SC - Removes and Feastocrat

[Catherine Deville]

I said:
> >as for feastcrat.  if/when i become active again, i expect that i will
use
> >whatever is common in my local group or what is most prevalent within
> >Meridies as per the dominant Kingdom custom.  as for past usage, we
*were*
> >all feastcrats... and not only was that what was used *historically*
within
> >our Kingdom in the SCA

and His Grace replied:
> I have long described the West Kingdom attitude to historical
> authenticity as "of course it's authentic--we've been doing it for
> years." I intended that as a (critical) joke, but apparently you
> regard the equivalent as a legitimate defense of the practice.

oh no!  I did not intend that at all.  What I meant is simply that they
*were* called feastcrats, therefore when I refer to a person who did a
feast in the past, then I will refer to their position as "feastcrat",
since that is what it *was* called when they (or I) did it.  I was simply
clarifying why I kept refering to myself and others as feastcrat when I was
sharing experiences from the past.

whatever the proper term is in the future, what I did and what I was listed
on the flyer as was as the "feastcrat"... and to call myself something else
is revising my own history and the history of the Society.  which does not
preclude my changing my habits in the future.  nor does it imply that I
make *any* claim to how historically accurate the term we used was.  but I
won't try to change history that I personally experienced.


> The SCA doesn't claim to be about recreating the history of the SCA
> but about recreating the history of the middle ages and the
> renaissance. So the fact that a historical error has been made in the
> past doesn't provide a "historical" argument for continuing to make
> it.

I'm not making an argument for it's continued use.  I'm explaining why I'm
referring to the past position with the term used for it in the past.

Gosh!  are ya'll *all* lawyers?  I haven't had people misunderstand my
intent this much since college (forensic debate). <BEG>

> >(which is relevant to the SCA's internal historical
> >context) but the term was appropos regardless of it's historocity based
on
> >it's etymology.
>
> Perhaps you could expand on the etymological argument. Are you using
> "feastocrat" to mean someone who believes that the feast ought to
> rule, in parallel with a "democrat"--someone who believes that the
> people ("Demos") ought to rule? Or are you using it to mean a feast
> that does rule in a political system ruled by feasts, in parallel
> with an "aristocrat"--one of the rulers in a system where the best
> ("Aristos") rule (at least, that's the theory).

no (and are you being intentionally obfuscatious to pick on me, or are you
honestly looking for clarification ;-)  ... I apologize, but I *don't* know
you well enough mi'Lord to know for sure.) ... I meant it in the original
Greek sense of one who wields power ("kratos")... not in the modern sense
of one who supports a form of government, but rather as the person who
rules that government (or area.)  In the same sense that autocrat is "a
ruler with absolute authority:  a ruler who holds unlimited power and is
answerable to no other person" (and also as an autocrat is "a bossy person:
somebody who dominates other people.", the feastcrat was the person with
final ("absolute") authority over the feast... (and some of them were
*very* "bossy" people who "dominat(ed) other people" in the kitchen.)

I was referring, in what was supposed to be a humorous way (sorry, this
time *I* forgot the emoticon) to the fact that back in the early 80s the
AutoCrat and the FeastCrat tended to have a great deal of autonomy and
authority over their respective positions, sometimes to the extent of
powertripping.   Whether they *had* "absolute authority" and "unlimited
power" they often behaved as though they not only believed that they did
but also that it was their Divine Right to have such.  By the end of the
80's this was changing quickly and drastically... which is one of the
reasons that I feel that it's a good thing to preserve the change in the
usage historically.

I really don't have an opinion about what we use in the future... I bow to
the sensibilities of those to whom it matters and as I said, I fully expect
to use whatever is "PC" (so to speak) in my local group and kingdom.  But
when referring to the *past*, I shall use the term which was used at that
time.  (Which is exactly why you want to change it for the future, isn't
it?)  So I have no need to reverse the direction of the argument...  I
actually refuse to get *into* the argument as to which term is most
appropriate (I happen to like the sound of 'feastcrat', but I really don't
have any attachment beyond that either way.)

But to wind the discussion back around to something which is more relevant
to me in a practical way, if we're going so far as to argue position titles
for the kitchen ... have we documented whether or not women can even be
*in* the kitchen?  (I'm wondering if I need to find a "Bob" as well to be
able to serve in the position (whatever it's called <g>) ;-)

I remain, in service to Meridies,
Lady Celia des L'archier