My rant: The mad Celtic katana and madu florentine fighter...
james koch
>
> Now I hate to seem argumentative, but I've always wondered about
> something. I've noticed quite a few Japanese and Roman type personas
> in the SCA. Now the SCA is a group dedicated to recreating the
> European Middle Ages, is it not? What do/did Japanese have to do with
> Europe in the middle ages? How many Romans lived on into the Middle
> Ages? Heck, isn't an American Indian persona just as likely as a
> Japanese one? I'm not trying to be a rules lawyer and not trying to
> ruin anyone's fun, these are just things I'm wondering. It's like the
> madu, not a period weapon, it just isn't, show me one from period and
> I'll recant. I want proof. :-) And madus were made from antlers, they
> couldn't penetrate maille, no way, no how, and if you tried to parry a
> sword with it, well you'd have lots of nice broken antler. And also,
> what's with all these kilted guys with katanas? Yeesh. :-) These are
> questions which echo around my mind, and no I'm not picking on anyone.
> It's just a bunch of those things that make me go "HUH?". Heheh, just
> don't get me started on exposed plastic. :-)
>
> Nomad/Michael
> Las Vegas, NV
> Barony of Starkhafn, Kingdom of Caid
>
>
Nomad,
>
Having visited Rome I can assure you that it has been inhabited
continuously since the 8th Century BC. I don't know what the population
of Rome itself was during various times during the middle ages and the
Renaissance, but it was Europe and Christendom's most important city
throughout that period. As to the population of the Holy Roman Empire I
should not even hazard a guess.
>
You are quite correct though regarding the Japanese not really fitting
into the European middle ages theme. You are also correct regarding
American Indians. A number of Taino, Mexica and other people of these
regions travelled to and worked in Europe in the period covered by the
SCA.
>
Jim Koch (Gladius The Alchemist)
Nomad in Starkhafn
Bronwynmgn
(Nomad in Starkhafn) writes:
>I've noticed quite a few Japanese and Roman type personas
>in the SCA. Now the SCA is a group dedicated to recreating the
>European Middle Ages, is it not?
The SCA's stated purpose is to research and recreate pre-17th century Europe.
There's no early cut-off date listed, although other documents do mention the
Middle Ages and Renaissance specifically. Romans are European and from before
the 17th century -and there are places where Romans hung on (besides in Rome)
into what can arguably be called the early Middle Ages. No real problem with
Romans. Most of the "Roman" personas I know are actually Romano-British, from
a generation or two after the departure of Roman powers from England.
The Japanese and other Easterners are a little tougher, but those other
documents also mention that cultures which had contact with Europe during our
time frame are welcome, so long as they behave themselves as visitors to a
European court would - ie, as ambassadors or guests. Indians, Chinese and such
might well have been met by spice merchants; there is of course Marco Polo's
trip; and apparently there is some documentation for VERY late in SCA period
contact with Japanese. I also know a fellow whose persona is an Aztec warrior
brought back to Europe as a novelty near the end of period. I don't know
whether anybody really did that with Aztecs, but we know they did a little
later with North American Indians, so it's certainly plausible.
<<And also, what's with all these kilted guys with katanas? Yeesh. :-)>>
Those are the folks who haven't learned yet that "Highlander" does not equal
documentation, and nor do almost other so-called "historical" movies and TV
shows.
Or the ones who want to wear kilts, and like to fight with katanas, and can't
decide which one they like better, so they come up with implausible persona
stories to explain it.
<<These are questions which echo around my mind, and no I'm not picking on
anyone. It's just a bunch of those things that make me go "HUH?">>
Well, the rules say "an attempt at pre-17th century clothing". They don't
explicitly say that each item in the outfit has to be from the same century or
culture. Ergo...
I have so much fun with the research and recreating that I don't understand why
other people don't get the same thrill from doing something well enough to have
someone come up to you and say "That's 13th century, isn't it!". But then
again, I also don't understand the appeal of getting smashed every night at
war, and the folks who enjoy that probably don't understand me any better. It
may not take all types, but we certainly have all types.
Brangwayna Morgan
jezreel...@my-deja.com
history book around, and not being an expert), but our time does cover
600 A.D. to 1600 A.D. That's 1000 years of history, quite a large
window. As far as Japanese persona's, I know there was trade with the
East long before 1600, so one could only presume that some of them came
to visit. Same for the Middle East.
Another thing to consider is this--much like in "real" life, once
you get people of different cultures together, you get some cross-
pollenation. An Irishman sees a katana in action and wants to try it
out, or a Samurai sees a Viking two-handed hammer and wants to try
that. Okay, so it doesn't match with their outfit, but at least their
out there, doing what SCAdian's are supposed to do: Have Fun!! That's
my story, and I'm sticking to it. ;)
Jezreel
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
caha...@my-deja.com
evilnom...@aol.com wrote:
> I've noticed quite a few Japanese and Roman type personas
> in the SCA. Now the SCA is a group dedicated to recreating the
> Europe in the middle ages? How many Romans lived on into the Middle
> Ages?
Since there is no offical start date that I am aware off (and I could
be wrong in my old age) Roman personas are not a problem. After all,
Rome is in Europe, isn't it? Roman soldiers travelled and it is not
surprising that Roman culture and influence would be around for many
years, it was a very large Empire at one time.
In the 1300's, obscure trade routes via the sea were used with Eastern
cultures. That is why Columbus sailed in the 1400's, to find shorter
trade routes.
Cahan Kyle
David Friedman
> Now I hate to seem argumentative, but I've always wondered about
> something. I've noticed quite a few Japanese and Roman type personas
> in the SCA. Now the SCA is a group dedicated to recreating the
> European Middle Ages, is it not?
It is not. Its time period is defined, in the official documents, as
"pre-seventeenth century." That covers a good deal both before and after
the middle ages.
> What do/did Japanese have to do with
> Europe in the middle ages?
Japanese has something, although not much, to do with Europe in the
sixteenth century, which is within the SCA's time period.
> How many Romans lived on into the Middle
> Ages? Heck, isn't an American Indian persona just as likely as a
> Japanese one?
Yes. Rather more likely. And there are a few, although not nearly as
many as there are Japanese.
> It's like the
> madu, not a period weapon, it just isn't, show me one from period and
> I'll recant.
You are correct about antlers, of course, although I have seen a picture
of a Chinese martial arts weapon that is essentially a steel version of
a madu. I have no idea whether it is period.
--
David/Cariadoc
http://www.best.com/~ddfr/Medieval/Medieval.html
David Friedman
wrote:
> Hm... I'm not sure when the whole Roman thing was over, (not having a
> history book around, and not being an expert), but our time does cover
> 600 A.D. to 1600 A.D.
That's a common oral tradition in the SCA, but I don't think it has any
actual basis in the official rules.
> That's 1000 years of history, quite a large
> window. As far as Japanese persona's, I know there was trade with the
> East long before 1600, so one could only presume that some of them came
> to visit. Same for the Middle East.
But most long distance trade didn't involve someone from one end of
Eurasia travelling to the other end, but rather goods travelling via a
series of traders. I know of at least one period (Islamic) reference to
someone from China, and there was lots of interaction with India, but I
am not aware of any medieval references to people from Japan in Europe.
--
David/Cariadoc
http://www.best.com/~ddfr/Medieval/Medieval.html
David Friedman
> In the 1300's, obscure trade routes via the sea were used with Eastern
> cultures. That is why Columbus sailed in the 1400's, to find shorter
> trade routes.
What routes by whom are you thinking of? There was trade with the orient
from much earlier than that--at least late Roman times, if not earlier,
and some of it went by sea around India. Do we have evidence of direct
European contact with Japan, or Japanese visitors to Europe, as early as
the 1300s?
--
David/Cariadoc
http://www.best.com/~ddfr/Medieval/Medieval.html
ZnamSinger
http://www.sca.org/docs/ . Our Articles of Incorporation state:
"This corporation is a nonprofit public benefit corporation and is not
organized for the private gain of any person. It is organized under the
Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law for charitable purposes. The
purposes for which this corporation is formed include:
a) Research and education in the field of pre-17th-Century Western Culture.
b) Generally, to engage in research, publish material of relevance and
interest to the field of pre-17th-Century Western Culture; to present
activities and events which re-create the environment of said era, such as,
but not limited to, tournaments, jousts, fairs, dances, classes, et cetera;
to acquire authentic or reproduced replicas of chattels representative of
said era; and to collect a library.
c) This corporation shall have and exercise all rights and powers conferred
upon non-profit corporations under the laws of the State of California,
provided that all activities shall be incidental to and in the furtherance
of the purposes set forth in II.a. and b. above."
Both the Corpora and Bylaws give the time as "pre-17th-Century Western
Culture" as well and refer back to the Articles of Inc. for detail.
In 1984, the Corpora read "pre-17th-Century dress of any period or culture"
but the Articles stated "pre-17th-Century Western Culture." Since then, the
Corpora has been brought into agreement with the Articles of Inc.
When I first joined, back in 1979, I was told that our time frame was 600
to the death or ER I (1603). I was also subsequently told that the time
frame went though 1650 (There was quite a fad for Cavalier garb, you
see..). In 1985 the BoD addressed this issue by publishing a message in the
TI (#75). Its fairly long but basically states that after much
consideration and a polling of the populace, the cut-off date will remain
1600 not 1650. It continues by emphasizing to "those of you who have worked
diligently at researching...'alternate persona'...No one will come to you
at an event and tell you to change your clothes, and no herald will refuse
to announce your presence in court or on the field."
It continues with a caveat... "However, you must realize that when you
attend SCA events or functions in your Eastern-culture, or late-period, or
very-early-period garb and persona you will be treated, ideally, as a
visitor from another culture or time who is a guest at a Medieval or
Renaissance court in pre-1600 Europe."
I hope this helps.
Elspeth/Lisa
caha...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <38a53290....@news.lvcablemodem.com>,
> evilnom...@aol.com wrote:
> > I've noticed quite a few Japanese and Roman type personas
> > in the SCA. Now the SCA is a group dedicated to recreating the
> > European Middle Ages, is it not? What do/did Japanese have to do with
> > Europe in the middle ages? How many Romans lived on into the Middle
> > Ages?
>
> Since there is no offical start date that I am aware off (and I could
> be wrong in my old age) Roman personas are not a problem. After all,
> Rome is in Europe, isn't it? Roman soldiers travelled and it is not
> surprising that Roman culture and influence would be around for many
> years, it was a very large Empire at one time.
>
> In the 1300's, obscure trade routes via the sea were used with Eastern
> cultures. That is why Columbus sailed in the 1400's, to find shorter
> trade routes.
>
J&S
james koch <alc...@en.com> wrote in message
news:38a5a8e6$0$14...@news.voyager.net...
> Nomad in Starkhafn wrote:
> >
> > Now I hate to seem argumentative, but I've always wondered about
> > in the SCA. Now the SCA is a group dedicated to recreating the
> > European Middle Ages, is it not? What do/did Japanese have to do with
> > Europe in the middle ages? How many Romans lived on into the Middle
> > madu, not a period weapon, it just isn't, show me one from period and
> > couldn't penetrate maille, no way, no how, and if you tried to parry a
> > what's with all these kilted guys with katanas? Yeesh. :-) These are
> > questions which echo around my mind, and no I'm not picking on anyone.
> > don't get me started on exposed plastic. :-)
> >
> > Nomad/Michael
> > Las Vegas, NV
> > Barony of Starkhafn, Kingdom of Caid
> >
> >
Jim Koch wrote
> Having visited Rome I can assure you that it has been inhabited
> continuously since the 8th Century BC. I don't know what the population
> of Rome itself was during various times during the middle ages and the
> Renaissance, but it was Europe and Christendom's most important city
> throughout that period. As to the population of the Holy Roman Empire I
> should not even hazard a guess.
Silas
I believe he was referring to having a roman legionaire running around
with some 12th century crusaders. If one wanted a roman personality who was
a light spearman from te 14th century, I dont think he'd have a problem with
that.
Jim Koch wrote further
Dragon
>Hm... I'm not sure when the whole Roman thing was over, (not having a
>history book around, and not being an expert), but our time does cover
>600 A.D. to 1600 A.D. That's 1000 years of history, quite a large
>window. As far as Japanese persona's, I know there was trade with the
>East long before 1600, so one could only presume that some of them came
>to visit. Same for the Middle East.
Seems to me that the "roman thing" ended for a time between 900 and 1100 ad,
during a time of a minor 'ice age' wherein the climate turned bad in
northern europe. Then after that, Rome wasnt as much of an influence.
dragon
Todd Rich
(snip)
: Silas
: I believe he was referring to having a roman legionaire running around
: with some 12th century crusaders. If one wanted a roman personality who was
: a light spearman from te 14th century, I dont think he'd have a problem with
: that.
Ok, and how is this different from the 7th century norseman hanging around
with the 16th englishman?
Torin
--
Due to spamage I have been getting my e-mail address is now anti-spam
encoded. Remove the unknown letter to e-mail.
Anephedros
'veterans' who were around in '85: were there fears, after the 1650 vote
and the subsequent 'permission' from the BOD to do asian and cavalier, of a
loss of focus in the SCA? obviously this hasn't come to pass, but
occasionally a medieval purist will still voice such concerns.
rob
Robin Wallace; Viscount & Master of Arms
J&S
Todd Rich <to...@xprimenet.com> wrote in message
news:884pnd$54h$1...@nnrp02.primenet.com...
> J&S <NEXUSC...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> (snip)
>
> : Silas
> : I believe he was referring to having a roman legionaire running around
> : with some 12th century crusaders. If one wanted a roman personality who
was
> : a light spearman from te 14th century, I dont think he'd have a problem
with
> : that.
>
> Ok, and how is this different from the 7th century norseman hanging around
> with the 16th englishman?
> Torin
Ummmmm.... Not much. :-) But hey I was just addressing what I thought was
his "problem issue". Maybe we can enact a society wide century
segregation....
"You you're 15th century Milanese!!!! Quit hangin out with the 11th century
Saxons this instant!"
Kisses.....
Silas
Steven H. Mesnick
Duke Siegfired, I believe it was, and I don't have the URL but I
believe it was off of Master Crag Duggan's SCA History page -- anyway,
that document indicated that the earliest "scope" of the SCA was
not "pre-17th century Western culture" but *any* culture in which
the security of the state was based upon the use of the sword. So that
explains why Japan and Mongolia (and Gondor, and Darkover, for that
matter!) were considered "in" (at least in the earlier years of the SCA)
and why American Indians are largely perceived as "out". Kinda puts it
in perspective....
Steffan "Katana? Where's my Greatsword?" ap Kennydd
Bridge, East
Chris Matthews
Back in '89, when I first got hooked, I was told 'any culture which was
known by Europe between 600 and 1600.'
