SC - Lady Seaton's Project

[Laura C. Minnick]

Lady Gwynydd of Culloden wrote:
> 
> Unto the gathered Cooks does Gwynydd send the following:
> 
> I have been following this debate with fascination and actually find myself wondering how to put my 2 cents worth in without offending the purists.  Giving offense is not my intention, so I apologise unreservedly should I do so.  That said, I feel that some of "us" (particularly those with no alergies) are being a little arrogant on this subject.
> 
> At 2000-03-15 17:54:49.359001,
> david friedman (ddfr at best.com) wrote:
> > it isn't very reasonable to restrict not only what you eat but what > everyone else at the event eats as well, just so you can be there.

> Ovbviously, this sort of situation is going to cause problems for the Stewards of the event, but I do not feel that it is reasonable to say to a person with _honest_ food complaints "you really shouldn't come to an event because your presence will in some way detract from the "periodisity" (and if it gets back to my Baron that I used that word, heads will roll!) of the event."  

Gwynydd, I think you have perhaps overinterpreted His Grace's comment
here, though I must say it was perhaps not worded well. I don't think
that he would EVER suggest that someone not come to an event because
their dietary habits are different than yours. Just that it is not
reasonable to inconvenience 100 persons for the convenience of one. In
that case your person with honest food complaints could perhaps bring
their own food from home rather than disrupt matters for the rest of the
diners. At least that's what I do in similar situations. My ex who is
lethally allergic to onions would quietly leave site, find a burger, and
return with a full tummy, sit down and enjoy the company around him. He
told me it was a matter of courtesy on his part to make as little fuss
as possible.

> For crying out loud, we can only _try_ to be period at the best of times and, for me at least, the Society is about inclusion not exclusion.  We all make concessions to the modern era all the time.  For example, most of our vegetables are not period - are not as a medieval cook would have found them.  It would take years of intensive work simply to back breed to the "original" carrot, or celery, and one has to wonder if the effort would be worthwhile!

Nooo... here you you are doing what we call 'making the best the enemy
of the good'. (And actually, if you were to wander Stefan's Florilegium-
I have to say it- he's on the road- you could find info on period fruits
and vegetables. They _are_ available!) But saying- or even _thinking_
'because I can't possibly replicate that beautiful period gown because I
don't have access to the gorgeous silk brocades and the furs for the
linings and the exquisite little cast buttons and the this and that,
then I will just make a t-tunic out of this cotton and call it good'- is
counter-productive. But looking at the gown and saying 'I don't have
access to that silk brocade, but I saw some cotton with a similar
print...' is a step- even if a small one, in the right direction.

I think the idea of putting together some period recipes with some
adapted versions (like the Heart Smart recipes that show up in the
newspaper and such) for specific needs is a good one. But it probably
won't be period food- just period-like, unless you are working with some
of the many Lenten recipes in the corpus of works we have to draw from.
And I think that if there is a substantial (25%? I dunno) proportion of,
say, vegetarians in the expected attandance, it would be reasonable to
offer an alternate menu. But the vegetarians I know would quietly fend
for themselves rather than inconvenience others.

pace,

'Lainie