ANST - A clarification (was Rant)

[John Ruble]

Breandan said (in clarification):
<snip>

> Putting into an example, which would you rather have: a gang banger who 
> knows that the first crusades was a rapascious invasion using religion to 
> claim land and booty and has no role models, thus no problem blowing one
> of 
> our officers away.
> 
> or a 15 year old kid who was raised on stories of knights of old and took 
> the chivalric code to heart and chose to live with honor rather than lead
> a 
> life of crime.
> 
I understand your point, and agree that the virtues taught us by our legends
are worth preserving and passing on at every opportunity.  But even the
classic legends were quick to point out "incorrect behavior", and portrayed
people trying to correct it.

In a sense, we are doing that ourselves with your very example.  We know how
much "incorrect behavior" occurred at the hands of the original crusaders.
But rather than buying in to that, we strive to show the other side of the
coin, to live the other side of the actual chivalric life.  Just like some
historical figures of that time, we are attempting to make up for the
shortcomings of our brethren by living the life of legends.

Those deeds of greed and anger are important for us to remember.  They serve
as a lesson on "what not to do".  And just as important are the deeds of
great archetypes overcoming these, whether based on fact or fiction.  But
the glory of one side is nothing without the harshness of the other. Without
both, you can have no revelation, and achieve nothing. 

Ulf Gunnarsson

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