Talk:A Gift to Young Housewives

Sources

The 1992 "Classic Russian Cooking" version has historical information, but is not available at any library local to me. --W.marsh 17:57, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

"fresh roach is not very tasty and barely useful; it is, therefore, best used to feed the servants." - source link to this is wrong, and does not include that actual part of the book. It's part of the Section XLVIII(not included), and the line is lost in translation. In this part, book describes the cooking process of the roach, and the line should read "Fresh roach is not very tasty, and is not of much use, therefore it should be cleaned, and put right away into the summer oven (not sure how to translate the term), right on the hay, for fish to then dry out, in one or two takes; such fish is very good for servants, fasting soups, that are as tasty made with dried fish, as with the fresh one". I do have a book, and can scan it if needs be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.48.2.215 (talk) 17:20, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Russians under communism

--Superdantaylor 22:23, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

"Russians under communism" implies that the food lines and shortages were due to Bolshevik policies, whereas actually they would still never been able to afford these luxuries under the Tsars or any government at the time

• I think it refers to "processing food" in DIY way, as it "you wanna "briosh"? Make it yourself, here's how; not the 1922 famine. ALSO, there was Soviet "Book on tasty and healthy food", probably inspired... based on A Gift to Young Housewives. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uchyot (talk • contribs) 20:36, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

yes no, the famine of 1921-1922 was associated with the devastating civil and First World War and there was no "diy way, as it you wanna brioche style" in the USSR, this is just schizophrenic nonsense and the author of the article contradicts himself , since The Book of Tasty and Healthy Food was published in the USSR even before the war in 1939, and not in 1952, as Wikipedia says, and therefore in no way in the USSR after the war, cookbooks could not be considered "bourgeois anachronism", just like the Molokhovets book itself was criticized by certain authors, but not government officials, for a certain "bourgeois-noble bias", which made sense since her books, in fact, were accessible only to the upper strata of society and this is no more than 10 percent of the country's population, since the majority they couldn’t even read normally, and if they could, they simply couldn’t afford to buy most of the food described in the book, and the actual shortages and long lines do not belong to the early post-war USSR, but to the late USSR with the greatest peak of problems during perestroika, but with all while in the USSR, recipes and cookbooks were available to the general reader due to urbanization and literacy by the majority of the population and, in general, most of the recipes in books, although with difficulty, ordinary citizens could bring to life and in general for 65-90 years the level of consumption and nutritional standards in the USSR grew and, in fact, Soviet books were not based on the Molokhovets book, and here you contradict yourself, so you say that in the USSR it was almost banned, although this is not so 37.54.230.242 (talk) 22:26, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Candidate for deletion

What exactly is the value of this article? If we start including articles on every book on cooking, gardening, home decoration are we really writing an encyclopaedia? If WP didn't keep on changing the procedure for nominatination for speedy deletion I would do it now - unfortunately, I'd have to go and learn the process all over again. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 12:50, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

In its own unique way this Russian cookbook is a classic history text describing the Russia of its time. It reflects certain lifestyles of its time. It ennumerates the profusion of fish and game species available in Russia. It catalogues the various foreign influences on Russian cuisine and its diversity within itself. It is also a book that is not readily avaiable and accessible to the common reader/researcher. These are a number of reasons why coverage of this book - in my opinion - is merited in Wikipedia.Moryak (talk) 18:17, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi @Moryak:. Your brief 5 lines here in the talk page make for far more interesting reading than the article itself. Were it not that it would immediately be seen as original research, I would easily copy this summary of yours into the article! Perhaps if you have the book it could still be done, using page references as sources. Having said that, I still find the "Table of contents" unencyclopaedic, perhaps it could be written as text, highlighing the more intesting elements, following the line of thinking that you outlined above:

etc

Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 20:04, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Obviously, there has been some time since the last comment here. However, should there be participants interested in any confirmation from earlier original editions of this cookbook, I have two copies in Russian. The first is a 1904 edition printed in St. Petersburg. The second is an edition printed obviously later by Parabola publishing in Germany but it lacks a specific date.Moryak (talk) 19:06, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on A Gift to Young Housewives. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071021194920/http://nuclphys.sinp.msu.ru/recipes/molohovec/ to http://nuclphys.sinp.msu.ru/recipes/molohovec

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:21, 24 June 2017 (UTC)