[Sca-cooks] dealing with mundane cooks

[Phil Troy / G. Tacitus Adamantius]

Also sprach Jadwiga Zajaczkowa / Jenne Heise:
>Ladies & Gents,
>
>I'm looking for some suggestions. I have found that I'm having a hard
>time communicating well with cooks with extensive mundane cooking
>experience. This is a bit of a problem seeing as I'm dating one. There's
>also someone who just popped up locally who a number of people who do
>medieval/renaissance cooking are having a bit of difficulty with. We'll
>call him Bobby of the East.
>
>Bobby of the East has a large quantity of ideas about how things should
>be done. Some of them are good (for instance, thinking about what you
>could use a period sauce on). Some of them (telling someone who was
>getting a roast pig done by their local butcher as part of their feast,
>that that was no better than sending out for Chinese...) are, well,
>difficult to cope with. There is definitely a protective armor of
>professional kitchen experience being used here, often as armored panels
>for a bulldozer.

I know there've been several responses on this topic already, but the 
actual description of the problem given above is pretty vague, and I 
suspect some faulty assumptions have been made somewhere along the 
line. But anyway, here goes...

Jadwiga, you don't actually state that there's a problem with Bobby's 
(sorry, when I hear "Bobby of the East" I immediately think of a 
certain Joisey Dook) desire to emphasize his professional experience 
over anybody's desire to do a good period recreation. What you do 
state, more or less, is that Bobby's experience seems to be driving 
him to try to exert control over kitchen situations. If indeed he is, 
or has been, someone who has managed kitchens professionally, this is 
at least understandable, if not always appropriate. He's someone for 
whom bad decision-making equates with bankruptcy, unemployment, 
homelessness, no braces for the kids, no GI Joe with the kung fu grip 
on December 25th, and general fiscal mayhem. In short, something to 
be feared. He has no concept of shires-that-oughtta-be-baronies with 
comfy bank accounts ;-) (in case you missed it the first time, ;-) ) 
to cushion the group from the occasional logical mishap, and he also 
probably is new to the idea that the primary goal of all this is to 
learn, teach, and have fun doing it. What his view of historical 
recreation in a kitchen setting is, is also an issue, but to me, it 
seems a less important one as far as behavioral impetus goes. In 
short, he means well, or at least, if it's all an ego trip, it takes 
the form of feeling good because he helped your shire, so in the end 
the effect is the same. He wants what's best for the group, and the 
disagreement lies in what that is.

Now, I'm not defending his attitude (remember that guy at one of the 
recent Southern Region War Camps who, when slicing mushrooms for 
Sunday breakfast, must have assured a roomful of worshipful acolytes 
of his professional status at least 18 times before I stopped paying 
attention?), but I've seen that attitude before, probably will see it 
again, and make an ongoing effort not to be guilty of it myself, so I 
am perhaps in a good position to figure out a counter-strike.

The key is to make him understand that there are some important 
differences between the typical SCA kitchen and a professional 
kitchen. We don't pay our workers, and can't really have professional 
expectations. Some of them are excellent, highly skilled, and work as 
quickly and as well as pros, while others work like department-store 
mannequins in somewhat dubious health and a philosophical uncertainty 
as to the moral rectitude of this feast, hip-deep in cold oatmeal. 
Some are there mostly to socialize. The point is that you have to use 
your resources as best you can, preferably without hurting feelings, 
and still get the job done without the yelling and the ability to 
fire your employees and immediate replace them.

SCA kitchens also tend to be, well, unpredictable as to facilities 
and equipment that actually work, and are often not well-designed for 
the job at hand (since the temptation for designers to cut costs a 
bit, and for site owners to figure it's okay to overstress the 
fridges, etc., a bit if it's only a few times a year that it's really 
being used, is almost overwhelming).

I could go on forever, but ultimately, the bottom line is that the 
goal of a professional restaurateur and that of a cook in the SCA is 
slightly different in some ways, and you need to convince Bobby that 
you want, and in fact need (let's not quibble too much over whether 
this last is strictly the truth) his help in doing a good job, but 
clearly define your goal. For example, in the matter of the pig 
roasted by the butcher, you can explain that this is not only common 
period practice, but it'll be safely and well-done by a pro at a 
reasonable price, and it will then leave other important kitchen 
resources (such as ovens or grills, fridges, and most importantly, 
extra hands) available for sauces, garnishes, serving, cleaning, 
etc., and this helps assure better overall quality without deviating 
from _the stated goal_ of doing a feast that is historically faithful 
in its final state/end product.

In general, though, I'd say the thing to do is to ask his advice and 
make him feel wanted, without yielding control of your kitchen to him 
(which seems to me to be what this is all about). When he gives a 
piece of advice, feel free to ask this question: "In what way does 
this bring us closer to our goal?" If you want or need a hammer to 
beat him with, that's it. Fight compulsive management with 
management: if he can answer that question, fine. If he can't, do it 
your way. I think this is the best way to make it clear this is not a 
matter of professional dominance.

Another thing you might do is express things in as open-ended a way 
as possible. Don't say to him, "What are we gonna do?", or even "What 
should we do?" Say to him, "What would you advise?", or "We'd like to 
consult with you on X." These are terms professionals are used to 
hearing, but they're also fairly non-binding on you. You have some 
freedom, then, in following part of his advice, while still making 
your own decision.

I've been lucky in dealing with professionals myself, because most or 
all of them that I've had to deal with (not to mention myself) have 
had strong foundations in grunt-work before being given any 
managerial position. It's not threatening for a real professional to 
slip back into grunt mode when it's needed, and actually fairly 
relaxing to know that it's not your head on the block, so to speak. 
The trick, in Bobby's case, is to make him understand that you want 
help and input from him, but that, unless he's specifically been put 
in charge, this does not necessarily extend to management.

Oh, and you definitely want to hit him with the Larousse 
Gastronomique, if all else fails.

Adamantius
-- 




"S'ils n'ont pas de pain, vous fait-on dire, qu'ils  mangent de la 
brioche!" / "If there's no bread to be had, one has to say, let them 
eat cake!"
	-- attributed to an unnamed noblewoman by Jean-Jacques 
Rousseau, "Confessions", 1782

"Why don't they get new jobs if they're unhappy -- or go on Prozac?"
	-- Susan Sheybani, assistant to Bush campaign spokesman Terry 
Holt, 07/29/04