[Sca-cooks] originals and redactions, was "All the King's Cooks"

[lilinah at earthlink.net]

Nancy Kiel wrote:
>In regards to an author's redactions without the original receipt, yes it is
>possible to locate the original using the footnotes etc.  But who has the
>time?  I'll take an original over a redaction anytime, no matter how
>competent the redactor is.

Agreed.

>In regards to judging documentation/redactions, why does the entrant need
>to include his/her process?  Isn't the receipt itself the process?  Yes, if
>information is lacking or you do something differently than in the original,
>the process is important.

Well, the process in the recipe may seem obvious to you, Nancy, but 
i've judged cooking and food-related A&S competitions and it just 
isn't that simple in reality. Describing quantities of ingredients 
used and the steps (and therefore processes) involved in cooking is 
necessary in documentation, since different people will make the same 
recipe different ways.

And, Ranald, i would consider "a handful" or "a walnut sized lump" to 
be descriptive of a quantity.

As an aside, I have actually measure how much *my* handful contains - 
of raisins and of corianders seeds - i hold less than 1/4 cup. I 
would imagine your hand holds a different quantity. I was just 
curious. I don't typically convert "a handful" into "less than 1/4 
cup" when working with a "period" recipe - how much i use depends on 
how the ingredient affects the dish... my handful may just not be 
enough to achieve the taste i want.

>  I would hope that competition cooking judges have enough
>  basic cooking skills to verify that steps were followed without demanding
>  written confirmation.

Unfortunately, period cooking is not that simple, and especially when 
a recipe is rather vague about process, and many recipes are. I know 
you do a later period than SCAdians do, Nancy, and by "your" time, 
recipes are often much more specific in terms of quantities and 
processes. But many "SCA period" recipes leave out steps in the 
process, which leave many aspects of cooking a recipe quite open to 
interpretation, thus different modern cooks can prepare them 
differently.

I know from my experience both in cooking and in  judging other 
people's dishes, it's amazing how many ways different people can 
interpret the same recipe. The purpose of a competition is to see how 
the entrants interpreted the recipe and what they did.

In one competition i judged, the recipe said to roast a chicken, and 
the entrant decided to boil it... This is not what the recipe said, 
so having entrants include the steps and processes is essential so 
the judges can see what each entrant actually did. Judges cannot 
assume that they know what the entrant did, unless the entrant 
describes it.

Ranald is fortunate in having training in a "period" kitchen. From 
what i can tell, most of us have to figure it out on our own. And 
often we may never have the actual experience, but only do it in our 
minds, which is hardly the same as "real world" experience. Thus, we 
may miss certain techniques or experiences, which will affect how we 
interpret a recipe, and hence the finished dish.

Anahita