SC - Re: sca-cooks V1 #405

[Philip & Susan Troy]

L Herr-Gelatt and J R Gelatt wrote:

> Look, Fellas, First: some of these questions can only be answered by
> communicating directly with the dead. While that may be a fit adventure for
> tomorrow  night, none the less it is well nigh impossible.

Almost all historical research is ultimately without a definite
conclusion. Are you suggesting there's no point in concerning oneself
with questions that can't be answered conclusively? I think someone like
Stephen Hawking would be fascinated by that, to name just one of several
hundred possibles.
 
> Second: I am of the opinion that simply because we can discover the "best
> interpretation" for a recipes given our own bias, that does not mean that
> historically the dish was cooked in the most efficient/appealing method for
> OUR time. Tastes do change, as well as ingredient availability and quality.
> We do not posess all the minute details of food preservation and storage,
> nor do we have complete diet analysis over lifetimes of living in the Middle
> Ages and Rennaisance. That does not mean that a Strohman's White Pound Loaf
> and Cheeze Whiz is a good substitute for Raclette, but it does mean that we
> can only make a good informed guess at what IS a good substitute for period
> toasted cheese and period bread in a given situation, by way of example.
> There is no Definative answer. We buy our sources and make our choices.
> Every decision we make is flawed. It is our job to choose the least flawed
> choice.

Agreed. Such is the nature of compromise. The trick is to find something
that we believe to have been a reasonably accurate attempt at what
people actually ate within the SCA's period, or in whatever specific
period and place we happen to be addressing at the moment, and present
it in such a way that fellow SCAdians, cooks and non-cooks, and modern
people in general, can appreciate them. When possible, we should be
striving for  the best recreation we can do, that  modern people will
most appreciate. In short, one of the things we are trying to do is to
learn and teach about what period people ate, and how. This is one of
the most primal urges and motivations of the human race, and it is vital
for people trying to create or maintain a persona to have at least some
knowledge of this, even if it only applies to themselves as individuals.
Again, you seem to be leading up to an unfinished point that it is
futile to pursue some of the more esoteric questions beyond the most
superficial examination, and that foods that really are accurate
recreations of period food will require some changes to be acceptable to
the modern palate. In some cases that may be true. In the majority of
them, though, it assuredly isn't. 
> 
> Third: Some of the newer and not-so-new folks on the list might like to have
> a peek at these recipes, if they don't posess them. Invaluable as your
> interpretations might be, none the less I much prefer to look at a recipe
> and make my own interpretation first. If it gives me trouble, then I have no
> problem trawling for advice or other points of view. But I see this as a
> learning process. For me, the most satisfying learning takes place at the
> point of personal discovery. That makes the moment I open the kitchen door
> and see folks enjoying my "recreations" a personal moment of triumph,
> unattributable to another cook's opinion of "how things were done". That's a
> risk. I could be wrong (and sometimes am, publicly), but I want MY spin on
> it. Then I'll read yours. So please, do the footwork and actually post the
> original recipes. Don't (so to speak) rest on your laurels, and assume
> superior knowledge! We don't just want to pick your brains. We want your
> sources. And, we want to help YOU learn too. That's reasonable, right?

"Child, you cut me to the quick!" If your post is genuinely in response
to the post you quoted from, there are no recipes to include, more or
less. In response to some statement to the effect that people could
resort to the World's Oldest Permanent Floating Recipe Redaction Game
with questions that they needed help with, Cariadoc (who I thought was
being facetious, at the time) asked about perre, which is an ingredient
or cooking medium, of an indeterminate nature. It is usually translated
into English as "pea puree", but it is unclear whether it is mashed,
boiled peas, or the liquid they were cooked in, that is intended. I
responded to him with an opinion in the matter, and went on to ask a
similar question, more or less, I confess, as an inside joke.

"What's that you're chewing?"
"Nuthin', Mr. Lamarr, sir."
"Open your mouth! Gum! I knew it! I hope you brought enough for
EVERYBODY!"
"But Mr. Lamarr, I didn't know there was gonna be so many--"
KA-BLAM!!!  

Perhaps I shouldn't have made a remark, even in jest, without bothering
to supply background information. I apologize. (the above, BTW, is a
short extract from the script of "Blazing Saddles") Now, as for your
statements about how you prefer to interpret recipes for yourself, I
agree, and share your preference. I just don't see how that could
translate into what appears to be a suggestion on your part that anyone
ever tried to impose on anyone else on this list the One, True Way of
any recipe, or anything else, for that matter. 

If I have belabored any point excessively, which is still not an attempt
to make anyone think anything they aren't already inclined to think on
their own, remember that it was originally in response to your request
for details that I did so.

If, on the other hand, your admonition is all traceable to the fact that
I failed to reproduce the original source recipe for Mosserouns Florys,
which is the source of my question about mushrooms and eggs (although
frankly I find it pretty hard to accept that all you wrote was the
result of that omission on my part), then I'll just say that it seemed
unnecessary, given that I was kidding, and that I have already posted
the recipe once before. Actually, now that I think back on it, twice.
What would be needed to make the point about the pea puree, even without
reaching a definitive conclusion, would be to type in and post almost
all of Le Menagier de Paris, le Viandier, and De Fait du Cuisine. A very
bad case of writer's cramp, indeed. Perhaps I need to get myself a
scanner and some OCR software so I can step up production?

It's really pretty distressing to hear you seem to suggest that anyone,
least of all I, would try to ram an idea down someone's throat on this
list, to the exclusion of all other reason, or that I have ever given
anyone reason to feel I consider my opinion has greater intrinsic value
than anyone else's, and even more alarming to hear you, mundanely a
librarian, if I remember correctly, seeming to imply that the most
valuable contribution I can make to the people on this list is by saving
them a trip to the local library.

Perhaps I have greatly misunderstood your last post, but my suspicion is
that it either needs to be rephrased, or have its content reexamined. If
I have misunderstood, I apologize.

Adamantius  

 
______________________________________
Phil & Susan Troy
troy at asan.com
============================================================================

To be removed from the SCA-Cooks mailing list, please send a message to
Majordomo at Ansteorra.ORG with the message body of "unsubscribe SCA-Cooks".

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