Now, since I'm certain if the Chinese and the Mongols were known at the
time, then so were the Japanese... though I kind of like the idea of
treating Eastern cultured personae as 'ambassadors' or 'visitors'
(However... This leaves the door open for an Eastern-Culture based court,
if someone had enough followers of that culture...)
Besides... we're 'Creative' Anachronists, are we not?
"Steven H. Mesnick" <ste...@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:38A64D9C...@pobox.com...
jezreel...@my-deja.com
>
> Besides... we're 'Creative' Anachronists, are we not?
>
Exactly. However, a certain amount of "authenticity" is necessary to
set us apart from absolute crazys who just like to dress funny. ;)
Jezreel, still jealous of anyone going to Estrella. Sigh.
Dominus Urien Vitalis
Nomad in Starkhafn wrote in message
>Now I hate to seem argumentative, but I've always wondered about
>something. I've noticed quite a few Japanese and Roman type personas
>in the SCA. Now the SCA is a group dedicated to recreating the
>European Middle Ages, is it not? What do/did Japanese have to do with
>Europe in the middle ages? How many Romans lived on into the Middle
>Ages?
I know everyone else already answered the point that there is no early date
set for our reenactment. Which is totally true.
As for the Jap reenactors, I will leave it up to them to explain why/how
they are in our court system. I will stick only with the Roman.
Myself, I am a fifth/sixth century Romano Brit. First, it is fully legal to
do so since it is covered in our time period. Second, the Dark Ages are
WAAAY cooler than the Middle Ages ever could be, (personal opinion here).
And the third and MOST IMPORTANT reason to do Roman and Romano Brit
reenactment is the same thing you or anyone else has to yell at my
household's gates on Toga Party night to gain entrance.
IF IT'S NOT ROMAN, IT'S CRAP !!!!!!
Dominus Urien Vitalis
House Darkyard
Legio Darkyard
ylm...@worldnet.att.net
> or a Samurai sees a Viking two-handed hammer and wants to try
> that. Okay, so it doesn't match with their outfit,
Just a note: though not the most popular weapon with "samurai" proper,
and possibly tending towards slightly different, if ovelapping, time
periods, the Japanese most certainly had and used two handed war hammers
and sledges in combat, and particularly when storming strongholds.
Stay Sharp,
Joe S.
Anthony J. Bryant
>
> As for the Jap reenactors,
Please do not use that word.
Effingham
Hasoferet
>From: "Steven H. Mesnick" <ste...@pobox.com>
>
>the earliest "scope" of the SCA was
>not "pre-17th century Western culture" but *any* culture in which
>the security of the state was based upon the use of the sword. So that
>explains why Japan and Mongolia (and Gondor, and Darkover, for that
>matter!) were considered "in" (at least in the earlier years of the SCA)
>and why American Indians are largely perceived as "out". Kinda puts it
>in perspective....
Security of the "state"? Maybe "security of the larger social unit". Never
mind, where's Gondor?
Basically, my take on the Japanese/Roman et al thing is that I may not know
what medieval is, but I can tell it when I see it--and by me feudal Japan is
in, Imperial Rome is out. Others may feel differently, and do. Trying to get a
hard and fast rule is just going to lead to headaches and hurt feelings.
Raquel, well within bounds
It doesn't take all kinds,
we just have all kinds.
Ashland S Henderson
jezreel...@my-deja.com wrote in message
<88462o$bbt$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>Hm... I'm not sure when the whole Roman thing was over, (not having a
>history book around, and not being an expert), but our time does cover
>600 A.D. to 1600 A.D. That's 1000 years of history, quite a large
>window. As far as Japanese persona's, I know there was trade with the
>East long before 1600, so one could only presume that some of them came
>to visit. Same for the Middle East.
Our time period covers anything before 1600, as I recall. No lower boundry
is set or, to my knowledge, ever been formally proposed. I don't recall off
the top of my head, but I don't think that even Europe is specified. I could
well be wrong about that one, however.
> Another thing to consider is this--much like in "real" life, once
>you get people of different cultures together, you get some cross-
>pollenation. An Irishman sees a katana in action and wants to try it
>out, or a Samurai sees a Viking two-handed hammer and wants to try
>that. Okay, so it doesn't match with their outfit, but at least their
>out there, doing what SCAdian's are supposed to do: Have Fun!! That's
>my story, and I'm sticking to it. ;)
I would have to completely agree. Indeed, since I've never believed in
or understood personas, I don't generally think of Irishmen or Samurai
so much as I think of people as different variations of the modern
middle ages.
tristan
"House Inactive" because I saw many of the same things you did, and just
got tired of trying too hard to research and create period armor/garb when
someone can just throw a cup over a pair of blue jeans and combat boots,
don a surcoat, and instantly become a Viking/Norman/English/Whatever
knight. My love of the SCA was part of the reason for me getting a Masters
degree in History, but in the 11 years I have been in this, my tolerance
for those who do not put forth the extra effort has distanced me from what
was once a refuge and way of life. I have not been permanently scarred,
nor am I bitter by any means, I am just glad to see that someone else feels
the way I do.
Tristan O'Tearney
House O'Tearney
oge...@hotmail.com
I am an Eastern persona and we kicked Europe's collective butt, so try
and kick me out! nyahhh :))
Where as the SCA hasen't made me go out and get a Masters in history,
it has crossed my mind, that the game I play might make an interesting
job.
Anyways. I am not 100% perfect and I have been known to throw a cup
on over jeans and wear running shoes on the field to do battle. I
would prefer not to, but sometimes it's just not in the cards, but I
try to do things in a good mongolian way. I have learned much and
reseached much on these people and continually find them fascinating.
On the other hand I like getting together with the fighters and get
completly wasted and fall down as well.
We can have both worlds. Just because my defintion and your
definition of what the SCA dosen't mean it's the same definition for
him or her over there.
The SCA is a lot of things for a lot of people. Try to take pleasure
in doing the things you like, not anguish in people doing the things
you hate.
Well, lets put on our felt hats and go drink KUMISS!!!!!
who's with me!?!?!?!
Ogedei
Check out the page ----> http://members.tripod.com/mongolian_page
Zebee Johnstone
tristan <tri...@hiwaay.net> wrote:
>Thanks for the few moments of reading pleasure. I am now a member of
>"House Inactive" because I saw many of the same things you did, and just
>got tired of trying too hard to research and create period armor/garb when
>someone can just throw a cup over a pair of blue jeans and combat boots,
>don a surcoat, and instantly become a Viking/Norman/English/Whatever
>knight. My love of the SCA was part of the reason for me getting a Masters
>degree in History, but in the 11 years I have been in this, my tolerance
>for those who do not put forth the extra effort has distanced me from what
>was once a refuge and way of life. I have not been permanently scarred,
>nor am I bitter by any means, I am just glad to see that someone else feels
>the way I do.
>
Funny... I am pretty indifferent about clothes, but I see so
many people put effort into clothes and know nothing about the
history or geography or sociology of the era.
I don't put effort into clothes. My effort goes elsewhere. But I
appreciate those whodo, just as I appreciate those who sing, play
music, make armour, cook, tell stories.
and dig privies.....
I hear people sing filksongs and I dislike it, but I learn to
ignore them. The put their "extra effort" in elsewhere. I just
concentrate on the things I enjoy and don't bother about how
much work other people do, that way lies madness.
Silfren
Dominus Urien Vitalis
Anthony J. Bryant wrote in message
>> As for the Jap reenactors,
>
>Please do not use that word.
>
>
>Effingham
>
No offence intended.
I shorten words, Brit (British), Celt (Celtic), Jap (Japanese), Aussie
(Australian)... etc.
Urien
Jay Rudin
> Now I hate to seem argumentative, but I've always wondered about
> something.
Goodness! I'd hate to see what you'd have written if you *liked* to
seem argumentative
Me, I don't mind looking argumentative, as long as I can also look
polite, cordial, respectful, and (ideally) convincing.
> I've noticed quite a few Japanese and Roman type personas
> in the SCA. Now the SCA is a group dedicated to recreating the
> European Middle Ages, is it not?
Yes, but it's also a group that refuses to kick people out, or to
require a minimum level of skills and devotion before you can start.
That one fact is the essential fact about our culture. The result is
that we have lots of people in poor costumes, or fantasy or non-period
ones. Another result is that somebody with one interest can come in and
share her interest in calligraphy, whether she wants to sew or not. A
great poet doesn't have to be a shoemaker, or even buy from a shoemaker,
to entertain us with his poems.
We don't kick people out for not having the same intensity, or the same
focus, or the same amount of money that others do.
Is that good or bad? I don't know -- but it is a major reason why the
SCA is far larger than any other re-creation group.
> What do/did Japanese have to do with
> Europe in the middle ages? How many Romans lived on into the Middle
> Ages? Heck, isn't an American Indian persona just as likely as a
> Japanese one? I'm not trying to be a rules lawyer and not trying to
> ruin anyone's fun, these are just things I'm wondering. It's like the
> madu, not a period weapon, it just isn't, show me one from period and
> I'll recant. I want proof. :-) And madus were made from antlers, they
> couldn't penetrate maille, no way, no how, and if you tried to parry
> a sword with it, well you'd have lots of nice broken antler.
It's not a madu, and doesn't look like one, but I have found something
vaguely similar. Talhoffer's Fechtbuch (1467) shows two fighters using
shields with thrusting tips on each end. (No other weapon -- just the
shield-thruster, held in both hands.)
Besides which, a madu is far less silly than a shield that can take a
hundred sword blows and still stop a spear thrust.
> And also, what's with all these kilted guys with katanas? Yeesh. :-)
I understand. But one of my goals is to be ready to use my weapons
against anything that comes. This isn't merely a re-enactive goal; it's
also a martial one. But I'm not a valid measure here -- I *like* the
toys. While I want my weapons to be as realistic as possible, I also
want to use lots of different styles.
Besides, I've never met a rattan katana yet that was any different from
a bastard sword between "Lay on" and "Hold". It's just a long sword,
and my job is to block it, not critique it.
[No, for the record, I don't have, or want, a madu or katana. But I do
have a hoe and a shovel left over from a Peasant's Tourney.]
> These are questions which echo around my mind, and no I'm not picking
> on anyone. It's just a bunch of those things that make me go "HUH?".
> Heheh, just don't get me started on exposed plastic. :-)
Actually, it's worse than that. The kilted guy with the katana is no
worse than the kilted guy talking to the guy with the katana, even if
both of them are in exactly perfect period outfits. If they didn't
exist together, then they didn't exist together.
That's why SCA participation is a three-legged stool. Yes, we should
cover up all the plastic and hide the Coke cans. Getting rid of
mundanity is the first leg. And, yes, it always makes things a little
better each time we build something, or behave, in a period way.
Creating period-style objects and acting as they did is the second leg.
But we can't do either perfectly, and the two-legged stool is unstable.
The third leg is *willing suspension of disbelief*. There will never be
a time when everything you see is authentic. Since there will always be
modern things in sight, the only solution is to not look at them.
Consider two men watching a fight:
John: Sir Fred's plastic armor sure is ugly, and what's Lord Chris doing
with a non-period madu?
James: Isn't Lord Chris's fluted plate stunning! And look how well Sir
Fred is using Di Grassi's greatsword technique!
Questions:
1. Who is focussed on the period, and who is focussed on the 20th
century?
2. Who has the best chance of influencing people to be more authentic?
3. Who is having the most fun?
4. Who would you rather spend time with?
5. Who would you rather be?
Robin of Gilwell / Jay Rudin
Jay Rudin
> Besides... we're 'Creative' Anachronists, are we not?
Sure, but "creative" doesn't mean "inauthentic" -- it means engaged in
making things. The root word is "create".
People making perfect Italian gowns, or calligraphing a peerage scroll
in Latin based on actual medieval legal documents, or writing a
Spenserian sonnet, are being "Creative Anachronists". People designing
totally new clothes, or most SCA-style scrolls, or writing filk songs,
are being creative fantasists, but not creative anachronists.
Jay Rudin
?> I believe he was referring to having a roman legionaire running
?> around with some 12th century crusaders. If one wanted a roman
?> personality who was a light spearman from te 14th century, I dont
?> think he'd have a problem with that.
T> Ok, and how is this different from the 7th century norseman hanging
T> around with the 16th englishman?
> Ummmmm.... Not much. :-) But hey I was just addressing what I
> thought was his "problem issue". Maybe we can enact a society wide
> century segregation....
> "You you're 15th century Milanese!!!! Quit hangin out with the 11th
> century Saxons this instant!"
Actually, I have that one solved. I'm an Elizabethan, from the age of
the great pageant tournaments. I just assume you are all Elizabethans
dressed up for the pageant. I *expect* to see Romans, Arthurian
knights, Greek heros, Turkish knights, in fanciful and totally
unresearched costumes, all speaking in English.
Jay Rudin
> Never mind, where's Gondor?
The biggest change in the SCA in the 22 years I've been in is that some
SCA member could ever need to ask this.
Gondor is an important land in J.R.R. Tolkien's *The Lord of the Rings*,
which was the book which led most SCA members into love for the Middle
Ages when I joined back in the 70s. It was the one thing that the SF
geeks and the history geeks and the sword jocks had in common.
Dominus Urien Vitalis
Jay Rudin wrote in message
>Actually, I have that one solved. I'm an Elizabethan, from the age of
>the great pageant tournaments. I just assume you are all Elizabethans
>dressed up for the pageant. I *expect* to see Romans, Arthurian
>knights, Greek heros, Turkish knights, in fanciful and totally
>unresearched costumes, all speaking in English.
>
>Robin of Gilwell / Jay Rudin
I like that.
As a fifth/sixth century Romano Brit, I look at others and figure if you are
not Roman, British, Celt/Pict, Irish, or Saxon you must have come to this
fair land on one of the mediteranian trading ships.
Im always interested in hearing of lands far away.
Urien
McLean1382
>
>> Never mind, where's Gondor?
It's a province in Ethiopia. You can look it up.
Galleron
Bryan J. Maloney
mclea...@aol.com (McLean1382) wrote:
And Gondal is a city in India (for Brontes fans). Golconda is also a city
in India, anciently famous as a center in the diamond trade. Cappadocia
is the northern coast of Anatolia (the peninsula that is essentially
modern Turkey) and was long a center of Hellenistic culture and Christian
learning. If one says "the Cappadocians" to an Orthodox Christian, he
would likely think of three early Saints. Any other historical region
names that have taken up a life of their own in fiction?
--
"Before we judge the lobotomist of old too severely, we
should go to the nearest street grate and see how we are
dealing with our mental health crisis today."
Phyllis M. Gilmore
bj...@cornell.edu (Bryan J. Maloney) wrote:
<snip>
> Any other historical region
> names that have taken up a life of their own in fiction?
