CR - No P-word for now!

[Lee Martindale]

Paul Mitchell wrote:
> 
> Mike C. Baker wrote:

> > Galen, herein lies one of the basic disagreements in the arguments
> > for and against seeking an advance in status for the Region. While I
> > certainly respect those who wear or have worn Crown or Coronet, I
> > don't make the leap to supporting the concept that these same
> > individuals are necessarily the best leaders. They just happen to
> > have been the folk with enough martial prowess in single combat to
> > attain victory upon a given day and in a particular tournament.
> > Based upon several examples within the history of the SCA, some of
> > which are part of Ansteorran history, I *can't* make a very good
> > case for what I see as your position here.
> 
> The advantage we'd have with a Prince is that we'd have a leader
> whose right to stand up say "go that way!" is unquestioned.

Unquestioned by whom, my lord?

As Amra has said, a good day on the list field does not necessarily
equate to possession of the myriad skills necessary to achieve all
you have envisioned for a central principality.  I share his
opinion, doing so based on my own observations of the Ansteorran
throne and its inhabitants.  We have been fortunate that so many
have possessed both martial talent and leadership skill in abundance,
but few will admit that it has always (or will always) be the case.
How can it be any different within the principality?

>  I
> think I have a pretty good idea of who most of our Princes would
> be for the first couple of years at least, and I think we'd do
> pretty well.  But even so, a bad Prince for six months would
> be better, I think, than the no leadership our region has had
> these several years.

Would that not depend on just how bad that prince might be during
those six months, at what juncture in the formation and buildling of
the principality such a reign might come, how much damage he or she
might do in the allotted time, and how many current and prospective
members might be soured on further participation?
 
> > The leaders who will count most in growing the SCA, and this Region,
> > are those who are not only administrators but also recruiters and
> > trainers. Not only the fighters and their consorts, but the dancers
> > and theirs. Not only the artisans, but also those who clean the hall
> > after an event.
> 
> Dancers are great.  I love it myself.  But I'm not the guy who gets
> musicians to play, teaches the dances (except on rare occasion),
> or decides what we'll dance next.  Leaders do that.  I'm seldom
> the person directing clean-up, but sometimes I'm there cleaning.
> Not everybody's a leader.  Some of us are participants.  Nothing
> wrong with that.

Nothing at all.  But the point Amra seems to be making here, and one
I champion, is that leadership does not necessarily sit on thrones,
enter list fields or wear those lovely coronets.  Leaders are those who
lead, whether it be by facilitating, autocrating, coordinating, teaching
or any one of a number of less-than-visible pursuits.  To disparage
what they do, for any reason up to and including the lack of title
or combative skill, is unworthy.

> Local officers/leadership should be involved to the greatest
> extent possible.  As Tip O'Neill used to say, "all politics
> is local".

Indeed it is.  As is organizational strength.


-- 
Lee Martindale /Llereth Wyddffa an Myrddin / The Copper Bard
email: lmartin at airmail.net
http://web2.airmail.net/lmartin

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