Rant on research; was, Re: [Sca-cooks] Re: Coffyns

[Phil Troy / G. Tacitus Adamantius]

Also sprach Micheal:
>Pardon me
>  I fail to understand this level of reaction to a question. Even to 
>which this morning I the originator was making fun of .  Indeed that 
>it got asnwers was a surprise .

I didn't think there was anything to make fun of, nor that it would 
be surprising to get answers.

>  That some were actualy valid even more so.

Why?

>  Is there some right of passage not known to  Canada east coast out 
>there on the west coast or what.
>  I agreed with some asnwers I dissagreed with others . I even dared 
>to agree with part of some but not all of another.
>So far I am  , stupid , uncaring , non receptive, thick headed, not 
>willing to read, to dull witted to form a valid question. Oh I 
>forgot or did everybody miss the overly sensative part.
>  Now do I have that right am I recieving some of your highly 
>developed opinions correctly. No need to feel bad or upset as 
>nothing so far has penatrated my cutting board thick ignorant skull. 
>Am I now disgruntled yes would be the asnwer.

I'm sorry to hear that, but I'm not sure why. Since you don't quote 
anything but the subject line, I'm not sure what your post is 
specifically in response to, but this entire thread, under this 
subject line, originated because I saw certain similarities between 
the lemon thread, the pie thread, and one or two others, and asked 
for your, and the group's indulgence while I mentioned some things 
that had, peripherally, to do with the question of forming pies on 
pots.

But as far as I know, nobody criticized you in any way, let alone all 
the nasty stuff you mention above. At worst, what some people said 
was, "I'm not convinced." If I criticized anything, it was not you, 
or anyone, but rather an approach that I sometimes see taken to 
research.

Just as Jadwiga didn't think (I hope) that I denied the existence of 
butchers in period, or attributed the small number of written bread 
recipes to guild secrecy, or spoke ill of Peter Brear's book, I 
didn't take those remarks personally. I simply took advantage of an 
opportunity to raise a point, and I thought I made it clear there was 
no criticism of you, or anyone, involved.

>  No need to do any form of research simply look up.

Well, if you don't mind my asking, can you tell us a little more 
about what research you'd do? Some of the people on this list have 
vast libraries, and others are lucky to have a couple of books. If we 
discount the reading of books, what else is there, short of digging 
for artifacts, or maybe looking for period drawings of kitchens and 
kitchen tools? What did you have in mind, if a simple, "I can't find 
that in the books I have available" is such a bad statement to make? 
All it does is establish that that source probably doesn't support 
your idea. One of the others might. We don't know.

>Found many books here many good sources thanks to one and all . Even 
>had fun reading most of the posts. Time to move on.

Well, I think most on this list value all the input we can get in 
cases like this. I'd hope that you wouldn't allow a simple and 
respectful disagreement over interpretation to spoil your experience. 
However, as you say you're disgruntled, I can only repeat I'm sorry.

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