[Sca-cooks] Re: Sca-cooks Digest, Vol 18, Issue 71

[Bill Fisher]

On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 18:24:35 +1100 (EST), tracey sawyer
<tfsawyer at yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> I'm guessing that's 8 american dollars .... approx $12 australian or $13 NZ ...   about what we've been allowing, but with inflation as bad as it has been - I guess we'll have to allow $15+ (Aussie $) soon.
> 
> Dammit!!
> 
> - Lowry (of Lochac)
> Lady Lowry ferch Gwynwynwyn ap Llewelyn   mka: Tracey Sawyer


Dunno, I am starting to be of the opinion that unless the group
hosting the event
wants a huge mucking feast, then we should make a single remove with dessert.

I was inspired by Elizabeth's smaller feast.  It means two things,
less of the night
is taken up by the feast, and you hold your eater's attention with
fewer dishes that
you can put more time and effort into, instead of being in a hurry to make two
or even three removes.

My first feast bucked a trend in Aethelmearc, when it was only two removes,
and had only two meat dishes in the entire feast.  It was Platina based and
the menu was set up by the book ane I worked very hard at balancing the 
humors in the dishes as well as the feast.

But feasts in the shire were usually 3 or more removes in length.  I believe
the feast got panned here, but I got good reviews from people who ate it.
The strongest criticism was too much weird foods for fussy people to 
handle.  Also I did not provide a huge, dripping roast for the carnivores.

But from working many feasts over the years, I have seen that most people 
lose interest in the feast after the first remove.  The long and short
of it is that
a smaller feast allows you to focus your attention on just that remove, and 
dessert (ok, two removes if you count dessert, gotta have dessert!), and it 
should serve to help keep the costs down for the event, so more people are
able to be on-board and enjoy period based foods.

Cadoc
-- 

"The 'Net is a waste of time, and that's exactly what's right about it" -
                                    - William Gibson