I don't recall precisely where I picked it up, but as a child I ran across
(and began gleefully to use) "Timbuktu" used to refer (metaphorically) to
any place far away in space (and possibly time). (Of course, I generally
used it as a complaint about journeys I considered long and boring, but no
matter.)
Imagine my surprise when I discovered it was a real, if distant, place.
Philippa
Bryan J. Maloney
<dd...@best.com> wrote:
> Rohan?
Aside from the region in Brittany, there are:
A palace in Strasbourg
A three-star hotel in Strasbourg.
Chevreuse, Marie de Rohan-Montbazon, duchesse de
A not uncommon French family name, as well.
erilar
bronw...@aol.comnospam (Bronwynmgn) wrote:
> I have so much fun with the research and recreating that I don't
understand why
> other people don't get the same thrill from doing something well enough
to have
> someone come up to you and say "That's 13th century, isn't it!".
AhA! YOU would understand why I'm frustrated that I can't figure out what
kind of boat we need to ferry supplies across a large and unruly river to
our little castle! And I can't understand why people want to don all
that hot gear to hit each other with stick in midSUMMER;-) Takes all
sorts, doesn't it?
--
Mary Loomer Oliver (aka erilar)
Erilar's Cave Annex: http://www.win.bright.net/~erilarlo
Jerry K.
>
>Actually, I have that one solved. I'm an Elizabethan, from the age of
>the great pageant tournaments. I just assume you are all Elizabethans
>dressed up for the pageant. I *expect* to see Romans, Arthurian
>knights, Greek heros, Turkish knights, in fanciful and totally
>unresearched costumes, all speaking in English.
>
>Robin of Gilwell / Jay Rudin
In all honesty, Robin, I have disagreed with you more often than I
have agreed. In this case, however, I wish I had written what you
did. Brilliant.
...Blue Skies, Red Peril
...Lavan Korsakov / Jerry Korshak
Chris Matthews
"inauthentic"... in the realm of conceivability, through a strange series
of circumstances, an eastern blade could come into the hands of a western
individual... the details of that series of circumstances is where the
"creative" comes in- the making of a fictional storyline in historical
perspective.
For example:
We know the history of animosity between the Chinese and Japanese, and the
Chinese and Mongols. We now have a storyline in which a Chinese warrior
kills a Japanese warrior, taking his blade as a souvenir. This Chinese
warrior, at some point, is in turn cut down by Mongols who, again, take the
blade as a momento.
From here, I must severely speculate, because my forte has never been
Mongolian history, but we could then say that this blade was either acquired
through some trade function or in combat with an Eastern European culture,
which in turn make contact with Western Europeans.
We now have a blade that, conceivably, has traveled halfway around the
world, to land in the hands of some lucky Celt who found it on a
battlefield, or traded for it for three pigs and a dozen chickens, or any
number of other tangents- all possible- all 'creative'...
So, if a new Celtic personna who wants to tote around live steel and only
has the katana he picked up to be 'cool' some years ago, I say, 'Have Fun!'
We can't all justify the cost of a nice broadsword or shortsword or
rapier...
"Jay Rudin" <jru...@americasm01.nt.com> wrote in message
news:38A82E55...@americasm01.nt.com...
Bryan J. Maloney
<ad...@archisol.com> wrote:
> But there's no way to say that a Celt with a katana is absolutely
> "inauthentic"... in the realm of conceivability, through a strange series
> of circumstances, an eastern blade could come into the hands of a western
> individual... the details of that series of circumstances is where the
> "creative" comes in- the making of a fictional storyline in historical
> perspective.
A politician ought to be able to get as many lengthwise slices out of a
hair as a man can get inch-long pieces from a twelve-foot log.
But do we really all want to be politicians?
Jay Rudin
RoG> People designing (snip) , or writing filk songs, are being
RoG> creative fantasists, but not creative anachronists.
> Nope, gotta quibble with you on this one. Parisian students were
> writing filk songs in period. What else would you call taking a
> liturgical song from Mass and re-writing it to be a hymn to your
> mistress or to the joys of drink?. Maybe the current crop of SCA
> filksingers aren't taking the same exact songs and re-writing them
> into bawdy latin, but the spirit is certainly the same!
Yup. And the spirit of Gilligan's Isle is the same as the spirit of
Commedia Dell'Arte, and the spirit of Superman is the same as the spirit
of Achilleus, and the spirit of Star Trek is the same as the spirit of
the Oddyssey, and the spirit of Isaac Asimov's non-fiction is the same
as the spirit of Aristotle. That doesn't make Gilligan, Superman, Star
Trek, or Asimov anachronisms in the twentieth century. For the same
reason, filks of modern songs are fun and entertaining -- but they are
not anachronisms.
ZnamSinger
IMHO filk plays an important role in the SCA. Many people know the tunes to
modern folk songs or rock ballads. It's easy to learn new words to the old
tunes and they (the newcomers) have an opportunity to participate early on
in one of the best things about Saturday nights at events; Bardic circles.
Songs composed where everyone can join in the chorus and using music over
and over again while changing the lyrics are both period... why not let
people enjoy the music, play the game, and learn a bit about the SCA before
demanding a "Bardic Saga or nothing"? Not everyone who joins the SCA is
interested in hearing all 497 verses of "Mary Hamilton" but they might like
to hear/sing/compose several verses of "Imperium Compound (H.C. & Kahlua,
etc.)"
Are "Macing the William" and "Bashing MacEanruig" less "real" or valid
because they are sung to the tune of Waltzing Matilda? I think not. They are
wonderful examples of a living society creating folk songs... hmmm is there
a research paper in this?
Mistress Seamchecker and Master Tuningfork have their place in the SCA. We
*are* all trying to learn about and recreate some part of the
pre-17th-century world and they can be wonderful resources to those less
skilled or knowledgeable. However, (you knew there was one, didn't you?) I
don't think that demanding either perfect period garb or perfect period
music from everyone is right. Part of the beauty of the SCA in the past has
been the gradual learning curve. Newcomers can grab a T-tunic and start
playing right away. They can join in songs because even if they don't know
the words they *do* know the tune and hum... learn... sing! As they ease
into SCA life, they acquire better garb, learn how to do things in a
"period" style, including sing/compose/perform if they so desire.
An anachronism? Definitely! Either the lyrics are in a period style but the
music is out of place, the music is period but the lyrics are about people
in the SCA or both the music and lyrics are by/about people in the SCA.
Don't sneer at fantasy either. Myth/Fantasy has been around a long time...
(oops, that's another topic...)
<./rant>
Angel Sparrow
JoAnn Abbott wrote:
>
> . People designing (snip)
> ., or writing filk songs,
> >are being creative fantasists, but not creative anachronists.
> >
> >Robin of Gilwell / Jay Rudin
>
> Nope, gotta quibble with you on this one. Parisian students were writing
> filk songs in period.
From my lecture notes on "Contrefaits and varients"
Contrefait: earliest usage mid 1400's. Setting lyrics
to an established une, usually liturgical.
From there we branch into broadsides,
parody and filk.
> What else would you call taking a liturgical song
> from Mass and re-writing it to be a hymn to your mistress or to the joys of
> drink?
A Goliardian triumph?
"I'm the last man of Golius' line.
We once praised our ladies and moreso our wine."
--Chidiock the Younger
>. Maybe the current crop of SCA filksingers aren't taking the same
> exact songs and re-writing them into bawdy latin, but the spirit is
> certainly the same!
>
> Lady JoAnna S.T.
> Who has written a filk or two in the past...(heh heh heh)
I must agree. And I do make
an effort to use peroid tunes.
But I have come to prefer period
bawdy ballads to writing filk.
(not to say I haven't done a few...)
I also agree with a later poster who comments
it allows the newbie to ease in.
It also teaches SCA history in some cases
such as the Calontir Hamster Song.
Aethelynde, who knows most of the verses
Greg Lindahl
> <.begin rant>
> IMHO filk plays an important role in the SCA. Many people know the tunes to
> modern folk songs or rock ballads. It's easy to learn new words to the old
> tunes and they (the newcomers) have an opportunity to participate early on
> in one of the best things about Saturday nights at events; Bardic circles.
I know how to play both football and baseball. Heavy fighting requires
a lot of training and equipment; as a beginner, maybe I should be
offered a nice game of touch football instead? We could make it a bit
more medieval by painting some heraldry on the ball... and making the
referees wear tabards...
> Songs composed where everyone can join in the chorus and using music over
> and over again while changing the lyrics are both period...
Right. And there are lots of catchy period tunes you can use for
sing-alongs. For a few examples, see:
http://www.pbm.com/~lindahl/ballads/
http://www.pbm.com/~lindahl/ravenscroft/
-- gb
JoAnn Abbott
was to start out by singing period- or near period songs, and Mary Hamilton
was one of the first I learned. Then I discovered filking.............
JoAnna S.T.
"Rhinohide song"
(tune-"I've got no strings" from Pinoccio)
There are no blows, that I can feel,
I'm all dressed up in 8-gauge steel.
You feel blows, while in sixteen
There are no blows on me!
Hold! Hold! The marshall yells,
That blow should have left you dead!
But-I-can never die-
"Cause I have a six gauge head-piece!
I feel no blows, so I have fun,
I hack and bash on everyone-
Next I'll try for Crown Tourney-
There are no blows on me!
By yours truly!
JoAnn Abbott
>
>Hold! Hold! The marshall >cries<,
Dominus Urien Vitalis
james koch wrote in message <38a9cbb9$0$14...@news.en.com>...
>A similar thing happened with coconuts
>in Europe during the Middle Ages. They were in fact not brought by
>migrating swallows.
>>
>James Koch (Gladius The Alchemist)
Do you mean that I have been spending all this time trying to figure out the
respective airspeeds of unladen European and African Swallows for
nothing?!?!?!?!?
Sheesh,
Why doesn't anyone fill me in on these things earlier?
Urien
Bronwynmgn
>But there's no way to say that a Celt with a katana is absolutely
>"inauthentic"... in the realm of conceivability, through a strange series
>of circumstances, an eastern blade could come into the hands of a western
>individual... the details of that series of circumstances is where the
>"creative" comes in- the making of a fictional storyline in historical
>perspective.
No, it may not be "absolutely inauthentic" - but it's bloody unlikely. Can we
document ANYTHING that would have followed that sort of circumstantial route?
Can anybody, for example, prove that at least one piece of Chinese silk made it
to France before the Silk Road was started (or whatever the first organized
attempt to trade silk was, anyway)? A fictional storyline in historical
perspective is all well and good, but the historical part should at least be
reasonably plausible rather than out-on-a-limb possible, barely.
YMMV, but personally I prefer history that I CAN back up with facts. That's
the only way I know that I'm recreating it correctly, and that is the fun part
of the SCA for me. My personal goal is to have my persona be totally plausible
for the time period and culture I've set her in, even though she didn't really
exist. I know I'll never get it absolutely perfect, but that's still the goal.
Your goal may be to find a way to explain the fact that your Scottish persona
carries a katana without having it be totally implausible (ie a Japanese in a
balloon flew over one day and the sword fell out.)
Brangwayna Morgan
Lisa: DreaManiChicKuriouStarfire
*WHERE -- rec.org.sca
*WHEN -- Mon, 14 Feb 2000 15:17:38 -0500
*WHY -- Goddess knows.
*WHAT -- wrote this:
>In article <20000214125140...@ng-fg1.aol.com>,
>mclea...@aol.com (McLean1382) wrote:
>
>> >Hasoferet wrote:
>> >
>> >> Never mind, where's Gondor?
>>
>> It's a province in Ethiopia. You can look it up.
>
>
>And Gondal is a city in India (for Brontes fans). Golconda is also a city
>in India, anciently famous as a center in the diamond trade. Cappadocia
>is the northern coast of Anatolia (the peninsula that is essentially
>modern Turkey) and was long a center of Hellenistic culture and Christian
>learning. If one says "the Cappadocians" to an Orthodox Christian, he
>would likely think of three early Saints. Any other historical region
>names that have taken up a life of their own in fiction?
t'HEE! White Wolf steals ALL their words. While I love their games,
this particular fact makes me incensed at times . . . I keep having
these annoying little impure thoughts: Caine ought to be an Amberite,
a Toreador is a bullfighter, a Sabbat is a Pagan holiday . . . grrrr!
This doesn't prevent me from liking the games; only from revering
them. :-)
Lisa Ann of many names: star7cyborgirl<at>lycosmail.com
>+<=>+<=>+<=>+<=>+<=>+<=>+<
tall as houses, small as spiders
undefined, this buzz inside us
tightrope walker, chaos, order
i fell right into heaven-hell
jezreel...@my-deja.com
Jay Rudin <jru...@americasm01.nt.com> wrote:
> Chris Matthews wrote:
>
> Sure, but "creative" doesn't mean "inauthentic" -- it means engaged in
> making things. The root word is "create".
>
> People making perfect Italian gowns, or calligraphing a peerage scroll
> in Latin based on actual medieval legal documents, or writing a
> Spenserian sonnet, are being "Creative Anachronists". People
designing
> are being creative fantasists, but not creative anachronists.
>
> Robin of Gilwell / Jay Rudin
On the one hand, I agree-- it is the fact that most of us make our own
gear, or buy it from someone who makes it using at least a semi-period
method, that makes us "creative" anachronists. However, wouldn't we
all like to understand what's written on our scrolls? Really, do most
SCAdians have the time to learn enough Latin, or other period forms of
foreign languages, to read an "authentic" scroll? Did everyone really
wear exactly the same style of gown in a certain year in Italy? Not
that I think that anyone should use cloth with *any* polyester in it,
or make a backless gown for Twelfth Night; and okay, a filk written to
the tune of Gilligan's Island isn't period, but one written to the tune
of Greensleeves, (which I believe Master Effenwealt Whistle, aka Jam
Master E, has done), or any number of other period tunes, I'm sure *is*
appropriate.
Jezreel
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Jay Rudin
> But there's no way to say that a Celt with a katana is absolutely
> "inauthentic"... in the realm of conceivability, through a strange
> series of circumstances, an eastern blade could come into the hands
> of a western individual...
What do you mean by "absolutely inauthentic", and how did you get to
decide that that phrase defines the only possible standard for a group
that is intended to "Research and education in the field of
pre-17th-Century Western Culture" by means of re-creating activities?
I don't claim that you can't invent a story about how a katana got to
Scotland. Rather, I claim that such a story is neither research nor
education nor re-creation of anything.
As I stated before, I don't care what people carry, and I know that a
newbie who owns only one sword will carry that sword. But simply
carrying it without inventing an unlikely story is more in persona than
the story could be. From my point of view, it's just a bastard sword,
and when I face one on the field, that's all it is. I recognize that
most of our props look wrong to an educated eye. That's why I think
ignoring the inaccuracies ("willing suspension of disbelief") is an
essential skill for staying in persona.
