SC - A question of re-creation

[Elaine Koogler]

I think you've definitely got a point.  However, not being a Laurel, I'm not really
one to say.  But I do believe that these should be entered and "judged" separately,
as they are separate skills/recreations.  There are two sides to my argument:
1.  If the entry is judged as a single entity, then those who do not have the
ability/interest/facilities to grow their own/grind their own/etc. are not being
judged on a level playing field with those who do.  Cooking and other arts should
be judged on that single skill, with the other steps being judged separately.
Obviously, I do not include presentation here, lest someone think that I
am...presentation is part of the cooking process.

2.  It is not, as Bogdan so eloquently states, really fair to the person who has
researched and recreated all of the different steps (growing/milling/cooking), as
they are actually being judged only on the final step (or should be!)

Just my opinion....

Kiri (who also thinks that those who contribute an unusual amount of research
information to a particular field should receive credit for that!)

Jeff Heilveil wrote:

> Salut!
> I have a most interesting question.  Before asking, I will state the
> following:
> 1) I am not trying to knock any of the hard work done by others
> 2) I am not saying that I don't think the practice in question is neat,
> especially as I do think it's neat.
> 3) I am not trying to start a war, just curious.
>
> That said...
>
> So I was talking with a friend who does mostly Metalwork and Illumination,
> and we started to talk about A&S entries.  He was saying how he wants to
> have a laurel competition so that people can see what the "Laurel level
> work" that they think they cannot achieve looks like.  From there we
> quickly got on to entries we had recently heard about.  When I told him
> about Constance's REALLY AMAZING entry, he pointed out an interesting
> thing...
>
> We give more credit to entries where the people mill the grain and all
> then we do to things that are just cooked.  We don't expect jewelers to go
> out and mine ore...  we don't expect illumators to make their own pigments
> (well some people do, but he has documentation from period where the
> master flat out says to 'go buy pigment.').  Milling wasn't the job of the
> cook.  So by giving more credit to those who mill/grow their own, so to
> speak, we are encouraging poor re-creation.  On the other hand, entries
> like the one Constance had should be judged as multiple entries.  She
> should have been given credit for accuracy of grain size and milling
> practice for the flour she used...  So while on the one hand, we are
> applauding inaccurate representation of period food making, we are also
> downplaying the talents of the entrant by not acknowledging all of the
> occupations they _are_ recreating.
>
> So perhaps when you enter a piece on which you spent a ton of time and
> grew/milled the ingredients (or grew/sheared/spun/wove) you should enter
> them as multiple entries.  Save back some of the flour, maybe even some of
> the grain if you grew it.  Write up how you milled it separately and how
> it was grown.  True, a judge may look at a pile of flour as an entry and
> laugh,  but if you researched period milling and flour grain size and did
> your best to re-create it, you should be recognized for your ability as
> milling and _NOT_ your cooking skills, since cooks didn't mill.
>
> My question (though I am sure other conversations will come from the
> above) is:
> Other than a multiple entry piece, how should we be dealing with projects
> built from scratch so that we are not overstating the fact of what period
> cooks did, and not understating the talents of the entrant?
>
> Cu drag,
> Bogdan
>
> _______________________________________________________________________________
> Jeffrey Heilveil M.S.                 Ld. Bogdan de la Brasov, C.W.
> Department of Entomology        A Bear's paw and base vert on field argent
> University of Illinois
> heilveil at uiuc.edu
> office: (217) 244-5115
> home: (217) 355-5702
> ICQ: 34699710
>
> Once one dismisses the rest of all possible worlds, one finds that this is
> the best of all possible worlds.
>                                  -Voltaire, _Candide_
> _______________________________________________________________________________
>
> ============================================================================
>
> 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".
>
> ============================================================================