taste good doesn't get served.  That still leaves us
with thousands of recipes to work out until we have tasty interpretations
of them.

Fekete Hollo Noemi continued:
>I have several recipes of
>my own that I would be willing to share, but the one time I offered no one
>took me up on the offer.

I seldom respond to messages that say "I have Recipe X; if anybody's
interested, I'll post it" because I assume somebody else WILL be
interested and it WILL be posted anyway.  In most cases, I end up
reading a dozen "me too" messages.  So I think this is just a typical
Net communication snafu, not a problem with the philosophy of the list.

>  In fact the only response was the statement of a
>web site where a period recipe could be found.

Is something wrong with that response?  I thought we were here to
exchange information.  F.H.N. offered a recipe that's known to work well
at feasts, and somebody else offered a similar recipe that was "period".
This allows all the list readers to try to combine the best of both,
producing a period recipe that works well at feasts.  I can't imagine a
more productive response.

Derdriu wrote:
>Pray lords and ladies, remember that asking someone for documentation is
>commonly used (not by any of us on this list) as a way of putting someone in
>there place, of telling them they are not as good, worthy, etc. of being in
>the SCA as the asker.

I keep hearing about this, and I'm sure it happens; there are enough
people in the SCA with serious complexes and a need to put other people
down.  Maybe I'm just so thick-headed I don't notice when people are
trying to put me down.  In any case, be assured that when I ask for
documentation, it is because I actually want to know where and when the
recipe came from.

Genevieve wrote:
>"Although I appreciate your enthusiasm for
>authenticity, I chose to spend my time with the Society relaxed.  My work
>is stressful enough without adding gray hairs over documentation.  If you
>has some you would like to share, however, I would certainly be
>interested."

and again:
>each member has within them
>a limit as to how period that person wishes to be and how much "trouble"
>they wish to go to to be accepted by members of rank.  I am not one to go
>to extraordinary documentary lengths for a hobby that help me escape the
>travails of mundane life.

Both of these comments carry the implication that "documentation" is
something you feel OBLIGED to do, a price you pay in order to gain
respect or awards or something.  And indeed, if "documentation" means a
mini-term-paper you attach to your A&S contest entry in order to earn a
few extra points, this is correct.  (Another argument against that sort
of A&S contest....)  For me, "documentation" means evidence that
informs me of how something was done in the Middle Ages.  And for me,
that's the end in itself, a WAY I "escape the travails of mundane
life", not an unpleasantly necessary means to an end.  If you're not
interested in a particular aspect of the Middle Ages (cooking, music,
armed combat) for its own sake, then don't waste your time studying it
just to impress somebody.

Kael, AKA Lord Mikael McCue, MKA Mike Macchione wrote:
>... in general there are two types of people on the
>list.  The first are those who seem to have been cooking in the SCA for
>over 5-10 years.  This group tends to be the more prolific of the posters,
>tends to be able to spout off documentation at the drop of a hat, tends to
>have some significant rank in the society, and tends to know most of the
>basics about period cooking and refer to them in statements that start
>with "of course you know that..."
>
>[miscellaneous comments about Hat-o-phobia and Laurel-o-phobia]

Actually, I don't know of ANY regular contributor to this list who has
a Laurel for cooking.  (Elizabeth?)  Off the top of my head, I can only
think of two or three who have a Laurel at all.  (I'm sure there are
some who I don't know, and if they wish to remain incognito, that's
fine; I'd rather be impressed by what they have to say.)  There's at
least one Ex-Rex, but as he himself pointed out, you don't need to know
anything about the Middle Ages to win a Crown Tourney, so that sort of
rank isn't really relevant to the present discussion.  In brief, this
list is not a concentration of rank, so if SCA rank intimidates you,
don't worry.  It is, however, a concentration of a lot of knowledge.
That's why I'm here, to learn something from those more knowledgeable,
and to pass on what I've already learned.

					mar-Joshua ibn-Eleazar ha-Shalib
                                                 Stephen Bloch
                                           sbloch at panther.adelphi.edu
					 http://www.adelphi.edu/~sbloch/
                                        Math/CS Dept, Adelphi University