ANST - awards & peasants & peers, oh my

[Dennis and Dory Grace]

Karl 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, alas, is human nature. We tend to try to catalog things and people
into categories for easy perspective access. It's a very useful tendency,
but can be problematic at times.

>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. 

Welcome to the human race. Karl, any time you get enough people together
that come together often enough to form some sort of cohesive social
entity, you're going to have politics (the definition of which does vary
somewhat from person to person). If you were to join the PTA and get
involved there, you'd eventually see the same things. If you were to join a
church and get involved there, you'd eventually see the same things. It's
human nature, and will come out even in an organization who purports to
hold dear the ideals of chivalry and honor (and even those ideals hold
different meaning and definition from person to person). It's unfortunate
and, yes, can be very discouraging at times. Ever heard of the Serenity
Prayer? Comes in handy  when you're feeling discouraged about crap sometimes.

>This is a far cry from when everything was new and everybody I knew
>seemed to just enjoy playing.

The SCA has never gone back to being the golden, shimmering thing it was to
me when I was new. But that's ok. I've allowed it to be other things for me
along the way that have been just as valuable.

>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.  

Your first post was obviously written out of being frustrated. Her post was
obviously written out of being frustrated and feeling insulted. Perhaps she
didn't put as much effort into trying to be as understanding as she could
have, but your statement and implication above suggests that perhaps you're
not putting as much effort into trying to be as understanding as you could
be. Just a thought.

>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.

I'll tell you what, some of the nastiest stuff I've ever heard come out of
anyone's mouths have come from peers, royals, mid-level ranked players, and
folk with little to no rank. Assholes come in all sizes and ranks, and I've
yet to meet anyone who didn't have an opinion about something, regardless
of what they're wearing on their head or around their neck or waist. 

>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. 

Well, now we delve into the realm of "do they have a real life?" The SCA
has its share of individuals who, for whatever reason, don't have a lot in
the way of accomplishments in the "real world" and the SCA turns into a
kind of strange, self-esteem crutch for them. That's not always a bad
thing; I've seen very insecure people come into the SCA, earn recognition
for service or art or whathaveyou, and carried that back to apply to thier
everyday life. On the other hand, there are folk out there who are
devestatingly insecure and that insecurity sometimes plays itself out as
any number of negative traits or behaviours; and, of course, the more
insecure they are, the more important their rank is to them. It's an
unfortunate thing, but rather than just throwing your hands up in disgust,
you can choose to try to be more understanding and not depend on others to
shape your experience for you. You might be surprised; some folk who come
off as the most gruff or standoffish can just be big ol'  shy teddybears. 


>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?"

Umm, how many non-brass hats do that? Lyonel and I wandered around all over
the campsite at Steppes Warlord--where there were *well* over 1000 people,
mind you--and neither of us were wearing our coronets and even though he
had on his belt & chain, I wasn't wearing my medalions and we were dressed
pretty darn casually, and the only people calling us over were people we
already knew. Funny thing that. It's another aspect of human nature that we
tend to spend time with people we already know, whatever our rank might be.

>As far as knight-hood issues are concerned...

You don't even mention, let alone address, any of the parallels to other
martial arts situations people have pointed out. Why?

> 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.

Back to the blackbelt analogy--do you think black belts should be pulled
from folk when they're not able to perform at blackbelt level, for whatever
reason? Because the white belt in the SCA *is* a rough equivalent to a
blackbelt in heavy fighting.

>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.  So, in the last
>note, the enthusiastic old guy who joined the Society too late, and
>who may have "learned his stuff", but just couldn't "do his stuff"
>could still become a knight and at least equal to the old knight.

"Honorary knighthood." Hmmm. How about a rank equal to knighthood but that
doesn't imply martial experience? Like, say, a Pelican or a Laurel? If this
hypothetical fellow is enthusiastic and active in service, he could very
well be recognized eventually as a Pelican, or, if  he's of an academic or
artistic bent, a Laurel? I also don't quite understand what you mean by
"learned his stuff but can't do his stuff."

>Are terms or requalifications really that far-fetched? 

Crowns have to "requalify." King's Champions have to "requalify." Queen's
champions have to "requalify." Steppes Warlords have to "requalify." These
are competion-based titles that reflect a day's prowess. The estate of
knight is a peerage which recognizes idividuals who not only excel in their
martial art overall, they ideally possess qualities which are considered
necessary for peerage. There's no reason to make everything temporary. You
don't expect someone with a college degree in history to resign that degree
just because they decide to go into accounting. You can't take the years of
effort and learning away, why desire their loss of the sheepskin?

>You have to take
>an eye exam every few years to renew your driver's license.  Mario
>Andretti doesn't automatically get to race in the Indy 500 every year.

But he *is* automatically deferred to when it comes to status based on his
experience and qualifications.

There's nothing wrong with questioning the status quo. There's nothing
unusual about getting discouraged by less than honorable behaviour. There's
nothing dishonorable about dealing with dissolutionment. Just try to keep
an open mind. Despite popular belief, power does not necessarily corrupt.
It's not that easy. Also keep in mind that it's a little too easy to fall
back on predjudices to deal with frustration; keep thinking and keep trying
to understand. Try to do it without condemnation of things that are outside
of your own personal ken.

Aquilanne


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