Jump to content

Wikipedia:Peer review/Elizabeth David/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Elizabeth David

[edit]
Previous peer review
Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

.

Elizabeth David was a woman who had an unlikely effect on British culture in the latter half of the twentieth century: through her first six books and numerous articles and essays, she managed to get the British to actually think about what they were eating. In doing so, she revitalised British home cooking, and her legacy is still preached by cooks today. This article has undergone an extensive rewrite and expansion recently, with an eventual goal of going for Featured status. All constructive comments are welcome. - SchroCat (talk) and Tim riley talk 21:52, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by William Avery

[edit]
David's written sources and British influences
[edit]

In the chapter on jams and jellies in Summer Cookery, David writes of Eliza Acton's Modern Cookery that it "is the expression of English country-house cookery in the mid-nineteenth century, when it must have been very good indeed", and states that she has drawn on Acton considerably. The Cookery Book of Lady Clark of Tillypronie is another source that she draws on repeatedly. These are both British writers, the latter with a heavy European influence. Auricoste de Lazarque's La Cuisine Messine is another work she seems to have held in high regard. I wonder if any of these, or similar, are covered in RS on David, and might be given a mention. (I have read, but don't have to hand, the Cooper biog.)

I see there's a cite for Bee Wilson quoting David on Acton in article Modern Cookery for Private Families. William Avery (talk) 22:51, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good points, both – thank you! I'm going to the British Library today and will do a little digging on this while there. Tim riley talk 09:17, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm really pleased to see these cookery books I've worked on being woven into the encyclopaedia! Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:07, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a note on Eliza Acton and Lady Clark, who are mentioned not only in ED's books but in the biographies. I'm inclined to omit Lazarque: ED's bibliographies in, e.g. French Provincial Cooking are extensive, of course, but I think we should stick to mentioning only the most conspicuous influences in the present acticle. – Tim riley talk 17:53, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wootton Manor as "Jacobean"
[edit]

There's been some discussion on talk about the propriety of this and the alternative 'Mannerist'. My feeling is that readers of this article are unlikely to be particularly interested in the style. 'Jacobean' (pace Cooper) is arguably misleading, whilst 'Mannerist' is too specialised a word for this article. Perhaps just use the plain chronological description, "seventeenth-century", attested by the Historic England page? William Avery (talk) 09:30, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely fine – and done. Tim riley talk 17:27, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Drive-by comment - Tend to agree with William Avery that readers are unlikely to care, but the 2012 Antram/Pevsner, which has quite a full entry, nowhere describes it as Jacobean. It does use the term Artisan Mannerist, but that's even more specialised and obscure! I think 17th century is best. KJP1 (talk) 18:23, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by ssilvers

[edit]

This is a beautiful article. Just two thoughts about the Lead section.

  • "She was deeply hostile to the second-rate, to over-elaborate cooking and to bogus substitutes...." Second-rate what? Second-rate writing, cooking or recipes? Also, the sentence reads as very idiomatic, and "to" need not be repeated. How about something like "She was deeply hostile to second-rate chefs, overly elaborate cooking and bogus substitutes...."
  • "Her reputation rests on her articles and her books, which have been continually reprinted. She published eight...." The first sentence seems redundant. How about: "She published many articles and eight books between 1950 and 1984 that have been continually reprinted. After her death her literary executor completed a further four books that she had planned and worked on." -- Ssilvers (talk) 00:22, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'll work on the first of these. (Incidentally, it's amusing to see that Americans use "idiomatic" to mean precisely the opposite of its meaning to English people, but I understand what you mean by it.) Point taken about the other sentence, and I'll work on that too. Thank you for these points. Tim riley talk 09:17, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Both now redrawn. Tim riley talk 17:27, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Chiswick Chap

[edit]