>the details of that series of circumstances is where the
> "creative" comes in- the making of a fictional storyline in
> historical perspective.
AAAUGH! The "creative" comes in when we make stuff. "Creative" doesn't
mean "inaccurate" or "strained" or "impossible" -- it means "able to
create". A weird, unlikely story explaining how the Scot got the katana
is creative, but the well-researched, plausible story about how he got
his claymore is equally creative -- because inventing *any* story is
creative.
> For example:
<katana's persona story deleted>
> So, if a new Celtic personna who wants to tote around live steel and
> only has the katana he picked up to be 'cool' some years ago, I say,
> 'Have Fun!' We can't all justify the cost of a nice broadsword or
> shortsword or rapier...
I say, "Have Fun!" too. But I also say, don't waste time inventing an
implausible story. That time is much better spent learning what weapons
the Scots *did* use, or building a rattan sword, or starting to learn to
fight, or writing a likely story that's tied to Scottish culture instead
of to your mundane possessions.
Six months later you might drop out, or change personas, or trade the
katana for another sword, or any of a number of possibilities that mean
the katana's persona story will be useless anyway. But the prop-free
story of how your grandfather gave you his claymore on his death-bed,
and told you to defend your home against the English raiders can live on
forever.
Writing a persona story to match your current possessions is a game with
no future. For one thing, your possessions change over time. More
importantly, your persona should be about who you are, not what you
have.
Jay Rudin
> Thanks for the few moments of reading pleasure. I am now a member of
> "House Inactive" because I saw many of the same things you did, and
> just got tired of trying too hard to research and create period
> armor/garb when someone can just throw a cup over a pair of blue
> jeans and combat boots, don a surcoat, and instantly become a
> Viking/Norman/English/Whatever knight.
Why is that tiring? If you researched and created period armor/gharb in
order to have period armor/garb, then you got out of it exactly what you
wanted. If not, then what *did* you do it for?
> My love of the SCA was part of the reason for me getting a Masters
> degree in History, but in the 11 years I have been in this, my
> tolerance for those who do not put forth the extra effort has
> distanced me from what was once a refuge and way of life.
I started out as one of those who only wanted to play, with no interest
in history at all. I'm now studying heraldry and period fighting styles
and period poetry styles *because* I learned to love them in the SCA.
If people with no interest in such things were kicked out when I
started, I'd have never been allowed to join, and would never have
learned to love these things.
> I have not been permanently scarred, nor am I bitter by any means, I
> am just glad to see that someone else feels the way I do.
Lots of people do. But consider:
There was once a shoe salesman who was assigned to the Arkansas hills.
After a depressing week, he quit, sending a telegram to the home office
saying, "I quit. This is impossible. Nobody here wears shoes." They
sent another salesman, who, after the first day, sent back a telegram
saying, "Hurry -- send me two truckloads! This is a bonanza! Nobody
here wears shoes!"
Some fencers have left the SCA disillusioned because so few people here
know anything about period fencing. But I have a great time teaching,
because so few people here know anything about period fencing.
I only get to have students because we let people stay in even if they
don't know about the period yet. Some of them will never care, so they
will never learn. So I'll always be surrounded by a lot of people who
aren't interested. But I'm also always surrounded by people who've been
in for a while, and are starting to develop an interest in it.
I have enough to do teaching people who want to be my students. I don't
have any time to worry about teaching people who *don't* want to be my
students. And it doesn't bother me at all that the non-students are
playing in the playground while I'm teaching in the classroom. That
playground is where my students keep coming from.
Nomad in Starkhafn
<ash...@ccnet.com> wrote:
>
>jezreel...@my-deja.com wrote in message
><88462o$bbt$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>>Hm... I'm not sure when the whole Roman thing was over, (not having a
>>history book around, and not being an expert), but our time does cover
>>600 A.D. to 1600 A.D. That's 1000 years of history, quite a large
>>window. As far as Japanese persona's, I know there was trade with the
>>East long before 1600, so one could only presume that some of them came
>>to visit. Same for the Middle East.
>
>Our time period covers anything before 1600, as I recall. No lower boundry
>is set or, to my knowledge, ever been formally proposed. I don't recall off
>the top of my head, but I don't think that even Europe is specified. I could
>well be wrong about that one, however.
>
>> Another thing to consider is this--much like in "real" life, once
>>you get people of different cultures together, you get some cross-
>>pollenation. An Irishman sees a katana in action and wants to try it
>>out, or a Samurai sees a Viking two-handed hammer and wants to try
>>that. Okay, so it doesn't match with their outfit, but at least their
>>out there, doing what SCAdian's are supposed to do: Have Fun!! That's
>>my story, and I'm sticking to it. ;)
>
>
>I would have to completely agree. Indeed, since I've never believed in
>or understood personas, I don't generally think of Irishmen or Samurai
>so much as I think of people as different variations of the modern
>middle ages.
>
>
Actually it states quite clearly on the sca web page (which I believe
is or should be considered an official document) that the SCA covers
pre-17th century western european MIDIEVAL history. Note the word
midieval. Now while an official lower year isn't stated, the word
midieval I would think logically precludes all of you who want
australophithicine personas...
Nomad/Michael
Las Vegas, NV
Barony of Starkhafn, Kingdom of Caid
Nomad in Starkhafn
wrote:
>In article <38a90...@news.greatbasin.net>, "Chris Matthews"
><ad...@archisol.com> writes:
>
>>But there's no way to say that a Celt with a katana is absolutely
>>"inauthentic"... in the realm of conceivability, through a strange series
>>of circumstances, an eastern blade could come into the hands of a western
>>individual... the details of that series of circumstances is where the
>>"creative" comes in- the making of a fictional storyline in historical
>>perspective.
>
>No, it may not be "absolutely inauthentic" - but it's bloody unlikely. Can we
>document ANYTHING that would have followed that sort of circumstantial route?
>Can anybody, for example, prove that at least one piece of Chinese silk made it
>to France before the Silk Road was started (or whatever the first organized
>attempt to trade silk was, anyway)? A fictional storyline in historical
>perspective is all well and good, but the historical part should at least be
>reasonably plausible rather than out-on-a-limb possible, barely.
>
>YMMV, but personally I prefer history that I CAN back up with facts. That's
>the only way I know that I'm recreating it correctly, and that is the fun part
>of the SCA for me. My personal goal is to have my persona be totally plausible
>for the time period and culture I've set her in, even though she didn't really
>exist. I know I'll never get it absolutely perfect, but that's still the goal.
>Your goal may be to find a way to explain the fact that your Scottish persona
>carries a katana without having it be totally implausible (ie a Japanese in a
>balloon flew over one day and the sword fell out.)
>
>Brangwayna Morgan
Oh let's be honest here... the real reason he wants a katana for his
Scottish persona is 'cause he's got "Highlander" on the brain. PLEASE
PEOPLE "Highlander" doesn't count as documentation. Jeez. I still want
to hear how these guys got madus made of antler to penetrate maille.
;-)
Nomad in Starkhafn
like minded person here. ;-) Myself and my lady both believe in being
as authentic as time and money allow. (Okay, I'm perfectly willing to
use modern materials where they look the same as period ones, at least
as far as I can tell, I don't want to pass at 10 feet, I want to pass
at 10 inches, you know what I mean?)
On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 02:50:29 GMT, "tristan" <tri...@hiwaay.net>
wrote:
>Thanks for the few moments of reading pleasure. I am now a member of
>"House Inactive" because I saw many of the same things you did, and just
>got tired of trying too hard to research and create period armor/garb when
>someone can just throw a cup over a pair of blue jeans and combat boots,
>don a surcoat, and instantly become a Viking/Norman/English/Whatever
>knight. My love of the SCA was part of the reason for me getting a Masters
>degree in History, but in the 11 years I have been in this, my tolerance
>for those who do not put forth the extra effort has distanced me from what
>was once a refuge and way of life. I have not been permanently scarred,
>nor am I bitter by any means, I am just glad to see that someone else feels
>the way I do.
>
>Tristan O'Tearney
>House O'Tearney
Lyle H. Gray
Nomad in Starkhafn wrote in message
<38abde4c...@news.lvcablemodem.com>...
>Actually it states quite clearly on the sca web page (which I believe
>is or should be considered an official document) that the SCA covers
>pre-17th century western european MIDIEVAL history. Note the word
>midieval. Now while an official lower year isn't stated, the word
>midieval I would think logically precludes all of you who want
>australophithicine personas...
In Modern English it's spelled "MEDIEVAL", not "MIDIEVAL".
The main SCA web page does not say that the SCA covers pre-17th century
Western European Medieval history. It says, "The Society for Creative
Anachronism (SCA) is an international organization dedicated to researching
and recreating pre-17th-century European history." The word "Medieval" does
not appear in that sentence.
There are references to the study of the Middle Ages and Renaissance
(Preface to the Organizational Handbook, A. Introduction).
The Introduction section of the SCA web site, titled "Life in the Current
Middle Ages", _does_ make explicit reference to the Middle Ages, but omits
reference to the Renaissance.
There's enough evidence there to argue three sides...
Hasoferet
to artifacts drifting between cultures. There was a find of a Celtic
burial at Hochdorf dating from 550 BC or so, the chief was buried wearing
Chinese silk. Now that's gotta be a long story!
But I doubt it involves a young warrior who travelled to India under the
protection of a Druid priestess and travelled the east for many years,
acquiring a beautiful Gypsy wife and a katana, and returning with a
couple of bolts of silk. If you see what I mean.
But also, who cares? If the guy with the katana likes it, he'll stick to
it, no problem for me. If he sticks around long enough he may also decide
he wants a more seamless look, get a better job, and get himself a
sword that suits his persona's range of influence.
Not a big deal.
Raquel
It doesn't take all kinds,
we just have all kinds.
Schuster, Robert L.
this all depends on who you talk with. it(the sca was originally meant to span all ages up to 1600. now then i beleive sometime later corpora stated the time was from 600-1600. i could be wrong here but have heard this before. yes thd american indian personn a is a valid one per the first swet of rules and there are Am indian personna out there. yes there were romans who lived throught the ages they were called byzantines(or the eastern romans as they styles themselves). i am not suppoeting these issues but believe that if they arent makeing it an issues to make everyone except them they are alright(preferabbly is done correctly) ive seen a few vey buetiful and exotic native american female personna at estrella and encourage all beauty. and i agree with your last statement dont get me started on exposed plastic. its just evil
-----Original Message-----
From: evilnom...@aol.com (Nomad in Starkhafn)
[mailto:evilnom...@aol.com]
Posted At: Saturday, February 12, 2000 04:22
Posted To: sca
Conversation: My rant: The mad Celtic katana and madu florentine
fighter...
Subject: My rant: The mad Celtic katana and madu florentine fighter...
Now I hate to seem argumentative, but I've always wondered about
something. I've noticed quite a few Japanese and Roman type personas
in the SCA. Now the SCA is a group dedicated to recreating the
European Middle Ages, is it not? What do/did Japanese have to do with
Europe in the middle ages? How many Romans lived on into the Middle
Ages? Heck, isn't an American Indian persona just as likely as a
Japanese one? I'm not trying to be a rules lawyer and not trying to
ruin anyone's fun, these are just things I'm wondering. It's like the
madu, not a period weapon, it just isn't, show me one from period and
I'll recant. I want proof. :-) And madus were made from antlers, they
couldn't penetrate maille, no way, no how, and if you tried to parry a
sword with it, well you'd have lots of nice broken antler. And also,
what's with all these kilted guys with katanas? Yeesh. :-) These are
questions which echo around my mind, and no I'm not picking on anyone.
It's just a bunch of those things that make me go "HUH?". Heheh, just
don't get me started on exposed plastic. :-)
ZnamSinger
The following is from http://www.sca.org/sca-intro.html under the heading "Where
did the SCA come from?"
"The avowed purpose of the SCA is the study and recreation of the European
Middle Ages, its crafts, sciences, arts, traditions, literature, etc. The SCA
"period" is defined to be Western civilization before 1600 AD, concentrating on
the Western European High Middle Ages."
Concentrating on the Western European High Middle Ages. That seems pretty clear
to me. As I mentioned earlier (perhaps in another thread) Although we are
encouraged to focus our study in the Middle Ages, we are not forbidden to expand
our knowledge of other cultures in other timeframes.
More from the SCA pages http://www.sca.org/docs/scope.hbk.html
"The Scope of the Society"
"The Society is based on the landed nobility of the European Middle Ages and
Renaissance. Their dress and music, their literature and sports, and above all
the chivalric ideals of their period, all serve to unify our events and
activities. Our regional and local organization sets aside the modern pattern of
elected representatives to give us a sense of what it was like to live in the
world of court and castle, so that our
studies can go beyond literature and artifacts into the emotional reality of
former times.
"Our activities range very widely, including a much broader span of time and
culture than most groups in the "living history" movement try to sample. The
people we've chosen for models were fond of play-acting and pageantry; they
would happily base tournaments and revels on ancient history and distant lands,
so we can use themes from outside medieval and Renaissance Europe as long as we
keep our main period as
an anchor. They also reached remote parts of the world, despite the limits of
their technology, and people born to other civilizations traveled too, so we can
allow for individuals and information from almost anywhere. The task is to weave
all this together, so that the events we sponsor are recognizably our own."
Hmmm... "we can allow for individuals and information from almost anywhere." I
would take the above to mean that if you can document it you can play it.
Elspeth
Malachias Invictus
ZnamSinger <ZnamS...@metro.net> wrote in message
news:38AC4599...@metro.net...
Now we are up to four sides. . .
> "The avowed purpose of the SCA is the study and recreation of the European
> Middle Ages, its crafts, sciences, arts, traditions, literature, etc. The
SCA
> "period" is defined to be Western civilization before 1600 AD,
concentrating on
> the Western European High Middle Ages."
>
> Concentrating on the Western European High Middle Ages. That seems pretty
clear
> to me. As I mentioned earlier (perhaps in another thread) Although we are
> encouraged to focus our study in the Middle Ages, we are not forbidden to
expand
> our knowledge of other cultures in other timeframes.
>
> More from the SCA pages http://www.sca.org/docs/scope.hbk.html
> "The Scope of the Society"
<snip>
Does that make it five sides? How about six. . .
From the Known World Handbook, 3rd Ed., p. 19:
"Period: The era used by the SCA as a base for its activities, and anything
dating from or used in that era. The earliest date of the SCA period is not
formally defined, for most people, it more or less blurs into being
somewhere in the years between 450 and 800 A.D. The Articles of
Incorporation define the scope of SCA interest as "pre-Seventeenth Century
Western culture," which implies a terminus date of 1601 A.D. There is a
certain amount of flexibility, especially as regards the time between 1601
and 1650 A.D. since was for many years accepted as part of the SCA period,
but members who base their garb or persona after 1600 - or in Classical
Antiquity - are formally expected to regard themselves as travellers in
time, visiting the SCA period. (Similarly, those who choose origins outside
of feudal Europe are expected to comport themselves as guests within it.)"
