SC - Makin' it work

[Siegfried Heydrich]

    I think more than anything else, we have a cultural problem, here. We're
used, as modern people, to the idea of a recipe as a scientific chemistry
formula. What we look for in a recipe is to consistently produce an
identical dish from what is written. Think of it as culinary blazonry - a
herald has to be able to accurately reproduce a visual image from a verbal
description. We do the same in an alternate sensory mode in modern cooking.
    If you try to reproduce a recipe from Estouffiers, a panel of experts
can determine how closely you came to the 'ideal' of the dish. This is all
well and good if you're in a restaurant or production kitchen where
tuesday's batch of whatever HAS to be the same as last thursday's. Quality
control and consistency is the name of THAT game.
    But back then, that concept probably didn't even exist. You have good
vintages, and bad ones. The art of the vinter was a subjective thing, and
people realized that a great many factors influenced the production of wine.
That's why master vinters were masters; their abilities to deal with these
factors allowed them to produce a superb wine in situations where others
might not.
    Cooking is the same way. A recipe was a GUIDELINE, a process, not a
formula. It was expected that you knew the basics, and had the requisite
ingredients on hand, or you could get them if needed. If you didn't, it was
assumed that you had the intuitive ability to figure out a way to fake it,
and still make it taste good. And that was the name of THAT game. Making da
boss happy!
    When we do a feast, there's no panel of CAI judges checking to see how
'close' we came to an ideal. All the guests know is whether or not the food
was good, and whether or no there was enough of it. There MIGHT be a Laurel
or two who could properly critique your work, but not likely (at least, not
in Trimaris, anyway). So I find some of the thread regarding the 'proper'
way to do something rather amusing - it misses the point of the artistic
aspects.
    It's not what you can do with a great kitchen, a huge budget, and a
pantry that would make Wolfgang Puck envious, but rather what you can do
with a primitive site, a $2.50 budget, and a hick town 15 miles away. (been
there, done that) And that, my friends, is the name of THAT game!

    Sieggy


> >
> >  Is such a list of  substitutions available? More importantly are there
any
> >  manuscripts which give details about exactly how a period cook would
have
> >  substituted and what would have been substituted for what? I am only
aware
> > of
> >  specific substitutions detailed in specific recipes.
> >
>
> I think it is safe to assume, judging by Zambrini's text, that
substitutions
> were made "to taste", as it were.  I do not have a "documented"
substitutions
> list, but it seems pretty fair to say that walnuts could be substituted
for
> almonds if you were not fond of almonds, beef for veal, or duck for
chicken.
> According to the studies I have undertaken (which are admittedly far less
> than some of the old-timers on this list), it seems that the medieval cook
> was not as strictly concerned with the actual ingredients of a dish, as he
> was with the flavor, consistency, and appearance of the finished product.
In
> the recipes I have examined, It appears a common practice to sweeten a
dish
> with "dried fruit" rather than sugar (which was apparently very
expensive).
> "Dried Fruit" could encompass any number of ingredients, and so, in this
> instance at least, the author leaves the choice up to the end user.
>
> Again, as I have said, I am only just beginning to dig deeper into this
> mystery of medieval cooking.  But the articles I have been able to examine
do
> seem to indicate more than a little leeway in the preparation or finishing
of
> a dish.  The very term "goode spycery" is indicative of this
open-endedness.
>
>
>
> Such a strange fascination, as I wallow in waste
> That such a trivial victory could put a smile on your face.
>                                         - Mark Burgess
>
============================================================================
>
> 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".
>
>
============================================================================
>