SC -Redacting?

[Philip & Susan Troy]

cclark at vicon.net wrote:
> 
> The fact remains that calling these things redactions instead of renderings,
> interpretations, or adaptations, implies a false claim as to the validity of
> one's interpretation of a recipe. Almost all so-called "redactions" that I
> have seen on this list have added (and sometimes even omitted) significant
> information, rather than merely restating in a different format the
> information that was already there. Yet some of us call these "redactions,"
> implying that while the form (or medium) was changed, the content is
> practically the same as it was in the previous form. Is this honest?

Uhhhhh...no. I don't know that it's necessarily duplicitous, but
accurate it's not. By extension of the above, I think there's a very
real implication that there's something wrong with the original recipe,
or why change the content?

What we're doing by rewriting, adapting, tweaking these period recipes
is to make it easier for modern cooks, experienced or otherwise, who
might lack the necessary knowledge or intuition, to produce an
interpreted version of the original dish. At the very least we can't
rule out a significant content change when we supply missing
information. In some cases the changes are obvious and signifcant, and
sometimes they're more subtle, but they're never completely absent.

Now, if there's a reason why we _should_ use a made-up term (or even a
made-up application of a real term), such as, say, autocrat, which is
pretty well standardized by Corpora, is universally understood by any
SCAdian, and provides a reasonably good definition of the authority an
autocrat has regarding a specific event, then that's fine.

If, however, there are several _better_, ordinary English words that say
the same thing without jarring people out of persona or mood, then
what's the point of jargon? I concede that SCAdians occasionally lapse
into a separate dialect of English, a sort of Knowne-World-speak, but
when there's no reason for it, as there demonstrably _is_ in some cases,
why bother?

If I were to redact a period recipe, it might consist of correcting
errors of sequence, possibly standardizing the spelling in some cases,
etc.  To add cooking times, temperatures, and in some cases, quantities,
and call it a redaction is essentially an attempt to disguise an
additional degree of separation from the primary source.

Adamantius, imagining an SCA "redaction" of "Hamlet" 
- -- 
Phil & Susan Troy

troy at asan.com
============================================================================

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".

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