[Sca-cooks] Revisons and Cock-a-leekie soup reference

[johnna holloway]

Stefan asked if I was going to revise the TI articles
or make them available. I am of the mind that until I can
revise them totally I'll let them stay OP. Part of the problem
with the TI articles is that they are not easily revised. I cannot
just open WORD and redo them. The original articles (which never
appeared as written in TI) were painfully handtyped. It's also a matter
of time and current projects and committments. (The way that
I want to redo the two part wafers article is to write a booklet this
time because I have all these new recipes and photo's of actual
wafer irons. That takes time.)

As a librarian I think that people are best guided at the
beginning of their careers by using the current up-to-date
materials than using materials based on how we did it back in
the late or mid 1970's. Certainly we have a much better understanding
of foods and recipes now than we had then. There's simply more
available to use and cite now than there was even a decade ago.
Would we use Fabulous Feasts now to construct an authentic feast
or would we use rather The Medieval Kitchen?

Besides Stefan there's always the Florilegium for newcomers to turn to
and it won't miss an article or two.

And no, we are building a timber-frame barn, not a warehouse.

Johnnae llyn Lewis  Johnna Holloway



Stefan li Rous wrote:snipped--
> Yes, I understand. But you never know unless you ask. And while I could have
> simply asked you by email, I asked in public so that perhaps this might spur
> someone else to rewrite a previously written article that they now thought was
> outdated, whether for the Florilegium or for somewhere else.
>
> > I Wrote ---Redoing the first decade
> > of any career given what we now know and sources now available
> > is daunting to say the least. In the SCA it seems more so.
>
> Yes, but that should be easier than starting such a job completely from scratch.

> Yes, you have mentioned this situation before. This is the first time that I
> knew a move was in the works, though. "All moved and shelved"? So your next
> home is going to be in a warehouse? :-)

> Yes, a revised article would be nice. But is the old article worse than
> nothing? Does it have errors or just omissions? Would people still find it
> useful if they could read it? Right now, I'm not even sure that back issues
> are available that far back for T.I.
>
> Another compromise would be to publish the article as it is, or was
 originally meant to be published, and then add a quick bibliography
 of these books you've found since then. People would then have the
 information you wrote then and a headstart on where to get more
information.
>
> Oh well. I'm certainly not trying to pick on Johnna. Even in the short time
> she has been on this list she has given us innumerable book referances and
> other info.
> Stefan
> --
> THLord Stefan li Rous