SC - Public Consumption [Was Distress in Trimaris]

[James F. Johnson]

LrdRas at aol.com wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 2/26/00 11:32:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, seumas at mind.net
> writes:
> 
> << their expectations may be less
>  demanding than if they've already offered up US$4-8 for a meal. >>
> 
> I can't imagine anyone expecting the dozen or more dishes they get at a feast
> for 4 to 8 dollars. I can imagine them expecting a cup of coffee and a pastry
> for that minuscule amount.

Sorry, Ras, but most of us here in the cooks list are gastrophiles. That
does not go for the body of the SCA. Tomorrow I can get 10 MacDonald
cheeseburgers for US$4.00. For the same amount, I can get a nice Rarebit
appetizer at the Black Sheep. _I_ value that rarebit (which is no larger
than one cheeseburger, without the meat) more than those ten
cheeseburgers, but not everyone else will, and many of them are in the
SCA. What would a person who routinely eats Value Meals and eats at
Denny's expect for US$5.00? 

Actually, what my point was in my original statement was that once a
person has paid money, their expectations (as to volume, quality, etc.)
raises. Once the feaster has paid their feast fee, the feast organizers
are now in a _value_ debt to the feaster. The feaster is expecting to
have that debt repaid in feast food. They may also be concerned that
_their_ value of the food may be less than their value of their money.
If equal or better, great, but if not, they're pretty much stuck with
it. On the other hand, if you give someone a free sample, they have paid
out nothing, have no expectation of being repaid, and whatever you give
them is perceived as an 'extra' not part of a trade. It's more
psychology than anything else.

> Also you said something that sounded like everything else is 'free.' Costumes
> cost money if you are to wear them, armor if you are to use it, needlework if
> you are to produce it, food if you are to eat it. Anyone can experience
> period cooking as 'freely' as any other SCA craft. They simply  show up in
> the kitchen and  cook. :-)

Except that the wearer of the clothing pays the cost. It costs everyone
else nothing to look at it. The fighter pays for his armour, it costs
everyone else nothing to watch him fight. The embroiderer paid for the
ground and thread, it costs everyone else nothing to look at it. To
carry the analogy farther out, the cooks would pay for the feast and
everyone else would eat for free. But we don't do that. What differs is
that for a feast, the artisans are not paying for the materials, the
audience is. So while a seamstress may make clothing for herself or for
a friend, and one of them usually pays for the cost, unless they only
wear it in private, I still get to enjoy looking at it at no cost. I
never said other arts were 'free,' I said they could be "appreciated for
free."

Seumas