SC - cuskynoles, continued...

[david friedman]

At 9:53 PM -0400 10/29/97, Philip & Susan Troy wrote:

>I'm sorry. I thought we had established (albeit recently, due to inexact
>speech on my part) that my intepretation's ability to adhere to the
>details of the illustration hinges on the fact that the filling is
>covered with dough.

Before the illustration is drawn?

>In order to conform as well to the illustration
>details as your method does, this needs to be done with a second sheet
>of dough per portion.

Are you saying that you cut your sheet of dough into 3x6 pieces, leave all
the pieces exactly positioned as they were before you cut them, then dot
the whole thing with filling (one glob in the middle of each 3x6 piece),
then put on the 3x6 pieces from a second sheet of dough, then seal the
edges--and through all this process your pieces remain neatly arranged edge
to edge, so that when you are done the drawing makes the whole array of 15
3x6 pieces look like one piece with lines on it?

That would answer my objection re the dots, but it doesn't sound very
plausible. If I were putting two 3x6 pieces together with filling between,
I would want to have some free space to work--not to have everything
crowded together edge to edge, so that everytime I touched one of them it
shoved all the others. Have you done it that way?


Of course, the dimensions as stated make the idea
>of simply folding them in half, and ignoring the illustration, almost
>entirely, quite tempting. Of course, then you'd have roughly 50% empty
>space in the illustration, rather than each portion touching the next.

Precisely. Whereas my interpretation allows you to fold them if you want.
If the original pieces are 2x6 you can fold them to 2x3, say--still
rectangular rather than square to fit the picture.

>Now, just for giggles, let's pretend this: you make one cuskynole, 2 1/2
>or 3 inches wide, by 6 inches long. Then, using the back of a knife, you
>press grooves into the surface, pushing the dough through the filling,
>until  it meets the dough on the other side, and sticks. Continue doing
>this until your pastry, dumpling, call it what you will, is now divided
>into fifteen little cells, each roughly 3/4 inch by 3/4 inch, deviating
>from those dimensions just barely enough to indicate that they are, in
>fact, rectangular rather than square, assuming you want to stick to the
>picture as your guide. Each little cell, filled, naturally has a high
>point on its surface. Now. Photograph it. Zoom in, until it's full
>frame. Maybe have a good sketch artist draw it, if you'd rather. That is
>your cuskynole, uncooked. Agreed?

Yes.

>Now. I'll make an entire batch of cuskynoles. Let's say I start with two
>large sheets of dough, each about eight inches by thirty. I cut each
>into fifteen rectangles, about 2 1/2 inches by 6. I leave them on the
>board as they were. It will help keep the edges from drying out as I
>work. I place about 2 tablespoons of filling on each of the fifteen
>rectangles comprising one of my sheets. I do this all at once, possibly
>with a pastry bag, before sealing any of them. Then, quickly, I top each
>of my fifteen filled rectangles with an unfilled rectangle, from the
>other sheet. I push the sheets of pasta dough down around the blobs of
>filling, trying to keep them from spreading to the edges of each
>rectangle, so they won't weaken the seal. This will also keep them from
>losing most of their height.  I now have, more or less, fifteen
>rectangular raviolis, arranged together, edge to edge in a rectangular
>formation. Each has a high point. I will now photograph the scene on my
>board, being sure to zoom out enough to ensure that the whole scene is
>in the shot. Perhaps, on second thought, I'll just have a good sketch
>artist draw it. Perhaps you can recommend one? Yes, it's a silly
>question, I know.
>
>So here's my question. Is the drawing or photograph of what I have made
>so different from that of what you have made, that the diagram in
>"Diversa Cibaria" decently represents what you have made, but _not_ what
>I have made?

No. that is a possible interpretation of the picture.  My only objection
(other than having done it the other way and liking the result) is that it
doesn't seem to me the natural way to do your version. Once you have cut
the pieces apart, it is easier, I think, to assemble them separately rather
than keeping them all together.

Keeping them together would make more sense if you were doing to do a giant
version of my interpretation, then cut them apart after sealing--which is
essentially how I believe ravioli are in fact made. But that seems to be
inconsistent with the plain language of the recipe.

>> What odds that I have known Brekke longer than you have? Lots longer?
>> Hint--whose queen was she? What is his relation to me? Who preceded them on
>> the throne?

>In my glib ignorance, I'll say...I have no idea, offhand.

Brekke was queen with Asbjorn, who is my blood brother. The sequence was
Angus/Asbjorn/Cariadoc/Asbjorn/Angus. A very interesting couple of years.

Give her my affectionate greetings.


David Friedman
Professor of Law
Santa Clara University
ddfr at best.com
http://www.best.com/~ddfr/


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

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".

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