SC - RE: creativity vs. blatant disregard

[david friedman]

At 12:24 PM -0400 6/26/98, Christi Redeker wrote:
>::watching the burners heat up to flame::
>
>Creativity/creation, what an interesting topic.  I try to document 95% of
>all recipes I serve, so I understand the need for that.  But I always wonder
>if changes to the recipes weren't as period as the recipes themselves.

Making changes is period--the problem is that we don't know what the
changes are that they would make, and the changes we would make to a period
recipe are not necessarily the same as the ones they would make.

> When
>I make a recipe at home and run out of an ingredient, if it is not integral
>to the recipe itself (such as one spice out of 20) I may substitute one for
>another, or I may leave it out all together.

And lots of period recipes offer alternatives, options, vague terms ("good
spices"), etc.

>Sometimes when I read a recipe
>in a cook book, I will not like the ratio of spices or ingredients used and
>I change them.  I have a hard time believing that period cooks did not do
>the same.

Since most of the period recipes don't contain quantities, the issue of
changing the ratio of spices is irrelevant to the question of whether or
not you follow  a period recipe.

>I always want proof that it
>was used.  I may change a period recipe around a bit, but I would never use
>an ingredient that wasn't available and proven as a food item for period.

Does "for period" mean "for the same time and place as the recipe you are
modifying" or "for sometime/someplace in the SCA period?"

David/Cariadoc
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".

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