SC - Removes and Feastocrat

[Bronwynmgn at aol.com]

In a message dated 9/26/2000 5:46:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
catdeville at mindspring.com writes:

<< If it is not medieval, then how does it show up in period table settings? 
>>

It usually shows up in Victorian period table settings, not medieval.  Yet 
another way in which the word "period" can be far to confusing unless it has 
modifiers attached.

<<And just for clarification, what *we* called a "remove", a group of courses
which went out at the same time, *was* "removed" when the next "remove"
came out.>>

OK, this is a misunderstanding of what a "remove"  and a "course" really are. 
 You are picturing an entire set of menu items, say a meat, a soup, a veggie 
and a starch, going out together.  Then those items are taken away and 
another complete set sent out, correct?
This is the modern use of the word "course".  A five course dinner today 
includes five dishes - say, an appetizer, a salad, a soup, the main course 
which usually is a meat and veg and starch, and desert.  In most cases, each 
"course" is one dish - the salad, say, or the soup.  Only in the "main 
course" do we see the survival of the medieval use of "course", a variety of 
dishes served at the same time.

A "remove" is different.  In Victorian times, a course might include several 
dishes, as the main dish does today.  But one set of dishes would go out 
immediately, and when one particular one (often a soup) had been served, it 
would be"removed", and replaced with, say, a fish dish, which would also be 
served within the same course.  Often you will see something in  the menu 
that says "tomato aspic, removed with a filet of sea bass".  Other items in 
that course would include similarly light items such as salad and dainty 
appetizers, but only the soup bowl would be removed and replaced with another 
dish.

Does that make any sense?  It seems hard to explain in writing...

Brangwayna Morgan