SC - Fun vs Authenticity

[L Herr-Gelatt and J R Gelatt]

My Dearest Darlin' Adamantius wrote:
>The argument that some of the recipes in a book are almost certainly
>period is sometimes misinterpreted by the unwary as a license to use a
>source which is  mostly non-period. That's not to say I haven't used the
>rationale myself on occasion, but I would be leary of using such sources
>when there are more reliable ones out there. Both Elinor Fettiplace's
>Receipt Book, and the Penn Family Recipes (the receipt book of
>Giulielma, Mrs. William, Penn) are similar books with a mixture  of
>period, potentially period, and non-period recipes, but the latest
>entries in both books are earlier than the latest ones in Martha
>Washington.
>

Here's my true sentiment---bound to be blown to bits by those professing to
play the "True Game, unsullied by outside influences": It is far far more
interesting to me to do this sort of detective work than to go to the proven
period source, open it up, and bang away. I've done that. I want to move on.
What changed when? How can we know that? What social influences caused those
changes? Did the change occur everywhere at once or did some areas fall to
fashion before others? What changes were clung to in certain regions and not
others? I have to decide this for myself with guidance from what I've read.
It's my call how close to the cliff I want to sail. Now, if you want to give
me some other complexity to puzzle at that seems at least as interesting to
me, I'll give it a whack (but we could be at it for years). 

You're right. It's a gamble. But who is to say for sure it won't payoff? The
proof of the pudding, etc...

But for me that interest and scholarship are not the only criteria. Other
things weight at least as heavily. As examples of what to strive for, we
almost never get the real foodstuffs themselves as they were consumed in any
version we can speculate from, at least in our periods of history. We only
have recipes to work from, with varying levels of reliability. So I have to
ask myself (because for me, FUN came first, and HISTORY followed): Is it
reasonable to expect people to consume this and like it? The answer is yes.
Is it based on an historical instance of at least partial reliability? I'd
say yes (some wouldn't). Is it attractive? Yes. Do I like cooking it? Yes.
Can anyone help me make it? Yes. Will my kitchen accomodations allow for
lots of it to be made easily? Yes. Can I afford it in my budget? Yes.
Bingo. Menu Hall of Fame. I could have have gone to an earlier source. I
admit it. Mea Culpa. Bad Aoife. No Biscuit. I liked those recipes. They
appealed to me. My brain works like this: I read a cook book like a novel.
When planning menus, they often come to me complete and in a lump, but I
know what sources come from where. I guess it's creative versus academic,
and if I were a true academic, creativity would play less of a role. The
only reason I go on and on about this is because I care what others think,
but not as much as I care to produce something my epicurean muse can
appreciate. Here I am sailing close to those cliffs again.

Now, just like the woman that I will adroitly change the subject: 

Adamantius, your lady wife sounds lovely. Does she cook at least a little
(does she have to, with you in the house)? 

Aoife,  Whose hubbie makes four alarm chili, four alarm spaghetti (which he
fries to re-heat), four alarm hamburgers (fried in oil), grilled peanut
butter sandwiches, and that's it. 
"Many things we need can wait. The child cannot."
				---Gabriela Mistral, Chilean Poet 1889-1957