Heraldry

STDDLY at TINY_TIM.SHSU.EDU STDDLY at TINY_TIM.SHSU.EDU
Sun Apr 2 19:49:30 PDT 1995


> Date sent:      Thu, 30 Mar 1995 19:07:16 -0600
> From:           litch at eden.com (R.Michael Litchfield)
> Subject:        Re: Heraldry

> Do we REALLY need to get  into yet annother interminable 
authenticity debate? > 

No, we do not need another debate. Authenticity is but one part of 
the game that is the S.C.A., one you have no interest in or talent 
at, obviously.

> The problem is that in this area the authenticity nazi's in 
>the tabbards have control, they have stated that you have to play MY 
>way or you can't play > (register your arms). 

There are no "nazis" in tabbards (I guess your diatribe was a cheap 
shot at heralds), we, the ones in the tabbards, "have control" because 
we have taken our time and energy to learn about heraldry, because we 
have volunteered time out from our fun to assist people interested in 
owning an unique set of armory.  

>If all they did was register arms with no regard for
> "periodness" that would be one thing, but they don't.

"If all they did was register arms with no regard for periodness..." 
My, wouldn't it be nice to see "taz" and "micky" and "terminator" and 
"pizza" and "M-16's" and "Ford Mustangs" and...well, you might get my 
drift here. Your statement is absurd and you obviously don't realize 
that the College of Arms has, and does, register many items that 
contain "non-period" charges and treatments. 

> It is an especially difficult area because so much of what they do 
>is entirely subjective. They shoot down device because it lacks a 
>period feel, or it feels like picture book, or it seems too 
>complicated. This opens the gateway for a lot of personal aspects 
>to color ppl's judgement.  
> In my experience the heralds try very hard to shoot down every device
> presented. They search to almost dizzying levels for a reason to kill a
> device. Watching an ILOI comment session is like watching a pack of dogs
> swarm a group of rabbits. If a device is not bullet proof it gets blasted.

I would ask you a couple of questions: Have you ever read the Rules 
for Submission? I (we) are trying extremely hard to end any "personal 
aspects" in the College of Heralds commenting sessions. When, 
exactly, did you last attend a CoH session on an ILoI? I've not seen 
you at one during my tenure. We, in the S.C.A. and in the College of 
Heralds, ARE trying to re- create a period feel in the Society. The 
Society wide rules we follow are "loosely" based on period 
English/Scottish/French heraldic rules and practices. We do try to 
"shoot down" every device presented, mainly because we do not want 
our client's (submitter's) time to be wasted in submitting a device 
that cannot be registered under the current rules. We also do our very 
best to find a way for the submitter to have what they want within 
the current practices and guidelines of the Rules for Submission. I, 
and other heralds, have spent countless hours assisting our clients 
in researching, documenting, and designing armory and names that will 
serve them well in the S.C.A.. As to the "pack of dogs..." well, I 
tend to think of myself as a wolf...

> I was at one where someone submitted a device and would not allow any changes
> because it came to him in a dream. The glee which erupted when someone
> finally found a reason to slam it was sickening. If the device had been
> mine and I had heard the comments some of these "honorable" men and women
> made I would have been so enfuriated I could never pass a herald 
> without feeling the urge to pummel them. The very fact that that 
> particular device was important to the person made thier joy at 
> shooting down the device that much sweeter. 

You know, you have a valid point here. Sometimes people act in a 
manner that shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are not 
""honorable" men and women" 'tis a shame I was not present that (one) 
commenting session. The "debate" would have ended rather abruptly. 
However, this submitter in question had been informed twice before 
that their device would not pass, ask them why they continued to re-
submit something that had been returned before and had no chance of 
passage. I think that your statement, "The very fact...the person 
made thier (sic) joy...that much sweeter.", is very subjective and 
judgemental, "Judge not lest ye be judged...".   

> And dance developed as a socially acceptable way of demonstrating your
> fitness to mate, it moved beyond that to a method of personal expression,
> why can't
> heraldry do the same?

Simply, heraldry very much is, nowadays, a method of personal 
expression.
 
> Our eyesight has gotten a lot better since then.
> -Michael
 
Perhaps our eyesight has gotten better (I actually think, overall, it 
has gotten much worse. No hand to hand combat in the wars to thin out 
the near/far sighted *sigh* Nature's (evolution in action) way is 
much nicer.), perhaps not. The same criteria applies, identifibility 
is paramount in heraldry. If you wish to use (more) modern artistic 
elements in heraldry, join an 19th century Victorian re-creation 
society, Dickens might just be more to your taste.
-Kief 



More information about the Ansteorra mailing list