OT - Re: SC - Re: saffron

[CBlackwill at aol.com]

In a message dated 4/5/00 5:58:49 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
ahrenshav at yahoo.com writes:




>  Your argument is one I have heard a thousand times in
>  the 25 years I have been in the SCA by people who
>  can't be bothered to do any kind of research at all. 

You make quite a sweeping generalization, here.  I think you should read my 
posts again before you respond to any of them.  I have NEVER said that I 
cannot be bothered with research.  I am currently involved in research.  
Thank you for playing.

>  And because of this, we will continue to be a
>  schizophrenic organization.  It is no wonder that we
>  are treated as if we are weirdos and mental cases
>  living in a fantasy world.

Your finger pointing is mis-directed.  Read before you lambaste, please.  It 
will serve you well.
  
> I don't need to do all that research to
>   feed the unappreciative masses like you.

Your comments are way out of line.  Again, I implore you to actually READ my 
posts, rather than grab onto someone elses comments regarding them.  If there 
is anyone in this society who is truly appreciative, it is me.

>  This is America and you can do whatever you please as
>  long as it isn't against the law.  However, if you
>  wish to be recognized for your cooking skills within
>  the SCA and you continue with this attitude, I can
>  guarantee you will be disappointed. 

News Flash!!  Not everyone in this Society does things so they will be 
recognized at court, or "get to speak to the King".  There are those who 
require this sort of attention to rationalize their existence, and the air 
they breath.  I do not happen to be one of them.  I am just as happy sitting 
in my pavilion juggling as I am standing around with the others at court.  

 
>  Changing a recipe to accomodate your personal taste is
>  no different than serving chimichongas or potato
>  salad.  If a recipe says that it is good for haddock
>  or pike, but does not mention salmon and yet there are
>  other recipes for salmon in the collection, then don't
>  you think that the cook would have mentioned that it
>  was good for salmon too, if he thought so? 
 
No, I do not think so.  Even medieval cooks had to know that people are 
capable of making assumptions.  "Geee...If it's this good on Haddock, imagine 
what it would taste like on SALMON!!!"  We do not (well, most of us anyway) 
need to be lead by the hand our entire lives.  We are capable of making basic 
assumptions without having it shoved down our throats.


>  
>  > It was done on a daily
>  > basis in our era of study, 
>  > and I defy anyone who says otherwise to come up with
>  > proof.  I have the sword 
>  > of culinary history and evolution to back me up on
>  > this arguement, sir. 
>  
>  But you don't know culinary history very well, if you
>  think that changes were constantly happening during
>  period.  Most people were not taught to read. 

Excuse me?  I was not aware that the use of tastebuds was dependent upon the 
ability to read.  And you do not know HUMANITY very well if you think they 
were NOT.


 
>  > As I 
>  > have said, cuisine is a living and fluid art, which
>  > means it is, was, and 
>  > always will be changing.  I know there are others on
>  > this very list who will 
>  > agree with me.  There are many people on this list
>  > and in this Society who, 
>  > it would appear, base their ideas of the medieval
>  > era solely on precedent, 
>  > and are incapable or unwilling to look past this,
>  > and into the "creative" 
>  > possibility that, yes, indeed, turmeric may have
>  > been used as a substitute 
>  > for saffron.  This is a re-creation society...NOT a
>  > re-enactment society. 
>  
>  And you, sir, need to look up the definition of
>  re-creation. 

Recreate:  To create anew.    Transcribe: To copy or recopy in handwriting or 
typewriting.

 You also need to look up the word
>  "arrogant".  You will find your name next to the
>  definition.  Which makes you hypocritical in calling
>  Lord Ras arrogant.

Arrogant:  Overbearing, haughty.   Hmmnn...seems like you shouldn't be 
pointing fingers.  By the way, if you had actually read my posts before you 
"spouted", you would see that I mentioned the mis-refference to Ras.

>  
>  >       I'll stop now before anyone gets mad.
>  
>  Too late.

Oops!  Of course, this all could have been avoided if this author had read my 
posts in context, rather than just jumping on the closest bandwagon.
  
Balthazar of Blackmoor
Such a strange fascination, as I wallow in waste
That such a trivial victory could put a smile on your face.