The fact is, the SCA has always been less than clear about drawing the line
on our period. Everyone seems to have their own personal idea of what the
SCA period covers (or should cover), and that is fine. Rule quoting to
support excluding certain personae is somewhat silly, though (not quite as
silly, however, as the whole "travellers in time" thing).
Herr Malachias von Morgenstern, Kapitän der Galatea
Syndic of the Loyal Guild of Saint Erasmus - We put the "Sea" in SCA!
Royal Artificer of the Kingdom of the West
capt_malachias <AT> juno.com
Amy Willison
Nomad in Starkhafn wrote in message
>Now I hate to seem argumentative, but I've always wondered about
Hello all.
Just wanted to add my thoughts to this one.
1. I was encouraged to use (plastic) armor to start with for a couple of
reasons. It's real hot where I live and lighter armor means less weight to
lug around in 90' weather with 80% humidity till I could get used to the
weight and learn how to make more authentic armor.
2. The man who really got me into the SCA uses a madu and has portions of
his armour that are plastic. He's been in the SCA for 24 years, is a
founding Baron, one time king, and also has his scarf in light fighting. And
to top it all off, he's a dang good guy. So, with all due respect for your
opinions, if it is good enough for him, it's good enough for me.
I understand wanting to become immersed at events, it makes feeling the
dream that much easier, just please understand that some off us can feel it
even when we're in plastic armor with steel toe boots and (gasp!) nice
comfortable cotton underwear that isn't in an eternal bunch...
Good day.
Thomas.
realml...@hotmail.com
<jru...@americasm01.nt.com> wrote:
>Chris Matthews wrote:
>
>> Besides... we're 'Creative' Anachronists, are we not?
>
>Sure, but "creative" doesn't mean "inauthentic" -- it means engaged in
>making things. The root word is "create".
>
>People making perfect Italian gowns, or calligraphing a peerage scroll
>in Latin based on actual medieval legal documents, or writing a
>Spenserian sonnet, are being "Creative Anachronists". People designing
>totally new clothes, or most SCA-style scrolls, or writing filk songs,
>are being creative fantasists, but not creative anachronists.
>
>Robin of Gilwell / Jay Rudin
Umm, not to be critical here, but you may want to reword that message.
You've just managed to insult about 90% of the Society. As an aspiring
scribe myself, I don't look kindly to be being basically told that any
scroll I try to design is junk, because everything's not perfectly
period. For that matter, I'm sure all of your garb's not hand-woven.
What we're attempting to do is "selectively" recreate the middle ages,
not be perfect. Gods know, I'm not. I honestly don't look at it as
though I'm doing fantasy when doing a scroll now. I'm sure a Lord,
Baron, King or any other noble of the time didn't have his best scribe
making every scroll he handed out. The junior scribes did the scrolls
for less important things (i.e. shire scrolls). Or they just did
illumination. Justr because you don't like fild songs, don't mean they
didn't do them. It's just a case of, "to each their own," or as I
prefer, "an ye harm none, do ast thou will." That's what makes the
Society so much fun for me, the diversity. The things I don't like,
which so far I've found very little, I just don't bother with.
Ah well, sorry about that. I didn't mean to rant, and don't take it as
an insult, it wasn't meant that way.
Blessings,
Cormac Munro
(The opinions contained herein are expressly my own and not those of"
Shire of the Northern Outpost
East Kingdom
All opinions herein represent myself only and not ...
The Shire or the Northern Outpost
East Kingdom
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
erilar
melody for your new set of lyrics. It doesn't SOUND very period if the
melody is too obviously modern and mundane*, though it does make it easier
for other people to sing along readily. The PRACTICE itself is, however,
very definitely IN period.
*The "Gilligan's Island" theme, for instance. Folk songs "feel" more
appropriate because they're a little older.
--
Mary Loomer Oliver (aka erilar)
Erilar's Cave Annex: http://www.win.bright.net/~erilarlo
Greycat Sharpclaw
wrote:
>
>David Friedman wrote in message ...
>>The fact that someone you respect does something is not a very strong
>>argument for doing it; someone can be a good person, and still be wrong
>>about one thing or another.
>>--
>>David/Cariadoc
>>http://www.best.com/~ddfr/Medieval/Medieval.html
>
>Ummmm, Bevis. I think you missed that plane that just flew over your head.
>The good guy comment was just a add on to a list of achievements. My point
>was, He earned my respect through his deeds and accomplishments.
I think Cariadoc had it right on. My respect for various people does
*not* mean I think they are never wrong! Neither, I suspect, does
Cariadoc.
--
Lord Emrys Cador
Barony of Settmour Swamp
East Kingdom
Remove "nospam" in the address to reply
David Friedman
<awil...@voyager.net> wrote:
> David Friedman wrote in message ...
> >In article <38ac799e$0$1...@news.voyager.net>, "Amy Willison"
> ><awil...@voyager.net> wrote:
> >
> >> 1. I was encouraged to use (plastic) armor to start with for a couple
> >> of
> >> reasons. It's real hot where I live and lighter armor means less
> >> weight
> >> to lug around in 90' weather with 80% humidity till I could get used
> >> to
> the
> >> weight and learn how to make more authentic armor.
> >
> >Cuirboulli--water hardened leather--is both light and authentic.
> >
> >> 2. The man who really got me into the SCA uses a madu and has portions
> >> of
> >> his armour that are plastic. He's been in the SCA for 24 years, is a
> >> founding Baron, one time king, and also has his scarf in light
> >> fighting.
> >> And
> >> to top it all off, he's a dang good guy. So, with all due respect for
> >> your
> >> opinions, if it is good enough for him, it's good enough for me.
> >
> >The fact that someone you respect does something is not a very strong
> >argument for doing it; someone can be a good person, and still be wrong
> >about one thing or another.
> >--
> >David/Cariadoc
> >http://www.best.com/~ddfr/Medieval/Medieval.html
>
> Ummmm, Bevis. I think you missed that plane that just flew over your
> head.
> The good guy comment was just a add on to a list of achievements. My
> point
> was, He earned my respect through his deeds and accomplishments.
And the fact that he earned your respect does not imply that his views
on particular issues--in this case, plastic armor and the madu--are
correct. It isn't even a strong argument for those views being correct.
As I just said.
If you reread the part of my post to which you were responding, you will
note that I wrote:
> The fact that someone you respect does something is not a very strong
>argument for doing it;
Thus responding to your "earned my respect" point
and then
> someone can be a good person, and still be wrong
>about one thing or another.
Thus responding to your "good guy" point.
It's the same argument either way. If you want to provide a persuasive
argument for using a madu (or anything else), it isn't enough to point
at someone and say "he is an admirable fellow, and he uses a madu."
Whether "admirable fellow" takes the form of "earned my respect" or "is
a good guy" is irrelevant.
--
David/Cariadoc
http://www.best.com/~ddfr/Medieval/Medieval.html
Dominus Urien Vitalis
Elizabeth Levin wrote in message
>> Stamboul? That is a land I have never heard of, but by your mention of
>> silks fair lady, I can only guess that it must lay in the Eastern part of
>> the Roman Empire.
>
>Indeed. The sons of Osman Ghazi are Sultani Rum. But I live a live to the
>west of where the silks come from. To the East, there are Persians. I've
>heard that their men dress immodestly in silks.
Sultani Rum, are these some type of great Thegns with a strong fyrd serving
them? As for these Persians, their land must be rich indeed, I have been to
Londinium several times and even traveled to the shores of Saxony and the
Germanic lands further east and have never seen riches such as these.
>My best veil is silk, embroidered with gold. It has fringes on the ends.
>Papa brought it for me when the ulemma insisted that the dhimmi laws be
>more strictly enforced. So I'm wearing a yellow veil, but it's prettier
>than the wives of the Kadis can afford.
>Elizabeth Levin
I am impressed fair Lady, your father is wealthy indeed. My own Lord has
bestowed me recently with a fine shirt of mail and a horse for my service to
him, and if I am ever blessed with any sons, these things will be passed
down to them.
Dominus Urien Vitalis
Hasoferet
>From: David Friedman dd...@best.com
>It's the same argument either way. If you want to provide a persuasive
>argument for using a madu (or anything else), it isn't enough to point
>at someone and say "he is an admirable fellow, and he uses a madu."
>Whether "admirable fellow" takes the form of "earned my respect" or "is
>a good guy" is irrelevant.
I understand your point there. However, one thing I have found to be true as a
newcomer to the SCA, and I think many others have as well, is that the
admiration we have for people who help us when we're new to the society, and
the way we are taught to do things by people who have our well being at heart
hugely outweighs concern for authenticity in most cases.
Now, this doesn't mean that if the folks who lead my shire were all wearing
garb cut from Mickey Mouse sheeting I'd be running along beside them, but I
think for me, as for a lot of people, as much as we may admire the people who
strive for enormous authenticity, we will tend to emulate the people who help
us with our first garb, teach us when we begin to fight, invite us to parties
and teach us filk songs...and these two groups do not always overlap.
So, authenticity maniacs of the world, here's the deal--some of you know it
already and act on it, others don't. Your only hope of passing on a great love
of fourteenth century embroidery, Viking-style tanning, or flawless chit-chat
about the court affairs of Catherine de Medicis is to get the newbies and make
them feel welcomed, valued, and cherished, and eager to look at your pictures
of embroidery as a result. Because, frankly, I can understand the 'Lord
So-and-So uses a madu and he is a good and honorable man' argument, and so can
a lot of others, I'm sure. It may not be period, but it's authentic in the
heart. So whatcha gonna do?
Amy Willison
>> >--
>> >David/Cariadoc
>> >http://www.best.com/~ddfr/Medieval/Medieval.html
>>
>> Ummmm, Bevis. I think you missed that plane that just flew over your
>> head.
>> The good guy comment was just a add on to a list of achievements. My
>> point
>> was, He earned my respect through his deeds and accomplishments.
>
>And the fact that he earned your respect does not imply that his views
>on particular issues--in this case, plastic armor and the madu--are
>correct. It isn't even a strong argument for those views being correct.
>As I just said.
>
>If you reread the part of my post to which you were responding, you will
>note that I wrote:
>
>> The fact that someone you respect does something is not a very strong
>>argument for doing it;
>
>Thus responding to your "earned my respect" point
>
>and then
>
>> someone can be a good person, and still be wrong
>>about one thing or another.
>
>Thus responding to your "good guy" point.
>
>argument for using a madu (or anything else), it isn't enough to point
>at someone and say "he is an admirable fellow, and he uses a madu."
>Whether "admirable fellow" takes the form of "earned my respect" or "is
>a good guy" is irrelevant.
>David/Cariadoc
>http://www.best.com/~ddfr/Medieval/Medieval.html
Well, debate wise you just got a few good points in. I'm taking an emotional
side while you are sticking to logic. Hats off to you on that one. All BS
aside, you are correct in your blind following statement. It is always a
good idea to reach one's own decision as to what is right. I'm just trying
to point out that in my eyes his awards and merits justified me in accepting
his words as true. Along with the fact that the SCA allowes plastic armour
and a madu made it even easier to come to the conclusion that said items are
acceptable.
I guess it's just easier for me to accept the rules as they have been set.
Just as long as I get to play. The way I figure it, why bicker about
what's not fair or perfect. If it's allowed, I'll go with that. If it
changes, I'll change with it.
Now, can we drop the "he's a nice guy comment" It had very little to do with
my original post. Could you look for a second past my (admittedly bad)
grammer and see what I was really tying to say?
Tom.
jezreel...@my-deja.com
There are many people that I respect in the Society. Some of
them do inauthentic things that make sense, and others suffer
unnecessarily in the Arizona heat or Maryland humidity. They are all
happy with what they have chosen, so I am happy for them. As for me, I
try to achieve a happy medium-- when I *do* get into armor, it's going
to be something like plastic screwed/bolted to the backside of
leather. Hopefully, I'll get something like a "Does she, or doesn't
she" look, not "oh, God, yet another hockey player", or something to
that effect. Whatever you go with, just make sure you are having fun,
the most important aspect of the SCA, and don't let anyone spoil it for
you.
Elizabeth Levin
<snip we learn from those who help us at first>
> So, authenticity maniacs of the world, here's the deal--some of you know it
> already and act on it, others don't. Your only hope of passing on a great love
> of fourteenth century embroidery, Viking-style tanning, or flawless chit-chat
> about the court affairs of Catherine de Medicis is to get the newbies and make
> them feel welcomed, valued, and cherished, and eager to look at your pictures
> of embroidery as a result. Because, frankly, I can understand the 'Lord
> So-and-So uses a madu and he is a good and honorable man' argument, and so can
> a lot of others, I'm sure. It may not be period, but it's authentic in the
> heart. So whatcha gonna do?
Well, in some ways. My way of relating to the SCA was profoundly shaped
by the first group I joined. Occaisionally, this results in some
inter-kingdom anthro issues, particularly with er.. hats.
However, we also develop. My first attempt at garb could have been held up
as an exemplar of "Bad Newbie Garb From The Depths". This stuff didn't
even look good from a "it all looks like it goes together" standpoint. I
was given an enveloping purple tunic from the "loaner bag" and told that I
should put a long skirt (preferably cotton) and a long sleeved shirt
underneath.
After going through every item of clothing I had brought to college, I
came up with a pink-hippie-embroidered-peasant blouse, and an ankle length
red courderoy skirt, plus an old russian headscarf for my head. Someone
from my group noticed, and I attended my second event in standard "wench"
garb, which I stuck with for quite a while. (There's even a family picture
with me in a chemise, with black bodice and that red cord skirt.)
Now, you're much more likely to find me if you look for someone wearing a
blue kaftan, loud stripey pants, and a yellow veil. (I never said I
learned to have taste in the colors I wear, just that I do it more
accurately, now.)
Most of the people I know who are authenticity mavens _do_ go out of their
way to be helpful, too. I know that I am very grateful to Mistress Jaelle
of Armida, who had me work as 2iC in her kitchen the week before my
wedding. Not only did she give me something to do and think about other
than that my wedding was going to be a complete disaster (I was sure); but
she also discussed how she put together the feast, and documentation- the
whole deal.
And now that I'm doing my own feast, she is still helping me with this
stuff. Thanks, Jae, and thanks to all the mavens!
--
Elizabeth Levin
Devora bat Shimshon
Jay Rudin
> Can I ask what you define as recreation and what is fantasy.