Yes, this is a splendid article and it's quite hard find anything to improve. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:33, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Personally I interpret the MoS to mean that the lead image should best be a little larger than the rest, say |upright=1.3, while the body images are formatted with |upright if they are portrait-shaped.
Looks just right to me! Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:23, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Carry-le-Rouet 20081010 04
  • There is scope for a colourful image, say of a ratatouille or a market stall, next to "the brilliance of the market stalls piled high with pimentos, aubergines, tomatoes, olives, melons, figs and limes" and the mouthwatering account of her recipes that follows.....
Maybe something like this? Commons has "Category:Markets in France by department" enabling search of single departments. We can crop it if need be. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:59, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That's very fine indeed, and would sit beautifully to the right of the quote. Would it be too much of a cheek if I asked you to do the honours? Tim riley talk 22:14, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, Chiswick Chap; much obliged. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 09:02, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Me too! Tim riley talk 09:27, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can one of you chaps, Chiswick or otherwise, please check ref 245 as it looks a bit confusing. I didn't want to go ahead and fix it, like I did the other ones, as it beat me. I came across some others, which I've fixed, and if I've tramples on Chiswick Chap's feet, I apologise. CassiantoTalk 20:55, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • In this overhaul the references fall to me to deal with, as SchroCat has kindly agreed not to press for modern referencing style to replace my stone age originals. I'm most grateful to Chiswick Chap and you for bringing the first-aid box, and I'll follow up any outstanding points a.s.a.p. – Tim riley talk 19:50, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • I imagine it's the irregular order of the eight page refs that you boggle at. They are that way because they follow the order of the eight ingredients and places listed in the sentence to which they refer. In articles I've worked on I used to use a more detailed style, thus: David (1986), pp. 192 (lemons), 216 (potted meat), 25 (mayonnaise), 98 (pizza), 229 (syllabubs), 280 (truffles), 94 (Spain) and 143 (Morocco), but I found this made the reference section a bit over-fussy, and as far as I can remember no PR or FAC reviewer has asked for the more detailed method. Tim riley talk 09:20, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by caeciliusinhorto

[edit]

Reviewing without having read others' comments. Hopefully I'm not repeating them too much. An excellent article, I'm really struggling to find nits to pick. Nonetheless, we proceed:

  • "they were allowed to cross the border into Yugoslavia, which at that point remained neutral and non-combatant." were there any neutral countries that were combatants? (Actually, on reflection, the answer to this might be "yes", but I'll still ask the question).
    • There some that were non-combatant and not neutral (Spain springs to mind), where life was made difficult to those of the other side, so I think the two terms are probably needed. - SchroCat (talk) 09:41, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "she offered David a contract, and her work began appearing in the publication from March 1949." – this is probably only a theoretical ambiguity, but "she" and "her" refer to different people in this sentence. Can it be rewritten to make clear that it is David's writing, not Scott-James', that began to appear in Harper's.
  • "She felt less emotionally connected to Italy than with Greece and southern France and found preparing and she found the writing "uncommonly troublesome"": am I missing something, or does this not make sense? I think the words "and found preparing" need cutting?
  • "At the time, many of the ingredients used in the recipes were difficult to obtain in Britain.": surely the same was true of the ingredients in Mediterranean Food? The fact that it was only mentioned when we get to Italian Food four years later somewhat implies that it wasn't, though...
  • The final paragraph of §Italian, French and other cuisines is a little confusing for me. The link between the dedication to Higgins and the divorce case is not entirely obvious, especially as we've been off the subject of David and Higgins' affair for eight paragraphs.
  • I noticed duplication of links to Mediterranean Food and Italian Food; the duplinks tool reveals more duplications that I hadn't noticed just on reading through.
    • We have deliberately duplicated some of the links from the Biography section in the Books section, as the two halves are so far apart the repetition is useful, rather than harmful. - SchroCat (talk) 09:41, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, an excellent article, compellingly written and thoroughly cited. Much better than some current FAs I can think of. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 21:47, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I add my thanks, too. Tim riley talk 16:45, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You are both welcome. Between the two of you, I was reasonably confident that it'd be an excellent article before I got to it, and my prejudices were confirmed. And I had never realised how interesting David's life was before Mediterranean Food! Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 16:22, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Brianboulton

[edit]

