Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Guild/fellowship

Expand Messages
  • Evian Blackthorn
    Ragnar Ketilsson wrote a long message on 1-31-01 at 657 pm CST. I will not quote all of it, but I have some comments to make. This Grand Fellowship seems more
    Message 1 of 3 , Feb 1, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Ragnar Ketilsson wrote a long message on 1-31-01 at 657 pm CST. I will not quote all of it, but I have some comments to make.
      "This Grand Fellowship seems more about calling attention to archers in circumstances where their sport is not immediately obvious, up to and including providing recognitions not sanctioned by the various Laurel Kingdoms."
      My feelings are that it is almost exclusively designed to provide recognition SCA wide for archers who have already been recognized by one of the various Laurel Kingdoms, but in a way that glorifies the archer beyond what the recognizing Kingdom intended.
      "From the rawest newcomer to the archer dinosaur who has held every archer's post in the SCA we are all already part of a fellowship both rich and varied, whose sole criteria is essentially "...Want to shoot today?". In our actions we declare ourselves archers, and by our actions we define what kind of archers we are today."
      My feelings are that this 'Grand Fellowship' is trying to define 'archers' as only those who have a certain level of profeciency, at least as far as any fellowship. "If you're good enough, we'll welcome you to the archer's fellowship" sort of idea.
      "This proposal states, in an early paragraph, "...But there is no Society wide order or group recognizing outstanding skill in archery as the Order of Chivalry does tourney combat, the Order of the Laurel excellence in Arts and Sciences, or the Order of the Pelican rewards service". "
      In fact, the whole proposal started off by Sir Jon reporting about the BOD refusing to consider a fourth Peerage, and then his proposal of a "Grand Fellowship".
      "While not mentioned explicitly under the numbered intents, a clear and repeated theme here is the mention of the Grand Fellowship in the context of the Chivalry, Laurel and Pelican. Indeed, the only SCA-wide goal the proposal mentions is, "Perhaps, one of those goals might be to work toward peerage level recognition for archery and other related skills.". "
      I caught that too! And while I would not object to Peerage level recognition for archery and other related skills, I see no need for a fourth peerage. I think the focus should be more on striving (individually, by our own skills) to show the Peerages we are their equals, if we actually are such. And for the "other related skills" Ragnar mentions, bowyers, fletchers, marshals and others, other than 'pure archers' who do nothing but shoot, already have that availability. In either A&S (Laurels) or service (Pelicans), or both.
      "This proposal carries a substantial focus on peerage orders, and explicitly sets out to create an SCA-wide vehicle for recognition equivalent to them. As such, this proposal may be legitimately viewed as an attempt to begin to create a shadow peerage ala the White Scarf. "
      Not only the proposal, but most of the conversation as well, excluding those that are concerned with what the insignia should look like.
      "If the Fellowship is seen as another quasi-peerage, what impacts would that perception have on potential archery Laurel and archery Pelican candidates?"
      As Ragnar outlined above, "this proposal may be legitimately viewed" by the powers that be, especially, as an attempt to do just that, create another quasi-peerage. If viewed that way by them, it will be YEARS before the archers can actually receive the recognition of these peers. Look how long White Scarves have been around (in Ansteorra, at least), and they still are not there.
      "On balance, I suggest that the current proposal offers insufficient benefit for the potential costs."
      I concur! And go one step farther. Not only will the proposal for a "Grand Fellowship" do this, so will the idea of a Society wide 'guild'. Maybe not quite as much for the guild idea. That will have to be determined by how the Peers PERCEIVE the guild. I know, some of you say you don't care how the Peers perceive things. But if you don't, why are you trying to build a quasi-peerage?
      I was, like Ragnar, uneasy with the 'fellowship' proposal. I felt that the 'guild' approach was the way to go. I then read Ragnar's posting. I am no longer uneasy about the fellowship idea. I am now vehemently opposed to it. And I no longer support the idea of the guild either. Not quite vehemently opposed, but still opposed. I had a 'charter' for the guild about 85% complete. I WILL NOT CONTINUE to work on it. Nor will I share my ideas on it any more than I already have. If others feel otherwise, and proceed, that is their choice. I just will not be part of it. But I will still think of myself as part of the REAL "Grand Fellowship" of Archers.





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • wyvern@megahits.com
      ... You assume that establishing a society wide guild is necessarily the same thing as building a quasi-peerage -- it isn t. As the person who first brought
      Message 2 of 3 , Feb 1, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        > as much for the guild idea. That will have to be determined by how the
        > Peers PERCEIVE the guild. I know, some of you say you don't care how
        > the Peers perceive things. But if you don't, why are you trying to
        > build a quasi-peerage?

        You assume that establishing a society wide guild is necessarily
        the same thing as "building a quasi-peerage" -- it isn't. As the
        person who first brought up the idea of aguild, let me assure you
        that a "quasi-peerage" is the last thing I intended and, if that's the
        way the proposed guild starts to turn, I'm right out of the picture.

        > vehemently opposed to it. And I no longer support the idea of the
        > guild either. Not quite vehemently opposed, but still opposed. I

        With respect, given that the guild only exists as the vaguest
        beginning of an idea, what is there to be opposed to at this early
        stage? Are you so convinced that there is no possible worthwhile
        model under which such a guild could be organized?

        I'm curious as to what could possibly have brought on such a
        sudden and decisive change of heart?

        Macsen


        ------------------------------------------------------------
        Get Medieval at Mad Macsen's http://www.MedievalMart.com/
        *** BUY *** SELL *** BID *** HAGGLE ***
        Look for the East Kingdom Fundraiser Auction coming soon!
        ------------------------------------------------------------
      • Jean-Paul Blaquiere
        ... Evian, I do appreciate your postings, they are always well thought out and constructive, however, I have no idea what to
        Message 3 of 3 , Feb 1, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          > On Feb 01, Evian Blackthorn scratched in indelible ink :

          <snippety snip another long post>

          Evian, I do appreciate your postings, they are always well thought out and
          constructive, however, I have no idea what to make of this last one. It seems
          to be quoting previous posts of both yours and Ragnars (and possibly others
          too) and I cannot for the life of me work out what is new and what has already
          been said


          /Jean-Paul... budding pointy-thing launcher
          --
          Jean-Paul Blaquière || Avatar of Computational
          japester@... || Thaumaturgy
          http://japester.ucc.aan.au ||
          The only thing keeping me from being a serial killer is my distast for
          manual labour - dilbert
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.