Is it period because its documented, or documented to be period?
- So as to not be part of the thread that must die, but since I think
this is a good topic of discussion, I figured id rename while
From a scientific standpoint, if what you are doing is trying to
recreate techniques, do some experimental archeology as it were, then
documentation is very important for the piece, just for yourself, even
if never shown to another person. Remind yourself. right, i did that
joint that way to see if it looked like that woodcut , and how sturdy
To me, the concept of proving you know more is odious. I for one LOVE
to win arguments and prove I was right, but its not about knowing
more, its about teaching and sharing what I do know. Because of that,
I love LOSING arguments even more. Because it means I'VE learned
something, which is awesome. One should never stop learning.
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 5:02 PM, donat0 <donat0@...> wrote:
> I totally agree with Eric on this. every event I attend, I get kicked in the
> teeth by a very interesting question to myself.
> Is this period. Is it period to provide period documentation. Is it period
> to say its NOT period.
> Although we are discussing woodworking, this thread is about SCA culture,
> and how it evolves. Frankly, the SCA is not going in a medieval direction.
> Although we may want to keep this topic on a woodworking topic, we need to
> make sure what we are doing is medieval, and not what we want to force to
> assure our own agenda's.
> Here are 2 questions for each of you to answer.
> 1. When you are documenting what you make, is it period, or are you just
> proving it is period. There is a fine line, but its about who you want to
> 2. Why are you documenting it. To prove its authentic, or just to get an
> Both are good questions. I ask these questions because everytime I attend an
> event, I get the idea that the entire purpose is not about experiencing what
> period people lived in period, but proving some people know more than other
> people do.
> Is this right? I think not.
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Eric Hess" <ejhess@...> wrote:
>> There are, I'm sure, a number of people who do not care about the
>> political nature of the 'Nazi' discussion, but there are likely equally many
>> who feel that the conversation was initially acceptable, and then veered
>> into an unacceptable tangent with a pair of posts. I'm one of those, and I
>> am very disappointed that someone chose to make an attack in this thread,
>> which came out of, as far as I can see it, nowhere. The attack against
>> Conservative Christians was an unacceptable, IMO, breach of the spirit of
>> this thread. That unacceptable attack was met by an equally unacceptable
>> response on the part of the gentleman attacking Liberals.
>> While I understand the relevance, tenuous though it may be, of the Nazi
>> discussion, what either of those attacks had to do with woodworking escapes
>> me entirely. On this board, we have the potential of forming a community
>> that grows as a unified body, helping each other through our combined wisdom
>> and knowledge, and I know many of us joined this group for that reason. Too
>> often of late, on many message boards I am a part of, I have seen that
>> fellowship and goodwill break down and devolve into petty bickering. I hope
>> that we can all take a minute to consider why we reenact, why we help
>> others, and how we would be treated by our fellow men and women, and
>> rededicate ourselves towards helping others and extending the charity that
>> has been extended us in the past.
>> In service,