I'm afraid I can't offer a very detailed review. As a result of my mishaps of a year ago I still haven't recovered my tastebuds, and to read about food, particularly delicious food, is a painful business. Another reason is that it's a long article, and I've just finished reviewing two blockbusters, so my critical energies are depleted. However, I have read the article, and can offer a few comments that may or may not be useful:

  • "She was sent to Paris in 1930, studying painting privately and enrolling at the Sorbonne for a course in French civilisation which covered history, literature and architecture". Should be "In 1930 she was sent to Paris, where she studied painting privately and enrolled at the Sorbonne for a course in French civilisation which covered history, literature and architecture".
  • The sentence beginning "She was especially taken with..." has too many "ands" in it, mostly within quotations, but could be split after "down the street".
  • "At the time, many of the ingredients used in the recipes were difficult to obtain in Britain." This sentence could do with the word "still" before "difficult"
  • Among occasional examples of unintended verbosity, I found: "David was able to visit several areas of France" ("David visited several areas of France"; the word "Instead" in "Instead she joined the weekly publications..."; "Six other books published since the author's death in various formats in hardback and paperback have been compilations drawn from her existing works" – are the words I've italicised necessary? There are possibly other examples (like, e.g. listing all nine possible literary influences on A Book of Mediterranean Food.)
  • "who shopped there for equipment that they would otherwise have to buy in France" I think needs a "had" after "have".
  • Was old Humph really just a "humorous writer"?

It's an extraordinarily well written article, but I can't help thinking that, at 10,000 words, it is on the long side for its subject. I've suggest a few small trims, but maybe there are other opportunities for excision, especially in the "Books" section which I found somewhat overdetailed. These are just my thoughts, and I'm quite ready to be voted down. Now, back to bread and water. Brianboulton (talk) 16:46, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for these, BB. It happens that most of your comments refer to the bits of the article I wrote, and I'll be attending to your suggestions over the weekend. Tim riley talk 16:42, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
All attended to except the possible pruning of the books section. Point taken there, but I'll wait to see what other reviewers say. Thank you for your thoughts here, and sorry to cause you distress with a culinary theme. Tim riley talk 08:47, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Wehwalt

[edit]

When I think of British cooking, I'm reminded of the exchange in Kind Hearts and Coronets "He's trying to improve his mind." "He has room to do so." But to business. This is up to the end of the biographical portion, I shall return after commenting on some other articles.

  • "she had become used" consider "accustomed" for "used".
  • "Her reputation rests on her articles and her books, which have been continually reprinted." This sentence falls between the discussion of her articles and that of her books, so seems placed a bit oddly. I might move it to the next paragraph, which seems to have the theme of her ongoing legacy.
  • "the marriage was not long-lived", "was not an uncaring mother", "was not eager for her daughter's early return" Possibly overusing this type of phrase in such a short span.
  • "After her return to London in early 1937, recognising that she was not going to be a success on the stage David abandoned thoughts of a theatrical career." Rather than have the subject so late, I might "After her return to London in early 1937, David recognised that she was not going to be a success on the stage, and abandoned thoughts of a theatrical career."
  • "smart young women " intelligent or stylish? Given the job, it really could be either.
  • " but the relationship came to an end when he was seriously wounded and he returned to his native Canada." I might strike the second "he".
  • "The earlier spark in the relationship soon died, and they were living separately by 1948." I might cut "earlier" or begin "What remained of the spark in the relationship soon died ..."
  • "and was less convinced by Minton's black and white drawings, " Less convinced than what?
  • "In The Sunday Times, Evelyn Waugh named Italian Food as one of the two books that had given him the most pleasure in that year.[101]" No doubt 1954 is meant, but it might pay to say so given the distance since the last mention.
  • " disliked the company and wrote a most unflattering portrait of it in a 1985 article.[102] Disliking " possibly a bit too close together, given the many synonyms available. Incidentally, the lawyer within me stirs: if she was under contract, how could she change houses?
An excellent first batch, thank you, Wehwalt. SchroCat and I divided the rewriting between us, and we'll be attending to our respective bits of the biography section. Tim riley talk 16:44, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've attended to the first four points, and will leave the other five for SchroCat to consider. As I have the biographies to hand, I can answer your contractual question: she was under contract to Lehmann's firm for Italian Food, and that contract was assigned to Macdonald. After fulfilling the obligation to write that one book for Macdonald ED was free to go to a new publisher. That much is definite (Chaney, p. 323) and indeed (from memory, but I think correct) ED never contracted with any publisher for more than one book per contract. Tim riley talk 09:07, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks Wehwalt. All mine covered too; I look forward to any further comments you have. No rush on this - whenever works for you. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 13:26, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not too much more.
  • "with sections linked by her chosen passages from relevant literature." I might strike "relevant". I think it's been made clear elsewhere and it slows things down.
  • "gnocchi and polenta;" I would consider links, note that you used gnocchi before.
  • I feel the legacy section begins weakly, with the fictional analogues of herself, which are dubiously a part of her legacy. If you must have them (and any vagrant comic book and video game versions), I'd bury them in the section a bit more.
  • "Cooper addresses the same point, although points" a bit too pointy.
An enjoyable read. I'm sure it will do well at FAC.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:34, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I desire to associate myself with that expression of thanks. Tim riley talk 20:56, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by KJP1

