[MR] Do Heralds dream of (em)blazoned sheep?

[Craig Levin]

Colin:

<snip>

> Lady Alanna, I will take up your challenge and will volunteer my time and
> service to my new Baronial Herald, if he or she will have me. I also hope
> that I can convince you to please NOT put down your books and service but
> rather help me and other "nay sayers" to better understand the process and
> the need for strict adherence. I have no doubt that there is a lot you can
> teach me. And if I listen, learn, and put some sweat equity into working the
> process, maybe my opinions will gain a little credibility within the
> Herald's commuting. Then again, maybe I'll end up agreeing with you
> completely. So I'm asking for your help and forgiveness.

I don't speak for her, naturally, but: part of the goal in
regularising the paperwork is to make things faster and easier at
the kingdom level, and at the Laurel level. Both Golden Dolphin
and I were part of Jaelle Laurel's staff. Every month, I spent my
Wednesday evenings, some Monday evenings, and the occasional
Saturday making sure that things that needed to be filed were
filed, that things that needed to be pulled (either because their
contents were needed for comparison or because the file would
possibly be updated) got pulled, and that new files were created.
Lady Alanna was right there with me. On top of all that, Jaelle
was doing some file stuff, plus other things which mere grunts
don't get to be told about. Being Laurel is like having another
full-time job, with subordinates to boss around and everything!

Getting behind is *bad* *stuff*. Not only are you letting down
the submitters all over the world, you're only making more work
for you and your helpers. Way in the dim dark past, a Laurel got
more than half a year behind in processing the paperwork. The
result was a turnover of the office, hasty and haphazard
processing by an emergency team of senior heralds, and a letter
of acceptance and return (LOAR) more than eighty pages long! As
it is, no Laurel is perfect.

> That being said, I do believe it is not heresy to call a regulatory process
> onerous (even though I understand you may disagree with me here) nor have I
> ever found a tradition or methodology that could not stand to have a little
> outside scrutiny and pointed questions. The more rules and regulations that
> are imposed on a process, the less likely people will be to avail themselves
> of its benefits. Anytime an organization adds a new rule or limitation for
> this reason or that, it is incumbent upon them to attempt to find a way to
> lessen the impact. If you tighten a rule here, relax a rule there. For
> instance, any good company seeking to tighten up its sick leave policy (from
> unlimited to say 10 days) will at the same time either increase vacation
> time, increase paid holidays, or allow for flextime. It's just good PR and
> good practice.

At the kingdom level, there isn't a great deal of freedom,
actually. Lots of this stuff is dictated in the Administrative
Handbook for the College of Arms, at:
http://www.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/admin.html

> I want to take a brief moment to speak on my earlier post's correlation
> between this topic and religion. History is full with examples of people who
> are a part of a structured organization and rebel against it because they
> found it to be burdensome or "out of touch" with their beliefs. Witness the
> Church of England, the Protestant reformation, or the distinctions apparent
> in  today's Jewish communities (orthodox, conservative, reformed) where
> church doctrine and traditions cause divergences in individuals practice of
> faith. Or if you prefer a political example, how about the American
> Revolution. Now no one wants to see some SCAdian with a hammer in one hand
> and a piece of paper with 68 scribbles on it walking up and nailing it to
> the Herald's Point and by no means am I advocating it. What I'm saying is
> that I don't believe it's my voice, or others like mine, that are preventing
> people from trying. I believe there is a general perception of "If I don't
> ask, they can't say no." I also believe that the Heralds goals are always
> that of "lets make this work." But that's just not always possible. Even my
> current local Baronial Herald, who is a certifiable genius with the ability
> to write darn near bulletproof supporting arguments, can't always get
> something past the visual test. All of us can appreciate that and walk away
> from the experience with a positive feeling.

Hm. I've never had a problem. In part, it's because my wife is a
fairly good artist, if people want it on-the-spot. Other
submitters have had a touch of the artist themselves. If neither
condition applies, I generally advise them to hunt about for an
artist, or wait until an event with a number of heralds greater
than one-typically, we like to travel in groups, and there's
bound to be an artist somewhere in the semy of heralds. 

The rules for submissions do change. There were some fairly substantial
reworkings about eleven years ago, another about seven years ago,
and incremental reinterpretations are always being done. For
them, see: http://www.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/rfs.html

> [Author's Note: I don't know why but I found the post title particularly
> fitting. It is in reference to somewhat popular 80's occult movie more
> commonly known as "Blade Runner." It is an excellent rental though I
> recommend the director's cut on DVD.]

Dunno about _occult_. Seemed more like hard scifi to me. :)

Pedro