CR - No P-word for now!

Paul Mitchell pmitchel at flash.net
Wed Jan 28 14:30:17 PST 1998


Galen here!

Just a couple of Llereth's points I wanted to also address:

Lee Martindale wrote:
> 
> Paul Mitchell wrote:
> > 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?

No one would argue that all SCA rulers are good rulers.
But I will argue that it's a good thing that we have
rulers in the SCA.  On the whole, I think they do more
good than harm.  I _don't_ expect anything different
within a principality.

Unquestioned by whom?  I have yet to see a even a bad
ruler's right to lead questioned.  I've seen his decisions
debated, and even criticized them myself, but I've never
seen a King or Prince who was trying in good conscience
to lead as he thought best have his standing as a leader
challenged.  I wish we had someone like that for the
central part of this kingdom, and some good mechanism
for choosing them, and limiting their powers and terms.
Like maybe _Corpora's_ limits on the powers of the 
Coronet.

> >  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?

I carefully expressed the above as opinion.  I don't believe that
a Prince & Princess, assuming as bad a reign as might be reasonably
likely to expect over, say, 5 years, would have a worse effect on
the area than the effect that I think our present lack of leadership
is now having.  Reasonable people may, in good faith, disagree of
course.
 
> > > 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.

I've been in the SCA for 19 years, come May.  Of that time, I've
spent 4 months and three weeks sitting on a throne with royal
authority.  The rest of the time, when I've been a leader, it 
was just the sort that you and Amra are talking about.  I hope
and believe that my success in this sort of leadership is why 
I was made a Master of the Pelican.  I'm not a leader because
I'm a peer; they made me a peer because I lead (among other
reasons).  The SCA cannot function without the kind of volunteer
leaders we're talking about.  But the SCA as we've always known
it also needs royalty.
 
> > 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.

Quite so.  Isn't it great to be able to conclude on common
ground?
 
> --
> Lee Martindale /Llereth Wyddffa an Myrddin / The Copper Bard
> email: lmartin at airmail.net
> http://web2.airmail.net/lmartin

- Galen of Bristol
pmitchel at flash.net
============================================================================
Go to http://www.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.



More information about the Central mailing list