ANST - awards & peasants & peers, oh my

[Laury Torrence]

> -Karl von Augsburg wrote:
> It seems some would love to stereotype me into some category so I can
> be dealt with or dismissed accordingly as they see fit.  That is why
> I'm somewhat reluctant to answer personal questions as well as not
> identify those who formed my attitudes or turn-offs.  It would seem
> (which is part of the point) that some need to know "who" I am, rather
> than considering what has been said.  The post was signed with both
> my name and my SCA name.

Understandable, but at the same time if you would like to reply personally
I'd be interested in knowing who "peed in your wheaties".  As to stereotyping
we're all guilty of it, including yourself in your first posting.  It's natural for folks
to try to quantify things so they can decide how to act/react to them.

> I also do not get every message, just a bundled lump of several e-mails
> which arrive after a considerable delay.  I also did not have the chance
> to go through the 1000+ lines of the bundles until now.  Genevieve de
> Courtanvaux's message arrived much earlier than the Ansteorra
> installment and was replied to.

Again, understandable.  We sometimes forget that not everyone reads their
e-mail more than once a day!

> To answer some questions...  I have never tried to seek any position
> in the SCA.  Thus I have never been rejected for anything and have no
> axes to grind due to something of that nature.
> What I have seen in my life is a growing distaste for the SCA.  When I
> began, it all seemed so innocent and polite on the surface.  As I've
> gotten to know more of the people who "run the show" and who tend to
> have more of these awards, titles, etc. I see how much less than ideal
> things really are.  The politics turn me off.  I see favoritisms, I see
> ass-kissing, I see secret hatreds, talking about people behind their
> backs, I see attempts to prevent other people from doing things, I see
> the little cliques form.  I've heard bad things from those close to
> me about people I respect, which (sorry to say) always leaves questions
> about that person in my mind.  I'd rather not have heard the negative.
> I see more of the "inside" trash.  And sorry, but leaving the company
> of these people is not so easy for reasons I won't address publicly.

Hate to state the obvious, but welcome to the real world, SCA version.
I have learned through the years 2 very important things:  a) no matter 
where you live,work, or play there will be "politics" in some shape, form,
or fashion. b) you usually have to make your own fun.  I'm not particularly
fond of some of the politics in our Society, so I try to stay away from things
that I either have no interest in, or that really piss me off.  I gave up being
"nice" to people I don't like a long time ago, specifically because I hated
being a hypocrite, and it made me sick to my stomach (literally).  Now I
just don't go around those people, and if I can't avoid them, I keep my
mouth shut (mostly).

> This is a far cry from when everything was new and everybody I knew
> seemed to just enjoy playing.  Yes, to an extent, I focus on those at
> the top because the closer I get to some of those the stronger the
> politics are and the more disgusting it gets.  Just look at some of
> the remarks about me from a baronness for the mere suggestion that
> ranks should be minimized.  Perhaps I'm just a victim of hearing from
> people guilty of the things some accuse me of.  I'm getting fed up
> with it.

Yeah, I got pretty disillusioned when the "new" wore off too.  One of the
many reasons I stepped down when I did, was due to some of the things
 that were happening around me which I could no longer stomach.  I had
enough stress at my mundane job already, I didn't need more from something
that was supposed to be fun.

> It seems those that don't aspire and just play the game are the most
> free from this problems.  I don't hear their opinions of everyone else
> or perhaps their jealousies of those people.  I don't hear how crappy
> so-and-so's work is, or about how much so-and-so thinks of themself, or
> why so-and-so didn't deserve that or why so-and-so should have gotten
> it instead.
> Many who do aspire, to me, seem to be of the sort that crave power.
> The SCA is a place for exploring fantasies of nobility.  Once they get
> there, they get this air about themselves.  Of all the "brass-hats"
> I've met, I've not known many without some sort of air of superiority.
> I know this is not always the case, but to me it's more often than
> not.  How many "brass-hats" go from camp to camp, meeting people without
> some dignified act or entourage?  How many brass hats shout to passers
> by to "come join us"?  "Here, sit here in my chair, I can stand".
> "Want something to eat?"  "Who are you, where are you from?"

Look me up at an event sometime!  You'll have to track me down by hearing
me laughing, because I almost never have my "hat" on.  I spend most of my
time checking out the stuff that interests me,  and visiting with folks I only see at
SCA events.  I spend the rest of my time partying with my Amazon Sisters and
those of the Swein Brothars as are present, and anyone else who wanders into
our camp.  Beware, I've been seen belly-dancing, and plying "innocent" bystanders
with the evil honey liquour I make!
Unfortunately, a lot of those people of whom you speak *usually* have serious
self esteem issues in the "real world", and tend to overcompensate for their
feelings of low self-worth by weilding any position they achieve in the Society
like a club.

<snip-o-matic - this next part has been edited as well>
> As far as knight-hood issues are concerned...
> First off, my term-limits on knights was primarly a suggestion to bring
> the brass-hat to regular guy ratio more in line.  My thoughts are not
> exclusive to the knighthood, but I can't really think of anything as
> glaringly ironic as a knight who can't fight.
> My point of view was obviously a bit different than the officially
> defined requirements "to be knighted", as Timo pointed out.  But my
> view of a knight is that of an elite fighter who should be able to
> fight, not just at one time in their life.  My opinion (which is, by
> the way all we're talking about) would be that this requirement be
> on-going or else we might as well grant "honorary knighthoods" as was
> the case with, say, Paul McCartney or Elton John.
> Are terms or requalifications really that far-fetched?
> Inman doesn't stay king forever
> and doesn't just get to come up and say he wants to be king next.  He
> has to re-earn it (no matter how easy he makes it look).  To kind of
> answer the question about would I dare question Inman's right to be
> a knight.  I wouldn't expect him to fail a test, would you?

There's really two issues here being addressed as one.  First, the "brass
hat ratio" thing: You happen to live in a "brass saturated" area of the
kingdom, I began playing in Elfsea, and when I went to my second event
(a Steppes Warlord), it seemed like I was curtseying every other step!  It
can take some getting used to, but REALLY, most of us are nice folks!
Secondly, as far as I have ever seen, there are NO Knights who can't
fight.  There are however, those who have with the wisdom of years (and
in a few cases, injuries), chosen to train the up-and-coming new fighters, and
their Squires, rather than take the field and risk a serious injury.  And then there
are those who can STILL open a can of whup-a** on you, and tattoo their names
on your body in bruises.  Their skills are the same, their personal choices are
different........
And I'm not too sure about Inman, who had been dubbed the "Once and Every
Other King" (Sorry Chuck!) long before I ever made his aquaintance.  And to the
other question, that's a big nope!

Sincerely,
Baroness Caterina  (actually a nice person with PMS at the moment!)
Bryn Gwlad
J-LTorrence at worldnet.att.net (this will be changing soon due to mundane stuff)


============================================================================
Go to http://www.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.