[MR] Peerage questions

[The Sheltons]

Lady Bianca,

I think that your questions have been wonderful opportunities for open 
discussion about process and perceptions.  The two are all too often not 
very similar.

As to your comment below...
>No, I don’t view that relationship as a clique.  I view the various 
>households as cliques.  And the orders too, to an extent.  Please don’t be 
>insulted since the word only means ‘an exclusive group of people who 
>identify with each other and are a subset of a larger group’, which is 
>precisely what they are, really.  It’s absolutely period, too.<

...yes, the word clique may be accurate but I suspect most would agree that 
it has a rather unpleasant connotation.  As email is often misunderstood and 
having been "bitten" by not carefully chosing a phrase, I too found the 
choice of the word "clique" to be worrisome.

And regarding your posting below...
>What I view as unfair is the notion that it is acceptable for it to take 
>unassociated individuals longer to become a peer.  I clearly understand 
>your points about peers needing to know who you are to vote on you or not- 
>well said.  But _accepting_ the idea that people must work harder just 
>because they’re not associated as 'the way things should be' seems 
>imbalanced.  Maybe they never found a compatible peer who didn’t already 
>have many associates.  Or maybe they were so busy doing an art or science 
>or service they didn't stop to pick one peer.  So it reads to me like you’re 
>saying that if you don’t pick one peer, you’ve got to work harder and that’s 
>as it should be.  Which is where I disagree a bit.  I firmly believe that 
>you learn best from many teachers rather than just one. <

...I understand that you have this perception.  No, perhaps the word belief 
is more accurate.  In hopes of offering more than opinion and my own 
experience, I went to the OP for my own Order (the Pelican) but honestly 
could not remember if many of the folks were or were not Associates.  I do 
know that most were not Proteges.  I think some were Squires.

I was never a Protege.  My husband was a Squire then Apprentice to Sir 
Aelfred of Cres who is now a triple peer (KSCA, OL, OP).  I was not in 
fealty to him but did benefit from his counsel and frankly the counsel of 
his circle of contacts.  I myself have been a peer since 1999.  It took me 
several years to take a student and my first I did not seek out.  I still 
felt too young as a peer.  She is now a Pelican in her own right but the 
lion's share of that path she walked before our relationship began.  Until 
one recently became the Baroness of Caer Mear, I had two Proteges, Melisent 
and Meriall.  But what is more significant to the discussion is that I am an 
active mentor to several other "near peers"  (folks I believe walk the path 
and have the stuff to become peers) and to several others who have become 
peers within recent years.  Of those, only a couple have been formal 
associates of a peer (Pelican, Laurel, Knight or Royal.)

As a Pelican, I have been privy to discourse on many individuals who are 
active in service in this Kingdom.  I assure you, whether they are or are 
not a Protege or associate rarely enters into the discussion, and then, 
usually when we feel there is an area of potential growth identified. 
Finding a way to guide those without even informal relationships can be 
tricky for us.  And, I have indeed seen Peers ask for more time for growth 
for their associate...perhaps even lengthening the time it took for their 
recognition. The opposite of your hypothesis.

I am not saying that you may not have clearcut examples that you feel 
support your contention.  I can only say that I do not perceive this to be 
the case in our Order.

Having a Peer-Student relationship does do a few things.  It offers you 
entre' into a different circle but that same entre' can be made on your own 
merit.  I know several non-Peers who breeze easily in and out of a gaggle of 
Peers with ease.  It also moves you up on the "pecking order" for my time. 
As a wife, mother, homemaker, full time employee, etc...I have limited SCA 
resources as do most Peers.  My first mentorship responsibility is to my 
Protege.  Anything left goes to those who seek me out as a mentor and then 
the remainder is available for whoever is left.

I do have dear friends who have chosen to not have a sole Peer.  I have 
cautioned them that seeking out too many mentors can actually be confusing, 
fragmenting and frankly, THAT might delay growth in an area.

Again, just my experience. Yours may vary.  Both are indeed valid.

Dame Anne le Coeur, OP