SC - Plaintive whine about sourcing....

[Terry Nutter]

Terry Nutter wrote:
> 
> You know, it would have been easy if the dratted modern author had been
> a touch more specific.  Is it just me, or do others really really REALLY
> wish that when people published original versions of recipes, they would
> (1) publish the *original* original version, and not their new-and-
> improved original; and (2) tell you not only what collection its from
> but *where* in the collection you can find it?  NBoC has 252 recipes, for
> criminy's sake!  References are supposed to be helpful pointers, not
> just discussion enders....
> 
> Sigh....

This is an interesting question. Some people maintain, for instance,
that a photocopy or a transliteration is a secondary source, and that a
proper primary source is the original work only, in the author's own
hand, or a first edition printing. It seems evident that the original
recipe as quoted is not the actual original recipe, based on the idiom
used. That may or may not mean there is a substantial change in the
content, however, and how far, if at all, off of the original it may be
has yet to be determined.

It's frustrating when something like this happens, but even though we
may never find a satisfactory answer, there are other possible scenarios
to be looked into. One is that the author and editor made a  mistake
that remained unchecked until seeing print. It might be, for instance,
that the source should be listed as A New Proper BoC, as opposed to
simply A NBoC. It wouldn't be the first time an author of such a work
(many of whom are no more qualified to be writing such stuff than you or
I, some far less) made a bloomer.

Another possibility, though less likely, is that the Lady who posted
made a minor error in trancription. It happens, and would be enough to
send some of the more inquisitive of us on a wild goose chase. This is
far from a negative comment on the kind lady who posted the recipes. I
was really pleased to see it.

My big pet peeve is the gratuitous omission of an index. I realize that
this is an unreasonable prejudice, but to me, iunder normal
circumstances, if it has no index or other table of contents to help you
find something, it is by definition excluded from the category of
reference books. Some day, in the afterlife, The Goodman of Paris is
going to answer to me! It won't be pretty.

Of course, it IS pretty annoying when somebody like John Edwards decides
Apicius doesn't know how to cook, and that a patina of asparagus should
be fried in butter or margarine...

Nobody should whine plaintively alone. It ain't healthy.

Adamantius