Re-creation is creating again. When I write a Canterbury Tale, I am
trying to create the kind of thing that was created before. That's
re-creation. When I write a "Green Eggs and Ham" poem, I'm re-creating
a Dr. Seuss style, but I wouldn't call that re-creation in an SCA
context. When I make up my own ideas, that's fantasy.
C. S. Lewis's *Till We Have Faces* was the myth of Cupid and Psyche told
in a (sorta) medieval style. That's re-creation. His Narnian
chronicles were fantasy.
> You're respected on here, so I'm assuming others I meet would agree
> with your POV.
Some yes, some no. I can respect lots of people I disagree with, and I
assume the converse is true.
> If we only make copies of existing, period scrolls, where is the
> creative then.
If we make X, that is creative, for any X. Creating is making, whether
authentically or not.
> By changing the style to our taste, do we then become fantasists?
*Of course* our peerage scrolls require wording changes. They don't
necessarily require changes of style, however. Changing the style to
our taste is indeed creating a fantasy. But so is inventing new
kingdoms and award structures. The SCA has a firm foundation in
fantasy.
When I helped change the text of the creation of the Earl of
Northumberland to make it appropriate for an SCA peerage, according to
the grammar of medieval Latin and the meaning of medieval law, that was
a re-creation. Years earlier, when I helped write the wording of a
Grant of Arms scroll with no knowledge or interest in what medieval
legal documents were for, or even what a Grant of Arms really was, the
result was fantasy -- perfectly adequate for SCA usage, but with no
anchor to the historical period.
There's a lot of fantasy stuff in the SCA, and almost everybody has done
some of it. I certainly have. My main point is not that everything in
the SCA can, or even should, be authentic re-creation, but that we
should keep track of the difference.
For one thing, it's not an either/or proposition. I can see several
inauthentic aspects of "The Chaplain's Tale", and other aspects that are
distinctly 16th century, not 14th. It's still an attempt at
re-creation, and "Captain Jack McGive" isn't. Both of these poems have
been well-received in the SCA, but "The Chaplain's Tale" has won the
final round of more than one competition, and "Captain Jack McGive"
isn't ever going to be heard then.
> This is not meant as a slight, I'm just trying to see your
> point of view. I'm a self-confessed arguer. :) I find only trying
> to see my point of view quite boring.
You can stop apologizing. If you ever offend me, I'll let you know.
And I enjoy arguing. It's like fighting -- it only gets annoying when
people stop calling blows.
> So what you're saying, if I understand correctly, is to keep filk
> songs for the campfire or similar, but keep period music for more
> important parts of the event? Unless the filk songs arre part of the
> event.
I agree with the spirit of what you're saying, but not the specific
example. I'm a bard -- the campfire *is* one of the most important
parts of the event. It's also one of the few places we can actually
make it feel authentic. Keep the silly stuff for the silly places.
(Like where? Well, I turned a somersault in court last month, and
recited a nursery rhyme while heralding one of the finalists onto the
field at Crown Tourney. To be fair, though, I should point out that the
nursery rhyme was patterned on a period one.)
> I guess that's where people's differing views on exactly what the
> word "creative" means to them come in.
It means "able to make stuff"!
Pat & Connie Cronin
wrote:
><.begin rant>
>IMHO filk plays an important role in the SCA. Many people know the tunes to
>modern folk songs or rock ballads. It's easy to learn new words to the old
>tunes and they (the newcomers) have an opportunity to participate early on
>in one of the best things about Saturday nights at events; Bardic circles.
>
>Songs composed where everyone can join in the chorus and using music over
>and over again while changing the lyrics are both period... why not let
>people enjoy the music, play the game, and learn a bit about the SCA before
>demanding a "Bardic Saga or nothing"? Not everyone who joins the SCA is
>interested in hearing all 497 verses of "Mary Hamilton" but they might like
>to hear/sing/compose several verses of "Imperium Compound (H.C. & Kahlua,
>etc.)"
>
>Are "Macing the William" and "Bashing MacEanruig" less "real" or valid
>because they are sung to the tune of Waltzing Matilda? I think not. They
are
>wonderful examples of a living society creating folk songs... hmmm is there
>a research paper in this?
>
>Mistress Seamchecker and Master Tuningfork have their place in the SCA. We
>*are* all trying to learn about and recreate some part of the
>pre-17th-century world and they can be wonderful resources to those less
>skilled or knowledgeable. However, (you knew there was one, didn't you?) I
>don't think that demanding either perfect period garb or perfect period
>music from everyone is right. Part of the beauty of the SCA in the past has
>been the gradual learning curve. Newcomers can grab a T-tunic and start
>playing right away. They can join in songs because even if they don't know
>the words they *do* know the tune and hum... learn... sing! As they ease
>into SCA life, they acquire better garb, learn how to do things in a
>"period" style, including sing/compose/perform if they so desire.
>
>An anachronism? Definitely! Either the lyrics are in a period style but the
>music is out of place, the music is period but the lyrics are about people
>in the SCA or both the music and lyrics are by/about people in the SCA.
>
>Don't sneer at fantasy either. Myth/Fantasy has been around a long time...
>(oops, that's another topic...)
>
><./rant>
>
>
>Jay Rudin wrote:
>
>> JoAnn Abbott replied to me:
>>
>> RoG> People designing (snip) , or writing filk songs, are being
>> RoG> creative fantasists, but not creative anachronists.
>>
>> > Nope, gotta quibble with you on this one. Parisian students were
>> > writing filk songs in period. What else would you call taking a
>> > liturgical song from Mass and re-writing it to be a hymn to your
>> > mistress or to the joys of drink?. Maybe the current crop of SCA
>> > filksingers aren't taking the same exact songs and re-writing them
>> > into bawdy latin, but the spirit is certainly the same!
>>
>> Yup. And the spirit of Gilligan's Isle is the same as the spirit of
>> Commedia Dell'Arte, and the spirit of Superman is the same as the spirit
>> of Achilleus, and the spirit of Star Trek is the same as the spirit of
>> the Oddyssey, and the spirit of Isaac Asimov's non-fiction is the same
>> as the spirit of Aristotle. That doesn't make Gilligan, Superman, Star
>> Trek, or Asimov anachronisms in the twentieth century. For the same
>> reason, filks of modern songs are fun and entertaining -- but they are
>> not anachronisms.
>>
> > Robin of Gilwell / Jay Rudin€
Nomad in Starkhafn
>
>The fact is, the SCA has always been less than clear about drawing the line
>on our period. Everyone seems to have their own personal idea of what the
>SCA period covers (or should cover), and that is fine. Rule quoting to
>support excluding certain personae is somewhat silly, though (not quite as
>silly, however, as the whole "travellers in time" thing).
>
>Herr Malachias von Morgenstern, Kapitän der Galatea
>Syndic of the Loyal Guild of Saint Erasmus - We put the "Sea" in SCA!
>Royal Artificer of the Kingdom of the West
>
>capt_malachias <AT> juno.com
>
>
I never try to exclude anyone. But please, I just say think a little
and use logic and not stretch QUITE so much just so you can carry
around pieces of equipment that you want or whatever. It REALLY kills
it for a lot of people, myself included. Especially when, knowing that
their persona makes little since, people invent this long and
convoluted "persona story" and feel free to launch into it at the drop
of a hat. Yes I believe in free speach, but come on, doing things in
such a way as to defy every genuine attempt at authenticity around you
is really just plain silly. It's obnoxious too. Please, at least try a
little? It's not that hard. ;-) And no, I'm not trying to pick on
anyone. Just don't treat authenticity as a bad word. That's a horrible
attitude! There is no such thing as an "authenticity nazi" that's
going to make you miss events because you're not perfect. But it
doesn't kill you to make an attempt...
Nomad in Starkhafn
>On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 10:33:25 -0600, Jay Rudin
><jru...@americasm01.nt.com> wrote:
>
>>Chris Matthews wrote:
>>
>>> Besides... we're 'Creative' Anachronists, are we not?
>>
>>Sure, but "creative" doesn't mean "inauthentic" -- it means engaged in
>>making things. The root word is "create".
>>
>>People making perfect Italian gowns, or calligraphing a peerage scroll
>>in Latin based on actual medieval legal documents, or writing a
>>Spenserian sonnet, are being "Creative Anachronists". People designing
>>totally new clothes, or most SCA-style scrolls, or writing filk songs,
>>are being creative fantasists, but not creative anachronists.
>>
>>Robin of Gilwell / Jay Rudin
>
>Umm, not to be critical here, but you may want to reword that message.
>You've just managed to insult about 90% of the Society. As an aspiring
>scribe myself, I don't look kindly to be being basically told that any
>scroll I try to design is junk, because everything's not perfectly
>period. For that matter, I'm sure all of your garb's not hand-woven.
>What we're attempting to do is "selectively" recreate the middle ages,
>not be perfect. Gods know, I'm not. I honestly don't look at it as
>though I'm doing fantasy when doing a scroll now.
I don't think he was stating that it was just junk. It's just not
anachronistic. :-) It's a fantasy item, it's not historic, that's all
I got from what he said. I agree with Jay on this.
Nomad in Starkhafn
<awil...@voyager.net> wrote:
>
>Nomad in Starkhafn wrote in message
><38a53290....@news.lvcablemodem.com>...
>>Now I hate to seem argumentative, but I've always wondered about
>---snip...
>
>Hello all.
> Just wanted to add my thoughts to this one.
>1. I was encouraged to use (plastic) armor to start with for a couple of
>reasons. It's real hot where I live and lighter armor means less weight to
>lug around in 90' weather with 80% humidity till I could get used to the
>weight and learn how to make more authentic armor.
>2. The man who really got me into the SCA uses a madu and has portions of
>his armour that are plastic. He's been in the SCA for 24 years, is a
>founding Baron, one time king, and also has his scarf in light fighting. And
>to top it all off, he's a dang good guy. So, with all due respect for your
>opinions, if it is good enough for him, it's good enough for me.
>I understand wanting to become immersed at events, it makes feeling the
>dream that much easier, just please understand that some off us can feel it
>even when we're in plastic armor with steel toe boots and (gasp!) nice
>comfortable cotton underwear that isn't in an eternal bunch...
>
>Good day.
>Thomas.
>
>
Uhm, first of all I was bitching about EXPOSED plastic. It's not hard
to cover it. I live in Las Vegas, NV where our summers have been known
to hit 110 quite frequently. It's HOT here. I've tried on both plastic
and leather armors and I've found that leather breathes better. Also
you can get leather for cheaper than plastic if you look hard enough.
:-)
Hasoferet
Especially when, knowing that
>their persona makes little since, people invent this long and
>convoluted "persona story" and feel free to launch into it at the drop
>of a hat. Yes I believe in free speach, but come on, doing things in
>such a way as to defy every genuine attempt at authenticity around you
>is really just plain silly. It's obnoxious too.
I hear your frustration--I bet they can hear your frustration in
Constantinople. And yes, ocasionally, I have looked at people and thought,
'dear God, what are they doing?' And I'm quite certain that people have looked
at me likewise from time to time.
Couple of things to bear in mind: people do not always KNOW that what they are
doing is inaccurate and silly. This is not because they're stupid, obdurate, or
trying to get your goat, they may just not have worked this out.
Personally, I think the deranged persona story is an art form--I love them, and
am quite sad that so few people in the West actually seem to have them or tell
them to people. But I am pretty strange, so leave that out of the equation.
Some people seem to be bitten by the authenticity bug naturally, and others
don't.
I think most people do gradually develop in that direction, at least in small
things.
But also, bear in mind, each of us shows up at an event in pursuit of our own
vision, and any overlapping is purely fortuitous. The fact that we somehow
manage to do that and still pull off a group EVENT is one of the most magical
things about this bunch.
Repeat quietly to yourself, "It is only a madu/katana/moronic persona story, it
has no power over me." Then walk up to the offender, tell them that you're
interested in spears too, and see if you can make a date to show him/her your
sketches. If you want. Otherwise, repeat mantra until you're feeling better,
and go do something else for a while.
Amy Willison
Nomad in Starkhafn wrote in message
>On Thu, 17 Feb 2000 17:45:53 -0500, "Amy Willison"
><awil...@voyager.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>Nomad in Starkhafn wrote in message
>><38a53290....@news.lvcablemodem.com>...
>>>Now I hate to seem argumentative, but I've always wondered about
>>---snip...
>>
>>Hello all.
>> Just wanted to add my thoughts to this one.
>>
>Uhm, first of all I was bitching about EXPOSED plastic. It's not hard
>to cover it. I live in Las Vegas, NV where our summers have been known
>to hit 110 quite frequently. It's HOT here. I've tried on both plastic
>and leather armors and I've found that leather breathes better. Also
>you can get leather for cheaper than plastic if you look hard enough.
>:-)
>Nomad/Michael
>Las Vegas, NV
>Barony of Starkhafn, Kingdom of Caid
Hi again. Quick question, where on earth do you get leather cheaper than
plastic? I paid $47 for a 4 X 8 sheet of 1/8" plastic and 107 for a full
side of B grade saddle skirting leather. I would rather use the leather but
the price difference for me at the time was an issue. And you are right it
does get hotter in LV than it does in SE Texas, but you have no humidity
which makes a big difference.
Tom.
Nomad in Starkhafn
<awil...@voyager.net> wrote:
Brettun's Village leather is quite good... if not cheaper than plastic
it's pretty close. :-) And I don't feel 1/8" plastic is rugged enough,
wouldn't 3/16" be better? If you're going to use plastic I just feel
it's best to cover it completely. Besides plastic doesn't breathe at
all at least leather doesn't get quite so sticky... ugh...
Dominus Urien Vitalis
Nomad in Starkhafn wrote in message
>Brettun's Village leather is quite good... if not cheaper than plastic
>it's pretty close. :-)
Do they have a web address?
>And I don't feel 1/8" plastic is rugged enough,
>wouldn't 3/16" be better? If you're going to use plastic I just feel
>it's best to cover it completely. Besides plastic doesn't breathe at
>all at least leather doesn't get quite so sticky... ugh...
>
>Nomad/Michael
It all depends on the style of armor that you use. By armor is almost
entirely kydex: knees, thigh, waist. And it would all pass the 1 inch test,
let alone the ten foot test.
It is all completely hidden under period fighting clothes.
Now the reason why the "breathing" aspect of the kydex isn't a problem is
that even in the largest concentration of it, around my waist, it is made up
of ten separate plates of no more than 3 1/2 inches wide.
This armor is WAY cooler and more breathable than my leather breastplate
ever could dream of being.
You just have to design for it.
Urien
Nomad in Starkhafn
<mg...@mediaoneSTOPSPAM.net> wrote:
>
>Nomad in Starkhafn wrote in message
>
>>Brettun's Village leather is quite good... if not cheaper than plastic
>>it's pretty close. :-)
>
>Do they have a web address?
