[Bards] old way vs new ways charter

Michael Silverhands silverhands at sbcglobal.net
Mon Oct 30 08:29:34 PST 2006

On Oct 30, 2006, at 8:09 AM, Simone Ui'Dunlaingh wrote:

> I will try.
> <snip>
> the reason for this structure is to help in th movement of information
> between the bards. to have a storehouse of information for old bards
> and new ones. to have a person for groups to contact should they need
> asistance with a cometition.  To promote our craft. to have a resorce
> old and new bards could use. to be in the college was a matter of
> choice not neccesity. the charter alows for our unity as bards of
> ansteorra while allowing us the freedom of our own individual
> autononmy.
> The reason i know the charter so well is i was honored with the
> privledge of writing it, and rewriting it until we got something the
> majority could agree on.
> simone
>> Clearly, I'm missing something. If that's the purpose of the officers
>> of the College... then it seems to me there's no need for it. But,
>> obviously, you and Robin *do* see a clear need... so, equally
>> obviously, you are seeing something that I am not. Can you please
>> clear up this confusion?
>> Thanks,
>> Michael

Thank you, Simone and Willow, for taking the time to answer my  
question. :-)

Now I'm going to ask another hard question. (I'd rather resolve them  
now -- when the asking and answering can strengthen us -- than later  
-- when they can undermine what we're trying to do.)

Tell me again why the college failed? (I thought about it, but chose  
not to say something gentle like "went dormant". It failed. Let's  
just acknowledge that and build from there.) If the charter was  
sound, the organization was healthy, and the drive was there from the  
people behind it, why did it die? Why is it not, today, a vibrant and  
active part of the Kingdom?

(The other side of that question is: given the answer, what can we do  
differently this time so we don't go down the same road again?)

I know that an explanation has already been given (paraphrased, "the  
Crown wasn't bardic-friendly, and certain Nobles in Fief weren't  
bardic-friendly, so we couldn't continue"), but, frankly, I am having  
a hard time understanding and accepting that answer. That boils down  
to "it wasn't our fault, other people did this to us". Sorry, but --  
truly meaning no offense -- that just sounds like denial, and not  
taking responsibility. If this group had been healthy, I can't see  
how a single bardic-unfriendly Crown (with a reign of 6 months) or a  
few bardic-unfriendly Nobles could shut it down. (For that matter, I  
was Baron of Stargate from 1995 to 2000. I'd like to think I knew the  
other branch nobles fairly well, and I can't name one who was -- to  
my knowledge -- unfriendly to bardic. On the contrary, several of  
them *were* bards.) So... can someone either please clarify that  
explanation, or offer a different one?


More information about the Bards mailing list