Now, I deeply love my girl and will go to great lengths to ensure her academic success; but let's be blunt - the process of reviewing four months of course work with a 16 year old is a painful process. Like getting your teeth pulled. Without Novocaine. Did I mention that she won't let anyone else study with her? Just mom. I'm not really complaining. Just saying.
Which led for the need for analogies. Because how do you explain consructionist views of the Constitution with out a few analogies thrown in. Which led to a discussion about the spirit of the law vs. the letter of the law. And the mythological event of her cleaning her bedroom. Ultimately, she became Thomas Jefferson - the strict constructionist with the black and white view of the world. (i.e. you told me to clean my bedroom, you didn't say I had to clean under my bed - stated vs. implied). On the other hand, I was more of an Alexander Hamilton type - "Yes, I said this; but X, Y and Z are implied in this statement."
The spirit of the law, and all that...
Later that evening, as I was recalling our study session I started thinking about the spirit and the letter of the law as it applies to cooking. And where it is okay to follow the spirit of a recipe (and be able to still say its the same recipe) vs. following the law of the recipe, even to the point of using an ingredient that you may not be enamoured of.
Which always leaves me wondering which stance the author of the recipe would take. Would they be offended that I changed the chicken stock for vegetable stock? Is trading out herbs to match what is in the house blasphemy or pragmatic?
Personally, I am a pragmatist - you have to do what works for you.
But still, these are the things that keep me up at night sometimes...
This week, I think I stayed closer to the letter of law - only trading out the chicken stock for the vegetable stock that I had on hand.
Somehow, I think Dorie would have been okay with that. I totally picture her on "Team Alexander Hamilton"...
Have a great weekend, all.