[MR] In defense of inauthenticity

[Donald Wagner]

Greetings!

gormofberra at direcway.com wrote:

>A strict reading of the rule could support the conclusion that an uncovered folding chair is not allowed near the field, so I would call that a "ban".
>
>I note that the way the Tea Leaves are reading currently indicates that isn't the working interpretation that will be in force, but what will keep a future Crown or Earl Marshal from changing their minds and being stricter?
>
I kind of resent this remark, Gorm.  Nobody is destroying the SCA by 
trying to make armored combat look better and it is an irresponsible 
argument for a learned man to make.  If you don't want catastrophic 
foreboding, buying your Tea leaves from Chicken Little is a bad idea.

>
>But you're missing my point...this Law is saying 'Thou must, or you can't play with us', a better approach, in my mind,  would have been to say "Thou should, and we will recognize those who do over those who don't".
>
The "Thou should and we will" approach just wasn't working.  If you 
wanted to find the most blatantly modern area in Atlantia's SCA, it was 
armored combat.  As collectives, the A&S communities, rapier, and even 
hard-core service folk looked better than the armored fighters did.  
Many of us just looked like crap.  Too many of us wanted to keep looking 
like crap for years.  I am no paragon of virtue where it comes to 
authenticity, but it is obvious that our shortcuts to plastic armor 
weren't being buffered with enough care or time to cover-up.

The Chivalry isn't unaffected by this.  Many are upgrading their gear, 
as well.  Most of the Chivalry, however, had the presence of mind to 
counsel, or respectfully bitch, during and immediately after Curias in 
two reigns, rather than waiting a month before the law took effect and 
getting excited off about it.

>As it is happening, the Law as written won't help the authenticity level of the SCA, will piss off a number of members, and goes against the spirit of how the organization has been run, where courtesy and social interaction was cherished over material possession.
>  
>
This isn't about some new class struggle in the SCA, Gorm, but adding 
unrelated emotion to the argument suits your cause.  This is about 
making sure we teach each new fighter, in the beginning, of the 
importance of authentic appearance.  They need to know that appearance 
and practicality must be equals from the beginning.  We could do that 
without a law or policy, but we didn't and I don't believe we would have 
without it.

>We aren't losing sites because of Coleman chairs, we're losing them
>because of people who drink despite the site being dry, or drive on the
>grass that the site asked us to keep off of, or who leave trash
>everywhere. Everyone is guilty of this at one time or another, I'm not
>accusing anyone specifically, but we all know this happens.
>
Whether or not people choose to obey the liquor laws has nothing to do 
with improving the authentic appearance of the collective body of 
armored combatants, or court ambiance.  We lose sites due to the morally 
poor, rather than financial, and a perfect man I know said the "poor 
would be with us, always".

>We aren't losing fighers because of Kydex, we're losing fighters because if you do this long enough, you *will* sustain a significant injury due to repeated trauma to your body.  The shot that years ago was excessive is light today.
>  
>
I think you previously stated that you had been active for six years.  
Respectfully, I disagree that blow force has significantly creeped in 
the last six years.  I have fought for 21+ years and I just might be 
able to make that argument fly.

>We aren't failing to attract and keep members because of sneakers (which can be documented to period, btw...no, the soles weren't rubber, but there is documentation for laceup low cut shoes made of leather), we're failing to attract and keep members because of cliquishness, attitudes of "my way or the highway", and rudeness.
>
>Should individual members want to make their personal kit more period?  Certainly.  Do I want to make my kit more period in some areas?  Absolutely, in those areas which interest me, or those which I believe I can accomplish easily.  Someone (it might have been Cuan), a couple of years ago, requested that everyone try to upgrade one piece of gear during their reign.  I did, and many others did as well.
>
>The carrot could work...why did you feel the need to jump straight to the stick?
>
Well, we tried the carrot approach for the last six years I think you 
have been fighting and for the last ten that I have been in Atlantia, 
and look where it's gotten us.  "Look!  It's the Michelin Man fighting 
some knight guy!" (yeah, I actually witnessed that reaction at a demo)

I don't have any bones to pick with you, personally.  I don't remember 
what your kit looks like, but I know it will look authentic if you take 
the field after Dec. 1.  That was the point.  We were placed on notice 
in the fighter community almost a year ago that this was going to 
happen.  Truthfully, most newcomers and old timers alike, poor and rich, 
the good, bad, and ugly to whom heavy fighting is an important aspect of 
their experience have upgraded their kit and a blazingly fast manner 
compared to efforts made over the last six years.

