![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Grumble, grumble, Order of Defense, grumble
So the movement to create a Peerage for fencing has reached the point of a formal proposal, out for comment. Do I send another letter to the Board?
On the one hand, I think there should totally be a path to Peerage for those who have had a major impact through fencing; I think that's true of every activity.
OTOH, I think this is the *worst* way we can possibly deal with that. Rapier *ought* to be recognized through the Chivalry, and I'm still cranky that that doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hades of ever happening -- the armored fighters hold the levers of power, and by and large they won't allow it. Failing that, we ought to reinterpret the Laurel or Pelican to be more accepting, or at the *very* worst, have an Order that is designed to be welcoming of all martial activities. As it is, creating a Fencing-Only Peerage means that we are inevitably going to have to create more and more Peerage Orders in the name of fairness. If we're recognizing Fencing today, we should absolutely have one for Archery, and then, I don't know -- Equestrian? Thrown Weapons? (And God help us when someone points out that excellence in execution and behaviour isn't the sole province of the martial arts.)
From an organizational-design standpoint, it's idiotic and damaging: the rise of Zillions of Specialized Awards is one of the worst blights on the SCA today, and I utterly hate the idea of it spreading to the Peerage. We like to say that our awards aren't just "merit badges", but that is certainly what they're coming to look like, and they get steadily less meaningful as they get sliced-and-diced more finely.
All of which said, we have a cultural problem: we are deeply failing all of the martial communities other than heavy list, and that *does* need to be fixed. IMO, the only thing worse than the current proposal is the status quo, and the proposal on the table may be the only politically feasible way to fix it.
Hence, grumble.
(I hate the name "Order of Defense" as well. Would anyone care to argue that "Order of Chivalry" is a name worth emulating? I've always felt that it was one of the more painfully mundane anachronisms we have. I wish someone would show the imagination and backbone to give this proposed Order a real name...)
On the one hand, I think there should totally be a path to Peerage for those who have had a major impact through fencing; I think that's true of every activity.
OTOH, I think this is the *worst* way we can possibly deal with that. Rapier *ought* to be recognized through the Chivalry, and I'm still cranky that that doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hades of ever happening -- the armored fighters hold the levers of power, and by and large they won't allow it. Failing that, we ought to reinterpret the Laurel or Pelican to be more accepting, or at the *very* worst, have an Order that is designed to be welcoming of all martial activities. As it is, creating a Fencing-Only Peerage means that we are inevitably going to have to create more and more Peerage Orders in the name of fairness. If we're recognizing Fencing today, we should absolutely have one for Archery, and then, I don't know -- Equestrian? Thrown Weapons? (And God help us when someone points out that excellence in execution and behaviour isn't the sole province of the martial arts.)
From an organizational-design standpoint, it's idiotic and damaging: the rise of Zillions of Specialized Awards is one of the worst blights on the SCA today, and I utterly hate the idea of it spreading to the Peerage. We like to say that our awards aren't just "merit badges", but that is certainly what they're coming to look like, and they get steadily less meaningful as they get sliced-and-diced more finely.
All of which said, we have a cultural problem: we are deeply failing all of the martial communities other than heavy list, and that *does* need to be fixed. IMO, the only thing worse than the current proposal is the status quo, and the proposal on the table may be the only politically feasible way to fix it.
Hence, grumble.
(I hate the name "Order of Defense" as well. Would anyone care to argue that "Order of Chivalry" is a name worth emulating? I've always felt that it was one of the more painfully mundane anachronisms we have. I wish someone would show the imagination and backbone to give this proposed Order a real name...)
no subject
One of my personal cornerstones about SCA awards is that all of them are given, to one degree or another, for leadership. More specifically, for leading the SCA and its members to be better than we would otherwise be, in some respect. In that light, I don't consider the Chivalry to be given for simple prowess -- I think of it being given more for providing inspiration, expressed *though* that prowess.
The Laurelate is for leadership within an artform: making that art better within the Society. Some folks interpret that quite narrowly, as being all about Research Dammit, but I don't agree, and really *can't* agree, because that isn't why *I* got the freaking award. I got my Laurel for being a great *teacher*, but I was a lousy researcher at the time. (My dance research is still quite weak, although my games research has wound up a bit more substantial.)
So while granted, the definition of the Laurelate *would* have to be widened to a broader interpretation of leadership within an art, I personally wouldn't mind that too much. I've gotten very weary and annoyed at the people who apply such an academic focus to it, and extending it to people who people who lead their art through demonstration of excellence wouldn't be the end of the world. (And I am *very* outspoken in my opinion that martial arts can and totally should be considered "arts".)
Mind, it's not likely to happen: the Laurelate are collectively just as jealous of their territory as the Chivalry, and no more likely to countenance a widening of their remit. So, y'know, grumble...
no subject
Then why should prowess with the rapier (for instance) be included in the Laurel, where prowess with rattan not be?
I mean, I've seen plenty of fencers who are great folks, stone killers, courteous, (dare I say) chivalric, are fantastic with that combat form, but don't use a lick of period technique.
no subject
Because The Chivalry Are The Exception. That is, I accept (out of necessity) that the Chivalry simply don't fit in with any neat categorization: they occupy a weird and particular place in the SCA, and yes, they violate attempts to create a nicely consistent system. I simply throw up my hands at that, and try to work around it...
no subject
no subject
Same for Chivalry. :-)
Justin and I differ a little. I think the Patent Orders (ignoring Rose) are:
1. People who make what we do, better. (Laurel)
2. People who make what we do, possible (Pelican)
3. Sports Heroes. (Chivalry)
I can, and have, argued the less-popular position that the Chivalry is about classic armored combat, because that's what the SCA was, is and must remain being primarily about. I'm prepared to compromise on that, because even if I am right, it's not a sufficiently supported position. So, if necessary, I'll abandon that in favor of a more generous definition of Sports Hero.
If I do, then it seems obvious to me that Rapier (and eventually any other martial sport from period) can be a Sports Hero.
I think the right solution is to allow the Chivalry to accept anything other than Rattan (which, right now, it may not) and then pressure the Kingdoms and Orders to more generously accept people who perform any martial art: by authenticity (Laurel), by service to it (Pelican) and by being an SCA Sports Hero (Chivalry).
I think any other solution sucks by comparison. Not just because of my cognitive model, but because we can't afford the loss of people that might very well come from an Either/Or decision around a new Order.