[Sca-cooks] Redaction

Alexander Clark alexbclark at pennswoods.net
Mon Jan 24 15:08:37 PST 2011


On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 22:02:09 -0700, Deborah Hammons
<mistressaldyth at gmail.com> wrote:
> I have been looking up just "when" we the SCA started using the word
> redaction for our "version" of a recipe.  I have to say some of the
> dictionary definitions have me wondering if we really should be using it.
>  So, I am throwing it out to the list.
>
> I was hoping to teach a class on "redacting" recipes at a collegium.  I
> welcome any and all comment.

My understanding of the verb "to redact" is that it refers mainly to
the framing of some content in written form. This can involve
omissions, either by selecting some parts of one's collected content
in preference to other parts, or (in frequent recent usage) by
deleting words or phrases that refer to sensitive or classified
information. It is related to the verb "to reduce".

One noteworthy form of redaction is the writing down of collected oral
traditions, such as common law. In such redactions, the written
redaction is supposed to report faithfully the content that the writer
received, to the extent of coverage that the writer chooses to give.
That is to say, the writer may include some information, and leave
some out, but should not make up any of it nor systematically alter it
by omission.

As an SCA cook, I say that I have "redacted" period recipes if I have
compared several versions to try to figure out what features of these
recipes might be part of the identity of the dish and what the options
are, or if I have reorganized information from a recipe into a
different form. When I do this, it is an intermediate stage, after
which I either write up a working recipe/interpretation, or start
cooking.

-- 
Henry/Alex



More information about the Sca-cooks mailing list