>
>
http://www.brettunsvillage.com/leather/
Amy Willison
Thx for the tip on where to get the leather. I'll check it out. As for the
plastic being tough, it works very well. Before I started fighting I watched
for a while and found that the upper leg seemed to be a favorite target for
most of the fighters so I put some leather behind the plastic. Big mistake,
now if I get hit there it has to be a really good hit for me to think it was
good. And since I don't want to be considered a rhino hide that leather is
coming out. A good hit with my armour feels like a hard open hand slap on
bare skin. Hurts enough to get my attention (and act as a small punishment
for my mistake) but not enough to make me wince the next day.
Tom.
realml...@hotmail.com
<jru...@americasm01.nt.com> wrote:
>realml...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>> I guess that's where people's differing views on exactly what the
>> word "creative" means to them come in.
>
>It means "able to make stuff"!
>
>Robin of Gilwell / Jay Rudin
See, that's what I mean. What you look at as creative, I see as
imitative. You see creative as merely physical, I see it as mental
also. Doing something the same way exactly as before isn't really
creating something new, it's just imitating the old. For me, creative
is combining period techniques or, as many people absolutely hate, the
"what-if's." What if the Celt had somehow gotten ahold of the katana?
What if the Roman (or Japanese,etc.) had somehow found their way to
the European courts. There's more than enough proof that one county's
fashions or tastes influenced others. So I myself see nothing wrong
with illuminating a scroll using some style from, say, France, and
some styles from, oh, Ireland. That's my idea of creative. <shrug>
Cormac Munro
Max Haig
to do with the concept that it is creatively anachronistic to have people from
different times and places interacting in a society. A celt with a katana
isn't just bad history it looks silly.
Silly has it's place, but as a rule we need to stick with historical accuracy.
One person at a time. The anachronism should be that a properly dressed 10th
c. Viking is interacting with a well dressed 15th c. Italian. It should not be
that a 10 c. Viking is partially dressed as a 15th c. Italian.
Then again, many folks in the SCA don't seem to agree with that, or that we
even need to bother with historical accuracy at all....
Max ~
Zebee Johnstone
Max Haig <max...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>Silly has it's place, but as a rule we need to stick with historical accuracy.
>One person at a time. The anachronism should be that a properly dressed 10th
>c. Viking is interacting with a well dressed 15th c. Italian. It should not be
>that a 10 c. Viking is partially dressed as a 15th c. Italian.
>
ObRant: This is not the Society for Compulsive Clothes Wearing
What people wear is only part of what we do, and shouldn't be seen as all
that matters. The half viking half italian may be the best damn middle
eastern cook in the group, or make illuminated manuscripts to die for.
Me, I figure that if people wish to be historically accurate, then
the SCA supports that. To the level the individuals want. The best
thing people can do who want to see more accuracy is to encourage it.
The best way to encourage it is to exhibit it and show how easy it is.
Never to say "why don't you" but always to say "let me help". Never to
say "bad" but only ever to say "good".
Another good way is to stop focussing on clothes, and praise those who
do other things.
Silfren
- who only started getting interested in *doing* accurate things
(rather than just knowing about them) recently, and clothes still
aren't interesting. So those who judge only by appearances will still
be disappointed in my "lack of effort" and "disinterest in history".
Ashland S Henderson
Max Haig wrote in message <20000226173415...@ng-dc1.aol.com>...
>Gee, I thought the "creative" part of "society for creative anachronisms"
had
>to do with the concept that it is creatively anachronistic to have people
from
>different times and places interacting in a society. A celt with a katana
>isn't just bad history it looks silly.
I always thought it had to do with just being creative. Then again, it more
likely had to do with the necessity of coming up with a name to reserve
a public park in 1966. Not too much more should be read into it.
>Silly has it's place, but as a rule we need to stick with historical
accuracy.
>One person at a time. The anachronism should be that a properly dressed
10th
>c. Viking is interacting with a well dressed 15th c. Italian. It should
not be
>that a 10 c. Viking is partially dressed as a 15th c. Italian.
It's a theory. It's not one I subscribe too, however. Personally, I view the
SCA as a modern day adaption of the best of the medieval days. I strive
for a medieval look and feel but I don't get worked up about historical
accuracy. If I wanted historical accuracy I would join one of the standard
re-creation groups, not the SCA.
>Then again, many folks in the SCA don't seem to agree with that, or that we
>even need to bother with historical accuracy at all....
Yup.
Ashland S Henderson
Zebee Johnstone wrote in message ...
accuracy.
>>One person at a time. The anachronism should be that a properly dressed
10th
>>c. Viking is interacting with a well dressed 15th c. Italian. It should
not be
>>that a 10 c. Viking is partially dressed as a 15th c. Italian.
>>
>
Or even the Society for Clothing Accuracy. Oddly enough, it is
possible to survive in the SCA without a persona or any attempt to
build one and I, for one, give thanks for that.
>What people wear is only part of what we do, and shouldn't be seen as all
>that matters. The half viking half italian may be the best damn middle
>eastern cook in the group, or make illuminated manuscripts to die for.
Too true. Such political police as the SCA has (mostly self appointed)
have shown little ability to look beyond clothes, however.
>Me, I figure that if people wish to be historically accurate, then
>the SCA supports that. To the level the individuals want. The best
>thing people can do who want to see more accuracy is to encourage it.
>The best way to encourage it is to exhibit it and show how easy it is.
>Never to say "why don't you" but always to say "let me help". Never to
>say "bad" but only ever to say "good".
>
>Another good way is to stop focussing on clothes, and praise those who
>do other things.
Well said.
realml...@hotmail.com
>Gee, I thought the "creative" part of "society for creative anachronisms" had
>to do with the concept that it is creatively anachronistic to have people from
>different times and places interacting in a society. A celt with a katana
>isn't just bad history it looks silly.
>
To you, but not necessarily to someone else.
>Silly has it's place, but as a rule we need to stick with historical accuracy.
>One person at a time. The anachronism should be that a properly dressed 10th
>c. Viking is interacting with a well dressed 15th c. Italian. It should not be
>that a 10 c. Viking is partially dressed as a 15th c. Italian.
>
Again, in your view. That is the wonderful thing about the Society, no
one view is correct. I'll stand by your view completely when the BOD
puts that wording in the by-laws.
>Then again, many folks in the SCA don't seem to agree with that, or that we
>even need to bother with historical accuracy at all....
>
>Max ~
Now you're trying to put words into my mouth. I agree that we should
try for historical accuracy, but not to the point where it's no longer
fun. Historical accuracy almost always comes with time, nobody starts
out historically accurate, and most never fully get that way. By
asking for complete historical accuracy, either in personas, clothing,
or any other segment, the fun bocomes less for some as they have to
spend all their time and money being 100% historically accurate,
instead of 50% accurate and having a hell of a lot more fun.
But that's just my opinion, I'm quite often wrong. :)
realml...@hotmail.com
wrote:
>In article <jeihbsc6uael5hgvk...@4ax.com>,
>realml...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>> A celt with a katana
>> >isn't just bad history it looks silly.
>> >
>> To you, but not necessarily to someone else.
>
>...
>
>> >Then again, many folks in the SCA don't seem to agree with that, or that
>> >we
>> >even need to bother with historical accuracy at all....
>
>...
>
>> Now you're trying to put words into my mouth. I agree that we should
>> try for historical accuracy, but not to the point where it's no longer
>> fun. Historical accuracy almost always comes with time, nobody starts
>> out historically accurate, and most never fully get that way. By
>> asking for complete historical accuracy, either in personas, clothing,
>> or any other segment, the fun bocomes less for some as they have to
>> spend all their time and money being 100% historically accurate,
>> instead of 50% accurate and having a hell of a lot more fun.
>
>To illustrate what seems to me wrong about this exchange, let me switch
>from authenticity to car safety.
>
>A: "A car without anti-lock brakes is dangerous."
>
>B. "To you, but not necessarily to someone else."
>
Good example. I like this one, considering I personally hate anti-lock
brakes. AI live in an area with a high deer population and I've
avoided accidents many times by LOCKING my brakes. When I got my new
car, it had anti-lock brakes. After I almost hit my third deer because
of them, I had them removed and lockable brakes put on.
>A. "Then again, lots of people don't seem concerned with whether a car
>is safe or not."
>
>B. "Now you're trying to put words into my mouth. I agree that safer is
>better, but not everybody can afford all of the safety we might like. By
>asking for compelte safety, you are demanding that people spend all
>their money on expensive safety options."
>
True. Can everybody afford a Fords Taurus (one of the safest cars
going)? Or are some people driving Yugo's without anti-lock and
airbags? Sometimes the price does necessitate choices. And let's not
forget car alarms with a panic button. There's a great safety device
for people. I suppose we should make them mandatory on all cars also?
Next Example?
>B in this exchange (and Cormac in the real version) is confusing two
>quite different statements: That something isn't valuable, and that it
>isn't always valuable enough to be worth getting. The implication of his
>"To you, but not necessarily to someone else" isn't "yes, we all agree
>this is a problem, but for some people it is a problem that isn't worth
>wolving." It is "To some people, this isn't a problem at all."
>
But not all people do agree it is a problem worth solving. Talk to the
Tuchuks sometime. They're having fun while not worrying about 100%
historical accuracy.
>The same is true of Cormac's
>
And others.
>> Again, in your view. That is the wonderful thing about the Society, no
>> one view is correct.
>
>Nobody I have ever met claims that you should be perfectly authentic
>whatever the cost in other values--nobody. That position is a straw man.
Then you must not be reading all the threads that have been posted for
quite a while. I've been hit with that before as have others.
>The real division, and the one Cormac points out in his "but not
>necessarily to someone else" and "no one view is correct," is between
>people who think historical authenticity is a value worth pursuing, and
>people who think the game we are playing is something else. But Cormac
>suddenly drops that division at the end, and goes over to the wholly
>uncontroversial statement that although more authenticity is better than
>less, some levels of authenticity are sometimes not worth their cost in
>other values.
>
Where's the schism? In the first half of that statement, I'm talking
about others' views as I've heard and read; in the latter half, in my
personal view. Unless you're assuming I'm speaking for the entire
Society. I don't claim that everybody agrees with the "wholly
uncontroversial statement" because not everybody wants to be 100%
accurate. Again, I use the Tuchuks as an example, because they seem to
be one group who has a lot of fun without complete historical
accuracy. Again I say, if people want 100% historical accuracy, get on
the BOD and get something put in the by-laws. At that point we'll lose
a lot of membership and have a lot more trouble recruiting new
members. The SCA started out as a means of recreating history AND
HAVING FUN.
>Which is it? Is a Celt with a katana entirely unobjectionable, or is it
>merely something we accept in new members because they haven't yet
>learned to do better, but hope they will grow out of? Cormac's first
>statements imply the former, his final statement implies the latter.
Bothl. You're assuming they're both my personal POV. For some, it is
completely unobjectionable, for others it's completely wrong. Neither
view is right or wrong, just different and a personal choice. I
personally hope he fully develops a historical persona, but if he's
happy with it, having fun, and enjoying himself, I'm happy for him.
But again, taht's my personal POV. I'm sure others disagree.
Greg Lindahl
> clothing, or any other segment, the fun bocomes less for some as
> they have to spend all their time and money being 100% historically
> accurate, instead of 50% accurate and having a hell of a lot more
> fun.
This is known as "making perfection the enemy of the good."
Caridoc's reply basically makes the same point, using many more
words. I'd suggest reading it carefully.
-- gb
Zebee Johnstone
David Friedman <dd...@best.com> wrote:
>
>Which is it? Is a Celt with a katana entirely unobjectionable, or is it
>merely something we accept in new members because they haven't yet
>learned to do better, but hope they will grow out of? Cormac's first
>statements imply the former, his final statement implies the latter.
It's both.
Because they aren't mutually exclusive :)
It isn't and *can't* be objectionable, it's within the rules.
so ithas to be "entirely unobjectionable".
We have to accept it in all - new and old.
However we can also hope that people grow out of it. New or old.
But "hope" doesn't mean "enforce" and it doesn't mean "object" in
my view. It means hope.
Silfren
--
Zebee Johnstone (ze...@zip.com.au)
Proud holder of aus.motorcycles Poser Permit #1.
"You don't own an Italian motorcycle
- you merely have the privilege of paying its bills."
David Friedman
wrote:
> In rec.org.sca on Sun, 27 Feb 2000 11:38:49 -0600
> David Friedman <dd...@best.com> wrote:
> >
> >Which is it? Is a Celt with a katana entirely unobjectionable, or is it
> >merely something we accept in new members because they haven't yet
> >learned to do better, but hope they will grow out of? Cormac's first
> >statements imply the former, his final statement implies the latter.
>
>
> It's both.
>
> Because they aren't mutually exclusive :)
>
> It isn't and *can't* be objectionable, it's within the rules.
>
> so ithas to be "entirely unobjectionable".
>
> We have to accept it in all - new and old.
>
> However we can also hope that people grow out of it.
If you don't object to it--if it is "completely unobjectionable"--why do
you hope they grow out of it?
> New or old.
>
> But "hope" doesn't mean "enforce" and it doesn't mean "object" in
> my view. It means hope.
Nobody said anything about forcing anyone--that's a read herring. To say
something is objectionable is not to announce your intention of
objecting to it--any more than "chivalrous" means "horsy." Nor does
something have to violate a rule to be objectionable.
--
David/Cariadoc
http://www.best.com/~ddfr/Medieval/Medieval.html
David Friedman
realml...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Good example. I like this one, considering I personally hate anti-lock
> brakes.
And some people hate--or, more plausibly, mildly dislike or don't care
about--historical accuracy. And their position is entirely different
from the position of the people who approve of authenticity, would be in
favor of being more authentic if there was an easy way of doing so, but
recognize that in practice they have to compromise. Just as your
position is entirely different from that of someone who wants ABS but
can't afford it. Yet you were conflating the two positions in your
earlier post.
> And let's not
> forget car alarms with a panic button. There's a great safety device
> for people. I suppose we should make them mandatory on all cars also?
I'm not arguing for making anything mandatory. You are confusing the
question of what is desirable with the question of what should be
compulsory.
> But not all people do agree it is a problem worth solving. Talk to the
> Tuchuks sometime.
I don't have to go that far. As I made clear in my post, there are
people (actually, lots of people) in the SCA who don't regard historical
accuracy as particularly desirable. But they aren't the same people as
the ones who regard it as desirable, but get less of it than they would
like because they have other goals as well. And you were first offering
the position of the first group then, when challenged on it, switching
to the argument of the second group.
> >Nobody I have ever met claims that you should be perfectly authentic
> >whatever the cost in other values--nobody. That position is a straw man.
>
> Then you must not be reading all the threads that have been posted for
> quite a while. I've been hit with that before as have others.
