Galen answers the posts about Reality (l

[Phillip Stallcup]

	IMO the Galen's point, please correct me if I'm wrong, is the
distinction being given between the two. Using the term mundane indicates to
many that their non-SCA life is somehow less than their SCA life. The
definitions of mundane in the Websters dictionary are:

Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English mondeyne, from Middle French mondain, from Late Latin
mundanus, from Latin mundus world
Date: 15th century
1 : of, relating to, or characteristic of the world
2 : characterized by the practical, transitory, and ordinary : COMMONPLACE <the
mundane concerns of day-to-day life>
synonym see EARTHLY

The only place that I remember seeing mundane used as a detrimental term was in
the Piers Anthony Xanth novels. However, here it seems to have taken on that
tone. As for reality, to me the SCA is just as real as anything else that I do.
Sure, we can say Kein pretends to be King, or Burke pretends to be a Knight if
we want to, but the reality is that Kein is King, I know not yet :), he is King
of Ansteorra which is a branch of the Society of Creative Anachronism, and
Burke is a Knight of Ansteorra. These things are real, and in many cases the
offices that we hold have very non-SCA type responsibilities as I'm sure the
paperwork that anyone in a Kingdom level office has to take care of displays
prominently. Even fighting, no we aren't killing each other, but we are really
hitting each other with rattan and epée's (sp?), and quite frankly my bruises
are real. Would it be any more real if we were using live steel? More dangerous
perhaps, but not any more or less real. The skills that we learn from the SCA
are very real, and sometimes can even be turned in to jobs that extend outside
the SCA. And of course, the way we treat each other is real. We aren't really
so-and-so from such-and-such, but those are our personas, and who those people
are is a direct reflection of who we really are. There are some people that I
know only by their SCA name, and if I saw them on the street out of garb,
that's how I would address them, and I don't see anything wrong with that.

To me an oath in the SCA is the same as an oath outside the SCA. To some people
this presents a heavier burden than to others. Life is a balance of choices
that we make every day, some choices go with others, some go against. It is up
to each individual to decide what choices to make. Do we make wrong choices?
You bet. Are some choices worse than others? Definitely. That's just life. If I
swore an oath to say the military, and then swore an oath to the SCA crown, and
the crown requested that I divulge military secrets, I simply would not tell
them. For me the oath to the US government would be more important than the
oath to the SCA, not any more real, just more important. 

We should also remember that we are not forced to do anything in the SCA. You
do not have to swear fealty, you do not have to hold office, you do not have to
be a member. Ok, you have to sign the waiver if you are to be a member or to
fight, but that's the Society protecting itself legally. When we see those
individuals that the SCA is their life, that's the choice that they have made,
and should have no bearing on the choices that we make for ourselves. Do these
people hurt others with their actions? Sometimes, but that's not a SCA thing,
that's their thing. Association should not imply guilt. Many merchants follow
their trade as a means of life, and they don't hurt anyone. We ARE responsible
for our own actions, even though it doesn't seem that way sometimes. If you do
it, you're responsible no matter where the 'blame' actually falls. 

Ok, I'll stop now. Sorry that this went on for so long, I'm sure you're all
bored by now....either that or you've deleted it already :)


Llygoden Llwyd
Barony of Weisenfeuer
mka Phillip Stallcup
stalpl at integris-health.com