[edit]

Firstly, I'll join others in saying it is indeed a wonderful article. Beautifully researched and written, it's an absolute pleasure to read. Secondly, apologies for my delaying in arriving at the party. There was little to suggest by way of improvements before, and there's even less now. But here we go:

Early years

  • "She and her sisters grew up in Wootton Manor in Sussex, a seventeenth-century manor house with extensive modern additions by Detmar Blow" - did they never get out? And given that Blow's additions date from 1915, can they really be described as "modern"? To her as a child, perhaps, but maybe, "She and her sisters grew up at Wootton Manor in Sussex, a seventeenth-century manor house with extensive, early twentieth-century additions by Detmar Blow".
  • "What had stuck was the taste for a kind of food quite ideally unlike anything I had known before" - it's a direct quote but I don't know what the "ideally" is doing. Just checking it's not a typo.

Actress

  • "She decided that she was not good enough as a painter" - as the "she" comes directly after the sentence containing the Chaney quote and comment, I was momentarily confused as to whether it referred to her or to David. Perhaps, "David decided..."

France, Greece, Egypt and India

  • "she joined Cowan in buying a boat, just big enough to suffice, with the intention of sailing it to Greece" - just big enough to suffice to do what? Sail to Greece? How much bigger would that be than one that was only needed to sail to Sicily? Perhaps just "buying a small boat", as per the lead?
  • "Cooper comments of this period of David's life" - "Cooper comments on this period of David's life"?
  • "but at night, dressed in exotic spangled caftans, she was a different creature" - link caftans or is the term sufficiently well known? Maybe I'm still in my over-linking phase.
  • "Elizabeth Gwynne married Tony David in Cairo on 30 August 1944" - this reads a little oddly to me, but I might be missing a stylistic trick? Up to now, prior to her marriage, she's been David, and Tony David is mentioned only seven words before. It almost reads to me like a hangover from an earlier version. Perhaps just, "They married in Cairo on 30 August 1944"?
    • It is always difficult, even impossible, to deal satisfactorily with the pre-marital career of a woman famous under her married name. We experimented with calling her "Gwynne" throughout until she married the Colonel, but it just didn't feel right. On the other hand it would have plainly read very oddly indeed to say "David married Tony" (sounds like a civil partnership) or "David married Tony David". We can't say "they" at the start of a new para, so I've changed it to "The couple were married". American readers might object, preferring "The couple was married", perhaps, but for now I'll go nap on the present wording. Tim riley talk 09:03, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Post-war England

  • "gristle rissoles" - I may be over-linking again but I'm not at all sure non-English speaking readers, or indeed English speaking ones any younger than Mr Riley and myself, will be immediately familiar with gristle rissoles.
  • "the editor of the British magazine Harper's Bazaar" - no dedicated follower of fashion, I, but is HB British, as opposed to the British edition of an American magazine? The Wikipedia article says it's American, first published in 1867. If it is a British version of the US magazine, should it be linked as others are?
  • "and several cases the ingredients were not available in British shops" - "and in several cases the ingredients were not available in British shops"?
  • "although Lucie Marion, writing in The Manchester Guardian, considered" - any reason the Manchester Guardian's not linked? I don't think it's appeared before?

