Wiccan Cookbook Reviewed (was Re: SC - I am So Ashamed! (long))

[Catherine Deville]

Hupman, Laurie <LHupman at kenyon.com> said:
> Let me apologize up front, I should have been more clear.  My local
> newspaper ran a review this morning of a new cookbook:  traditional
Wiccan
> cooking.  From the article, the book seems to perpetuate the same old
myths
> about medieval food that we constantly see popping up elsewhere,
especially
> the idea that medieval food was heavily spiced to hide the taste of
rotting
> meat.  Of the three representative recipes included in the article, one
is
> for apple scones and the other for chocolate "All Hallows' Eve Cakes."  I
> have my doubts about the authenticity of the scones, as I do not know as
> much about baked goods as I should, but I really don't think the
chocolate
> cookies qualify as medieval Wiccan cooking.  Another recipe, referred to
but
> not reprinted, is for one of the authors' grandmother's tamales.
>
> My problem is not that it is Wiccan, but that it does not present an
> accurate picture of medieval cooking.  Instead, it uses the veneer of
> Wiccanism (is that a word?) to present the same shoddy research and
> half-truths that we've tried so hard to dispel.
...

apology accepted and clarification appreciated.  *however*, I'm unsure if
the book's purpose is actually to *present* an accurate picture of medieval
cooking, and we should remember to take that into account.   it would seem
from the title and the Amazon.com review that the purpose of the book is
rather to enrich Wiccan ritual and practice.

So, just to clarify, everyone's problem with the book is that it is coming
across as being represented as *historically accurate* even though the
purpose of the book is supposed to be to present the *folk lore* behind the
ritual use of food in Wicca, am I getting this right?   So the problem is
not the folklore part, (or the Wiccan part) the problem is that the book is
not authentic and the review makes it _seem_ as though the book is being
*represented* as though it is historically based, not based on inspiration
and lore?  And that by doing so it perpetuates myths as fact, correct?

I, too, am Wiccan, and since the initial reason for renewed interest in
medieval cooking (and thereby my reason for finding this list) was to
research a similar book concept (which I wanted to base on both history
*and* lore),  I just want to understand where everyone is coming from.  The
Amazon.com review, the title and the author's indication that her writing
was inspired (rather than researched) doesn't lead me to assume that the
authors are making the statements from a historical viewpoint, but rather
from a religious / folklore viewpoint.  The customer reviews and the Santa
Cruz review does seem to indicate that readers get the impression that such
information is being presented as history rather than "lore", something
that is too often (IMO) a problem with Wiccan books... but that's a whole
'nother discussion, one which I'm sure that most of you aren't interested
in.

I would just ask, as someone who hopes to play in the SCA again in the
future and as a Wiccan, that those of you who do decide to write either the
reviewer or the author please be careful to state your position clearly.
The SCA already has a reputation *in some areas* for discriminating against
Pagans (I was told by more than one ex-SCAer when I moved here that telling
anyone that I was Pagan would be "political suicide", but luckily I tend to
be apolitical and to disregard 'rumors'.)Now, I'm still hopeful that this
is a reputation which has not been earned but has been inflated by other
people's own insecurities and over sensitivities and tendancies to perceive
discrimination where none exists and just as we discussed being distressed
by having the SCA represented (on TV) by people who were simply unpaid
extras more interested in theatre than history, I would also be distressed
by seeing a letter printed in response to this review which characterized
the SCA as bigotted because of it's tone or context.   So, if you do decide
to write a letter, please stick to the issues that you are concerned with,
i.e that things were presented as historical fact, not lore and that they
perpetuate myths about medieval food, rather than being general so that
your comments sound like you are attacking the book because it is "more
Wiccan dreck".   Doing the later will give good reason to disregard your
probably very valid points as simple bigotry.    Also, unless you buy the
book to read yourself, please realize that it may not have been the
authors' intent to represent the book as historical research (that's not
the *topic* or the focus of the book, after all) and that this impression
may be the perception of the readers (which may mean that the authors did
not communicate their message well rather than that they did poor
research... such research may be irrelevant to the nature of their topic.)

just my POV, of course... offered in hopes that we can *better*
communication between people who think differently than we do rather than
disable lines of communication through miscommunication.

I remain, in service to Meridies,
Lady Celia des L'archier