ANST - aesthetics and class

Dennis Grace amazing at mail.utexas.edu
Wed Aug 27 11:21:28 PDT 1997


Hi all. Aquilanne here.

Lord Stefan replies to Sir Lyonel's posting of:
>*If, however, you can show examples of, say, Medieval kings, commanders, and
>*knights who eschewed ornamental armor and adornment in favor of the cheap
>*munitions armor of their lowborn troops, you might have an interesting
>*research source for an A&S entry.

with:

>But we aren't creating just the life of medieval kings, commanders and
>knights. Yes, we assume everyone, unless told otherwise, is of noble birth.
>But there is no requirement that everyone be of noble birth. I would say
>we are doing re-creation of all classes of the Middle Ages not just the
>nobility. As such I would say there is a place study of the items, behaviours
>and thoughts of all classes.
>
>I do think items that are created should be items that were actually used
>by the particular class. Be careful of trying to create ornamental armor
>that was given as a gift and stuffed in the treasury somewhere. On the
>otherhand, ornamentation on armor that was actually worn and used is to
>be encouraged if it can be supported by evidence. For instance, although
>horned helmets have been found, I think the concenus is that they were
>not used in actual warfare.

First, I'd like to point out that at no time did Lyonel ever *advocate*
people running out and gussying up their seige weapons, or that members of
the SCA must be of noble birth or make any suggestion that anyone limit
their studies in any way. How could any of that possibly be interpreted from
the above snippet? What he did was ask some questions about *whether* there
was any source material on whether seige weaponry was or was not ornamented.
In the snippet to which Lord Stefan replies above, Lyonel is only commenting
on what he believes would be an interesting research paper.

Now.
I feel compelled to repeat: 

*Aesthetics and function are not mutually exclusive.*

*If it was done in period, _it's period_.*

Stefan says:
>But we aren't creating just the life of medieval kings, commanders and
>knights.

No one has suggested that we are. OTOH, who else tends to have seige engines
laying about? I don't know too much about implements of war, but I'd bet a
baker's dozen that most of your *average* folk didn't have a balista in
their back yard. ;->

Stefan also says:
>I do think items that are created should be items that were actually used
>by the particular class.

"The particular class"? What particular class? Weren't all classes that
existed in period, er, *period*?

Stefan also says to:
>Be careful of trying to create ornamental armor
>that was given as a gift and stuffed in the treasury somewhere.

Why? "Be careful" of exactly what? Was it created in period? Then it's
period. Aaaalrighty, then--I'm going to state the obvious here: if a peice
was created to be ornamental and given as a present, then its _function_ was
to _be ornamental and be given as a present_. Concept, eh?

but Lord Stefan generously allows:
>On the
>other hand, ornamentation on armor that was actually worn and used is to
>be encouraged if it can be supported by evidence.For instance, although
>horned helmets have been found, I think the concenus is that they were
>not used in actual warfare.

So are you suggesting that replicas of ceremonial horned helmets made in
period not be acceptable as entries into A&S competitions? Look, I don't
mean to sound like I'm openly pounding someone here, but, for crying out
loud, exactly what is it about aesthetics that's so bloody intimidating?
Aesthetics are period. Ornamentation is period. People liking attractive
things is period. I'll tell you what "is to be encouraged" for entry into an
SCA A&S competition--items and papers that attempt to recreate and research
the arts and sciences of the historical period that we're all about. Items
that were created and used by people in period, people who plowed fields and
sold merchandise and ran households and sat thrones and conquered nations
and gave birth and intrigued and prayed and fought and spun and painted and
traveled and usurped thrones and attended courts and spun and wove and lived
and died. Between 600 and 1600, it's all period--functional, ornamental,
used, not used, given as gifts, not given as gifts. It's all period.

If it was made and used in period, it's period--period!

I'll tack on an idea to mull over here: if an item was _well-crafted_ and
shows a high quality of _workmanship_, then odds are it will display a high
level of _aesthetic apeal_. Think about that a bit.

Aquilanne

============================================================================

To be removed from the Ansteorra mailing list, please send a message to
Majordomo at Ansteorra.ORG with the message body of "unsubscribe ansteorra".



More information about the Ansteorra mailing list