Falcone


>----- Original Message -----
>From: logan <dukelogan at bellsouth.net>
>Date: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 9:57 pm
>Subject: RE: [MR] In defense of inauthenticity
>
>  
>
>>sigh....
>>
>>no one has banned the precious coleman chairs.  no one has said 
>>you must
>>meet any standard to sit down.  if your kid vomits on your bathing 
>>suit do
>>you still jump in the pool?  sure there are a 1000 excuses for the 
>>cover to
>>the chair being lost, stolen, missing, abducted, whatever so i 
>>dont get what
>>point you are trying to make with that.
>>
>>coleman chairs have no place in an organization that is supposed 
>>to be about
>>the middle ages.  can you explain how they do?
>>
>>im at a loss
>>
>>logan
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: atlantia-bounces at atlantia.sca.org
>>[atlantia-bounces at atlantia.sca.org] On Behalf Of
>>gormofberra at direcway.com
>>Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 4:26 PM
>>To: Marybeth Lavrakas
>>Cc: Merry Rose
>>Subject: Re: [MR] In defense of inauthenticity
>>
>>
>>Let's see...
>>
>>1. You forgot it at home...no it isn't a "good" reason, but it 
>>shouldn'tresult in your not being able to sit down. 2. Your baby 
>>threw up on it 3.
>>You lent it to a friend for some other purpose 4. You had to 
>>change a spare
>>tire on the way up to the event, used the fabric as a ground cover to
>>protect your Elizebethan dress, and left it on the side of the 
>>highway. 5.
>>The hall needed fabric for a wall hanging to screen off the 
>>kitchen area,
>>and you were the only person on site who had some.
>>
>>I could go on and on.  And yes, I've had some of these happen to me.
>>
>>However, you're missing my point.  My point isn't that I should be 
>>able to
>>sit in my naked Coleman chair on the side of the field as a matter 
>>of right,
>>my point is that rather than *banning* something for failure to 
>>comply with
>>an arbitrary standard, instead *encourage* people to meet that 
>>standard, and
>>maybe even exceed it, by rewarding excellence.
>>
>>When you say "You must meet this standard", you get a lot of 
>>activity right
>>at that standard, and have to ban people who don't meet it.  When 
>>you say
>>"Here is a shiny object because you excelled", you get a lot of 
>>excellence,AND you don't have to ban anyone.
>>
>>Which is more likely to result in a larger pool of people with 
>>fewer hurt
>>feelings?
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: Marybeth Lavrakas <katrous at yahoo.com>
>>Date: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 1:01 pm
>>Subject: Re: [MR] In defense of inauthenticity
>>
>>    
>>
>>>There are plenty of reasons to use a Coleman chair,
>>>but I can't think of a good reason not to cover it up
>>>with some cloth...
>>>
>>>=====
>>>Lady Kateryn Rous, CP
>>>House Broussard
>>>Windmasters Hill
>>>http://sca.livingpast.com 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>========================================================================>                   The Merry Rose Tavern at Cheapside
>>    
>>
>>>   List Info: http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
>>> Submissions: Atlantia at atlantia.sca.org
>>>Subscriptions:
>>>http://seahorse.atlantia.sca.org/mailman/listinfo/atlantia
>>>      
>>>
>>========================================================================
>>                  The Merry Rose Tavern at Cheapside
>>   List Info: http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
>> Submissions: Atlantia at atlantia.sca.org
>>Subscriptions: 
>>http://seahorse.atlantia.sca.org/mailman/listinfo/atlantia
>>
>>========================================================================
>>                  The Merry Rose Tavern at Cheapside
>>   List Info: http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
>> Submissions: Atlantia at atlantia.sca.org
>>Subscriptions: 
>>http://seahorse.atlantia.sca.org/mailman/listinfo/atlantia
>>    
>>
>
>========================================================================
>                   The Merry Rose Tavern at Cheapside
>    List Info: http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
>  Submissions: Atlantia at atlantia.sca.org
>Subscriptions: http://seahorse.atlantia.sca.org/mailman/listinfo/atlantia
>
>  
>