Italian, French and other cuisines

  • "her agent, Paul Scott, persuaded Macdonald relinquish their option on the next book" - "her agent, Paul Scott, persuaded Macdonald to relinquish their option on the next book"?
  • "David's agent negotiated a contract with a new publisher, Michael Joseph, and a new illustrator, Juliet Renny" - "David's agent negotiated contracts with a new publisher, Michael Joseph, and a new illustrator, Juliet Renny."?
  • "It discourses at some length the type and origin of the dishes popular in various French regions" - "It discourses at some length on the type and origin of the dishes popular in various French regions"?

1960s

  • "but her sense of smell of frying onions was so enhanced as to be unpleasant for her" - "but her sense of the smell of frying onions was so enhanced as to be unpleasant for her"?
  • "the condiments of the orient, near and far" - hate to suggest more linking, but will people know David meant "the condiments of the orient, near and far? At least, I assume she did.

Later years

Nothing here. Now have to go out but Books will be covered this evening. KJP1 (talk) 15:25, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Books: France

  • "French Provincial Cooking, by far her longest to date" - perhaps, "French Provincial Cooking, by far her longest book to date".

Books: Other Mediterranean lands and beyond

  • "a Persian "maqlub" of aubergines, rice and mutton" - perhaps link maqlub?

Books: England

  • "Some writers have believed David neglected the cooking of her own country in favour of Mediterranean cuisine" - "believed" reads slightly oddly to me, perhaps "contended" or "considered"?
  • I chose the word because "considered" would imply conscious weighing of the facts, and without wishing to be unkind to Humph or the more recent journo it seems to me that nobody weighing the facts could reasonably come to the conclusion that ED was hostile to British food - she was, as we explain in this section, a knowledgeable devotee and exponent. (To be fair to Humph, he was writing after her first English cookery book, but a year before English Bread and Yeast Cookery came out, so his ignorance may be partly excused.) Tim riley talk 09:03, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy

  • "as evidence that David had a broader readership than some give credit for" - perhaps, "as evidence that David had a broader readership than some give her credit for"?
  • "The same year, the journalist Susan Parsons wrote in Canberra Times.." - perhaps, "The same year, the journalist Susan Parsons wrote in The Canberra Times"?
  • "More modern Australian cooks, such as Kylie Kwong, have also cited David as a continued influence on their work" - perhaps "More modern Australian cooks, such as Kylie Kwong, have also cited David as a continuing influence on their work"?
Even more meagre offerings here than the first set. Shall now do a quick once-over of the article in general, but I think I'm done. KJP1 (talk) 21:31, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, nothing more from me. Adopt or ignore the above as you see fit, particularly any impertinent grammar suggestions! They're all minor. One final thought on a very fine article. It is, as Brian says, long. But her life and her books are so interwoven, and so central to her importance and her influence, that I'm hard-pressed to see what could be cut without detriment. And, to me, it didn't read as an overly long article. KJP1 (talk) 22:10, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
KJP1, thank you so much for these points. I think I can speak for SchroCat when I say we shall both enjoy working through them from tomorrow. After that, I think, we'll be off to FAC, but more on that in due course. Tim riley talk 23:39, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks KJP1. These are all extremely useful. - SchroCat (talk) 08:46, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I add my thanks to SchroCat's. Tim riley talk 09:03, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Closing this PR

[edit]

Now closing the PR, with grateful thanks to all who contributed. We're off to FAC if anyone cares to look in. Tim riley talk 10:49, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Echoing my thanks to all too! Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 10:51, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Elizabeth_David/archive2&oldid=1136085356"