At 12:21 PM 5/19/2005, you wrote:
>--- In Authentic_SCA@yahoogroups.com, lilinah@e... wrote:
> >>But the Arabic and the Japanese do not? Never mind, separate
> > Uh, err, ahem...
> > There were significant Muslim territories *within* Europe in "SCA
> > period"...
>Which is why I didn't say "Muslim". I made reference to a *specific*
>Islamic ethicity that appears frequently in the SCA [Note for the
>illiterate - I'm not saying that they shouldn't appear in the SCA, my
>point was that Native America/Indian personas, as a rule, tend to
>disturb people in the SCA (yes, yes, I know there are individuals who
>pull it off, which doesn't, in fact, invalidate the point) when
>personas based on Japanese, Chinese, Indian, Arab, Persian, and
>similar cultures aren't even blinked at.
>The only reason I can think of for this is plain old American white
>guilt, which is ... unfortunate.
When the SCA and I were both young, the way the Japanese, etc. cultures
snuck in the back door was by the concept that any culture with significant
contact with Western Europe was fair game. There were a few Native
Americans, a few Aztecs, etc. However, it was difficult to substantiate
the significant contact concept with the American cultures once they made
it more specific that the idea was of a "foreign national" attending a
Western European court (a distinction that is often ignored by the current
membership of the SCA), as the bulk of the Americans at European courts
were there against their will.
Yes, Mrs. John Rolfe is a notable exception.
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 266.11.12 - Release Date: 5/17/2005