I doubt it. I've been involved in these argument for a very long time.
In my experience, that is a position that always appears as a straw man,
raised by the person who is arguing against more authenticity, not as a
proposal by the person arguing for more authenticity.
Deja News archives posts. Can you quote any post in which someone said
that people should be perfectly authentic whatever the cost in other
values? If it is a common argument, you should be able to find an
example.
> >The real division, and the one Cormac points out in his "but not
> >necessarily to someone else" and "no one view is correct," is between
> >people who think historical authenticity is a value worth pursuing, and
> >people who think the game we are playing is something else. But Cormac
> >suddenly drops that division at the end, and goes over to the wholly
> >uncontroversial statement that although more authenticity is better than
> >less, some levels of authenticity are sometimes not worth their cost in
> >other values.
> >
> Where's the schism? In the first half of that statement, I'm talking
> about others' views as I've heard and read; in the latter half, in my
> personal view.
But you switched to the second position in the process of objecting to
someone's response to your statement of the first position. Since the
two positions are inconsistent with each other, that makes no sense.
> Again I say, if people want 100% historical accuracy, get on
> the BOD and get something put in the by-laws.
And again, you simultaneously invent a straw man of 100% authenticity,
which nobody is arguing for, and confuse the question of whether
something is desirable with the quite different question of whether the
rules should require it. So far as the BOD is concerned, I would be
happy if they (and royalty, and other people in a position to make
rules) would just stop making rules against authenticity.
You think that (say) 50% authenticity is desirable. Does that mean you
want to make a rule requiring exactly that, and forbidding anything more
authentic? Obviously not. So why do you respond to other people as if
arguing for something meant wanting to make rules requiring it?
--
David/Cariadoc
http://www.best.com/~ddfr/Medieval/Medieval.html
Honour Horne-Jaruk
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>
> In rec.org.sca on 26 Feb 2000 22:34:15 GMT
> Max Haig <max...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >Silly has it's place, but as a rule we need to stick with historical accuracy.
(snip)
> ObRant: This is not the Society for Compulsive Clothes Wearing
(snip)
>
> What people wear is only part of what we do, and shouldn't be seen as all
> that matters.
> Silfren
> - who only started getting interested in *doing* accurate things
> (rather than just knowing about them) recently, and clothes still
> aren't interesting. So those who judge only by appearances will still
> be disappointed in my "lack of effort" and "disinterest in history".
I don't think Max had any intention of proposing a "Society for
Compulsive Clothes Wearing". This is a classic straw man;
rephrasing someone's position in ridiculous terms, so that it
becomes very easy to slam it.
In simply practical fact, of course people judge first by outer
appearances. That's what they see first.
I've been in the SCA since Yule AS 7. Assuming I only meet 100
new (to me) SCA folk per year (Ha): 2,500 new people. Have I had
a one hour long conversation with each and every one of them,
learning all about their non visible interests, skills, works and
goals? Of course not. Have I seen what they're wearing? Of
course.
Do I gravitate towards the quiet gentleman in the hand stitched
monk's robe and away from the loud drunk in the plastic Day-Glo
trim? Of course. Has this occasionally been a bad choice? Once.
In 28 years, it's happened once.
What gets me is the ones who claim they couldn't care less about
appearances, then ask me why I'm "slobbing around" in a
hand-woven silver brocade Dark Ages tunic instead of "looking
decent" in my usual craft muslin Tudor. (Person quoted being my
God-daughter, I didn't rip her head off and hand it to her... but
being a full-time pacifist is hard sometimes!)
Chris Straughn
WelshWmn3 <wels...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000227200826...@ng-fm1.aol.com...
> snip
> Now, I realise I'm taking this entirely too far and being entirely too
anal
> about it, but that is how the people who lobby for 100% historical
accuracy
> come across to me.
snip
Please show me one person who is lobbying for 100% historical accuracy?
Please just one. I've yet to see it and I frequent a board entitled Goal
Authenticity on the Armour Archive. The board is for discussing ways of
doing things authentically, and I've to meet anyone there who lobbies for
100% historical authenticity in the SCA.
Ld Christoffer Knudson
Christopher R Straughn
David Friedman
wels...@aol.com (WelshWmn3) wrote:
> If we were to be 100%
> accurate in our re-enactment attempts, then those of us with pre-spice
> route
> persona's would not EVER be able to wear silk, or eat at feasts that
> included
> cinnamon in the menu.
Unless I am much mistaken, both cinnamon and silk were coming into
Europe by late classical antiquity, perhaps earlier, so the only people
affected would be those with very early personae--Spartans and the like.
> Now, I realise I'm taking this entirely too far and being entirely too
> anal
> about it, but that is how the people who lobby for 100% historical
> accuracy
> come across to me.
But since there are no people who lobby for 100% historical accuracy,
how can they come across as anything?
I repeat the same question I put to someone else. Everything on this
newsgroup is archived at Deja News, for some years back. Find a post you
can quote where anyone argues for 100% historical accuracy. Find a post
where anyone suggests that everything can or should be done perfectly.
If you can't find such a post, recognize that the reason is that you are
attacking a straw man--a position of your own invention. The argument
isn't and has never been about whether we should be 100% authentic
because that isn't an option, and everyone knows it isn't an option, and
has known it isn't an option as long as the SCA has existed. The
argument is about whether historical authenticity is a good thing.
If it is a good thing, then people should be more authentic when they
can do so without sacrificing other important good things. Given the
choice between OOP dances and equally good period dances, they should
choose the period dances. Given the choice between buying a katana and
buying the kind of sword your (hypothetically Celtic) persona would have
worn, buy the Celtic sword. Similarly for food, clothing, etc.
People will still end up doing OOP dances if they don't know any period
ones and don't have the time to research them, and eating OOP food if
they cannot find a source of period recipes. And almost all of us will
continue to use OOP (for us) languages, because learning a language just
for SCA is more work than it is worth. And a Celt who already has a
katana, and doesn't know what his persona would have carried and
couldn't afford it anyway, will still carry a katana. But he will
recognize that he is doing it because it isn't yet practical for him to
do better, not because authenticity doesn't matter.
> And if I DO wear said completely documentable set of clothes at said
> event,
> does that REALLY give me the right to "look down my nose" at somebody
> who's
> main purpose in the SCA is to "get dressed up and beat on each other with
> sticks", who has "inferior", in my opinion, clothes as they are half
> Viking,
> half Welsh, and happens to be carrying a katana?
No. But you do believe in looking down your nose at (imaginary) people
who are in favor of 100% authenticity--and have just been doing it.
And (incidentally) there is nothing particularly OOP about a
Viking/Welsh combination (minus the katana). The Vikings raided Wales,
and there is a Welsh character in Jomviking saga.
--
David/Cariadoc
http://www.best.com/~ddfr/Medieval/Medieval.html
David Friedman
Carroll-Clark" <nicola...@columbus.rr.com> wrote:
> And frankly, I'm not surprised--after all, our
> cusp of the 21st century brains have gotten used to the idea that gaining
> knowledge necessarily leads to snobbery.
My lady wife, reading over my shoulder, suggests that part of what
creates that idea, and creates the sort of hostility to authenticity
that occasionally surfaces here (as opposed to the indifference to
authenticity which is fairly common in the SCA), is the identification
of authenticity with competition. There is a repeated subtext in a lot
of SCA culture to the effect that the only reason to be authentic is to
win an arts contest, and the only reason to win arts contests is to get
awards. If the function of authenticity is to get more status than other
people, naturally those who aren't winning that particular silly game
resent it.
I remember a pamphlet on a particular art form, written many years ago
in the SCA. It contained a couple of pages on what pieces were or were
not period. The passage started by saying that the information was being
provided for people who planned to enter contests. The clear implication
was that nobody else would care, since the only reason to be authentic
was to win contests.
All of which ties into my long held view that the way to encourage
period arts isn't by having arts contests, but by finding functions for
those arts in the SCA, and employing them to serve those functions.
--
David/Cariadoc
http://www.best.com/~ddfr/Medieval/Medieval.html
WelshWmn3
As I understand it, the SCA was started as a picnic in a person's backyard in
Berkley. A few people attending the "picnic that grew" came as (OMG)
historical personages, and others came as (horror of horrors)
fictional/mythological personages. Some people came as knights, but had nobody
to "knight" them, and nearly all were accepted to be Lords and Ladies without
the benifit of AoA's.
This is a game/picnic that grew to be a wonderful place to re-create the best
part of pre-17th Century Western civilisation. 100% accuracy in the society is
not a possibility, nor is it completely desirable. If we were to be 100%
accurate in our re-enactment attempts, then those of us with pre-spice route
persona's would not EVER be able to wear silk, or eat at feasts that included
cinnamon in the menu. Those of us who mundanely wear glasses to see, must, for
the duration of the event, take off thier glasses, and go around half blind, as
THAT was the historical way of dealing with nearsightedness.
Oh, yeah, those of us that are afflicted with asthma, or allergies, or any
illness/disease will need to leave modern antibiotics, prescription allergy
medicines, inhalers and etc at home.
And, to be 100% historically accurate, how were you planning on arriving at
said event? How many people in the SCA happen to have a horse or two and a
cart to transport thier belongings in their barn errr garage?
Now, I realise I'm taking this entirely too far and being entirely too anal
about it, but that is how the people who lobby for 100% historical accuracy
come across to me. I joined the SCA because I have a love for history, and
like to learn more. The SCA, for me, is a place to learn about history by
immersing as much as I can in it. Whether that means that I wear a completely
documentable set of clothes while I'm at the event or not is my preference.
And if I DO wear said completely documentable set of clothes at said event,
does that REALLY give me the right to "look down my nose" at somebody who's
main purpose in the SCA is to "get dressed up and beat on each other with
sticks", who has "inferior", in my opinion, clothes as they are half Viking,
half Welsh, and happens to be carrying a katana?
In my not so humble oponion, no.
YMMV.
Branwyn
Susan Carroll-Clark
WelshWmn3 wrote in message
>Now, I realise I'm taking this entirely too far and being entirely too anal
>about it, but that is how the people who lobby for 100% historical accuracy
>come across to me.
Who the heck are these people? I keep being told they exist, but I've never,
ever met one. Even the biggest authenticity enthusiasts I know recognize
that there are certain basic limitations on our recreations, first and
foremost being that we're not medieval people; we're cusp of the 21st
century people who will go back to being said cusp of the 21st century
people after our weekend fun is over.
I continue to meet people with a deep interest in authenticity in one or
more aspects of period culture who are incredibly fun to be around, who
spread their passion through enthusiasm and teaching, and most importantly
of all, have gained a certain humility through the acquisition of knowledge,
realizing that the more they know, the more they realize what they do not
know.
Most people who argue for more authenticity do so not because they want
everyone in the SCA to be 100% authentic, but because they believe it's fun
and gives useful insights about the Middle Ages. Most are not arguing that
those who do not choose this path are lower lifeforms, but all too often,
that's the interpretation. And frankly, I'm not surprised--after all, our
cusp of the 21st century brains have gotten used to the idea that gaining
knowledge necessarily leads to snobbery.
Nicolaa
Zebee Johnstone
David Friedman <dd...@best.com> wrote:
>
>If you don't object to it--if it is "completely unobjectionable"--why do
>you hope they grow out of it?
I can not object to something, but still think it can be
better.
"OK.. I did 6 pushups. I hope I can do better"
Doesn't mean I object to 6, it means that there is better and
I'd like to do better.
Silfren
Zebee Johnstone
Honour Horne-Jaruk <hon...@banet.net> wrote:
> Do I gravitate towards the quiet gentleman in the hand stitched
>monk's robe and away from the loud drunk in the plastic Day-Glo
>trim? Of course. Has this occasionally been a bad choice? Once.
>In 28 years, it's happened once.
Do you gravitate towards the loud drunk in the hand stitched
monk's robe and away from the quiete gentleman in the dayglo
t-tunic?
Me, I go for behaviour over clothes every time.
Silfren
Hasoferet
>
>>Now, I realise I'm taking this entirely too far and being entirely too >anal
>>about it, but that is how the people who lobby for 100% historical >accuracy
>>come across to me.
>
>Who the heck are these people? I keep being told they exist, but I've >never,
>ever met one.
That's because, as far as I can tell, the threat is not from the chap demanding
total authenticity, it's the SCAnik who is either a.) twenty percent more
authentic than you are, and doesn't see how anyone can stand to live the way
you do, or b.) just wants to moan and bitch about the lack of standards in some
field of endeavor he'she knows something about. I've met 'em.
Now, thank God, most people who are real authenticity mavens usually just want
to teach, talk, and encourage folks to do it the neat way. They are almost
never the bitchers and whiners. Also, they are usually tolerant of other folks'
flexible standards. I'm acquent with folks who care deeply about accurate Tudor
garb but could give rat's about period food. Folks who can give an hour's
extemporaneous lecture about concepts of chivalry, but have been wearing the
same rayon t-tunic since 1982. Fine hack and bash folks who could care less
about anything that hasn't got to do with armor, but by God, they do know about
their armor. And folks who do some of everything, or all of everything.
They're into authenticity, all of these people. They do not, and maybe I can't
emphasize this enough, bitch, whine, complain, or make other people feel
rotten. All of the most staggeringly authentic folks I have met have been nice,
nice, people. But that doesn't mean that there aren't MANY people who use
authenticity standards as a blunt instrument to whack folks with.
What ticks me off the most about the authenticity yowl, and by that I do NOT
mean advocating more authenticity in the SCA's doings, is that usually
sandwiched in there somewhere is "it ruins the look of things, and interferes
with my fantasy". Well, tough. Button your lip, and practice some manners.
>I continue to meet people with a deep interest in authenticity in one or
>more aspects of period culture who are incredibly fun to be around, who
>spread their passion through enthusiasm and teaching, and most >importantly
>of all, have gained a certain humility through the acquisition of >knowledge,
>realizing that the more they know, the more they realize what they do >not
>know.
Absolutely so. Lord love 'em.
>Most people who argue for more authenticity do so not because they >want
>everyone in the SCA to be 100% authentic, but because they believe it's >fun
>and gives useful insights about the Middle Ages. Most are not arguing >that
>those who do not choose this path are lower lifeforms, but all too often,
>that's the interpretation.
Some are, and as I said above, not all of these, nor most of them, are actually
themselves HIGH authenticity players.
> And frankly, I'm not surprised--after all, our
>cusp of the 21st century brains have gotten used to the idea that gaining
>knowledge necessarily leads to snobbery.
I think most people can recognize snobbery when it's aimed at them, without
needing to be taught to distrust eddicated folks.
Good grief, the fury and time we've spent on this thread! Just because one
lousy Scotsman was waving around a katana? Let him have it, and let's go back
to fighting about whether to put radio tags in teenagers' ears, or whatever it
was.