[Sca-cooks] obscure measurements

[Phil Troy/ G. Tacitus Adamantius]

Also sprach Phlip:
>I think what we're referring to here, was that when some of us were kids,
>several different food manufacturers used the fact that their
>jelly/cheese/whatever containers were reusable as a selling point for the
>contents.

Yeah, the basic difference between it and a small jar is that the top 
had to be removed with a bottle opener (usually) rather than by 
twisting it off. And because you had to deform it just slightly to 
remove it and to make it subsequently removable, assuming you didn't 
immediately empty the container, it never fit quite well on the 
container again. The most common form of this container used to be 
the "jelly glass", which I've seen people re-use for jelly, under a 
thick layer of melted paraffin as a seal. But I think there used to 
be a small-size Cheez Whiz (possibly Cheez Whiz garni au pimiento -- 
Ooh, lah lah!) that was sold in this... um... genteel... form.

What, if anything, now comes in such packaging? I seem to recall 
getting a jar of anchovies sealed in this way, a few years ago. 
_Great_ product to have in a non-resealable container, huh? Maybe 
something with garlic, while we're at it. Maybe some leaking oil?

>  For whatever reason, people started using very small glasses for
>juices about that time-

There is a funny little sort of plastic thimble that you sometimes 
see as part of a diner's Sunday breakfast special, if you order that 
kind of thing. Looks like it might hold two or three ounces of OJ. My 
point was only that the "cheese glasses" previously referred to were 
approximately the same size and shape as a four-ounce juice glass, 
and for many people, I suppose, such products were the source for 
their everyday glassware.

I actually had occasion to look through our assortment of glassware 
the other day. Probably looking for something to pour champagne into, 
and noted that I probably have more jelly glasses, 
fast-food-restaurant promo glasses, etc., than I do real glasses, and 
the truly frightening thing is that there's a chance some of the 
jelly glasses are more valuable (as collector's items) than the 
crystal champagne flutes.

>  I missed most of that because we didn't use them,
>and, in fact, at the boarding school I was at at that time, our plates and
>cups were all hand made pottery- in fact, every kid was required to make a
>bowl, a plate, and a cup during their stay there. Only limitations were
>size, so as you can imagine, we ate off an interesting "set" of dishes. The
>serving pieces were handmade, too, but the teachers made them, at need. They
>tended to be a bit more consistant ;-)
>
>But, I do remember seeing ads on TV about the pieces, and using them at
>various friends' homes when invited for a meal.

Cool! Did you actually eat off your own, or simply add your pieces to 
the general pool? It might be interesting to see a kid's 
interpretation of the proper size for, say, an oatmeal versus an ice 
cream bowl.

As for pottery, an interesting side note: Clive la Pensee always 
recommended pottery drinking vessels when adapting period brewing 
recipes. It was a way of breaking free of modern standards of 
judgement and our obsession with clear brews: if most people weren't 
drinking out of transparent beer glasses until quite recently anyway, 
what difference does a little cloudiness make, and is there, perhaps, 
a _reason_ why historical brewing recipes tend to ignore this 
criterion of quality?

Adamantius