[Trimaris] Re: SC - Highnesses, Lownesses, and Period Cooking.

[david friedman]

Dulcia MacPherson, in the process of a valiant and courteous effort 
to spread oil on troubled waters, writes:


>What I will say, is that I disagree with your interpretation of Her Highness'
>letter.  I do not believe that she intended it to be insulting to anyone - I
>beleive that it was, perhaps, not written as well is it might have been, and
>that her message got lost in the  process of people taking offense to
>individual lines.

I don't think she was trying to insult any person. She was, however, 
making an assertion, one she presumably believes, that is insulting 
to a particular SCA art--the assertion that period cooking tastes bad 
and is hard to digest.

>All of this
>started because of a letter sent to the people of Trimaris by Her Highness.
>It should never have been spread around the Known World, and it is most
>unfortunate that it was has been so misunderstood.

This is where I lose you. Her Highness sent a letter to the people of 
Trimaris which was designed to discourage period cooking in Trimaris. 
What is wrong with that information being spread to people outside of 
Trimaris who are interested in period cooking, so that they can 
respond?

>  I would never presume to
>speak for Her Highness, but as  Peer of Her Realm I feel personally obligated
>to make whatever restitution I can.  Please, allow me to make things right.

But one person can't make right another person's actions. The only 
think you can do to correct the original error, so far as I can see, 
is to persuade Her Highness that she was mistaken in her letter, and 
get her to correct that error--to say that she has nothing against 
palatable period food, and her only point was that she didn't want 
cooks to use the claim that their recipes were period as an excuse 
for serving food that nobody would want to eat.

(quoting someone else)

>  > I'm really wondering what your Peers are elevated
>  >  for- it certainly isn't tact or courtesy, at least from the Peers and
>  >  non-Peers I've been exposed to during this idiocy.

It's a bit of a tangent, but my own opinion is that tact and 
courtesy, while desirable characteristics, are not essential for the 
Laurel, although they may be for the chivalry. As I have put it 
before, Egil Skallagrimsson was not a knight but Benvenuto Cellini 
was a Laurel, even if he did have an attitude problem. But that would 
be another and long discussion.

David/Cariadoc
http://www.best.com/~ddfr/