From: KGANDEK@mitvmc.mit.EDU (Kathryn Gandek)
Subject: Multiple Titles
Organization: The Internet
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 18:39:01 GMT

This is in response to Thomas Ignatius Perigrinus's posting to Arval.  I am
responding in particular to the last section, which I hope I am accurately
summarizing as follows (and much less prettily that Thomas stated it).

1) That Arval would be treated with different degrees of respect if he said
when traveling "I am Arval, Triple Peer" than if he said "I am a traveler, of
no particular name or title."  Presumably he means that Arval would be treated
with more respect.

2) That those who say "a worthy soul is neither enhanced nor diminished by
titles" generally have a lot themselves.  However, those without titles are
dismissed out of hand in reality by many in the Society.

There are two issues here I think.  The first has to do with how recipients or
non-recipients of awards are viewed.  The second is how recipients or non-
recipients view awards.

First, with regards to how recipients or non-recipients are viewed, let me
repeat the wisdom of some of those whom I respect - "Anyone who treats you
differently because you have an award isn't worth your respect or the time of
day".  Okay, it's a little harsh but basically true.  They're shallow if they
look at the awards instead of the person.  That doesn't mean they're a
worthless human being or don't have merits on their own, but their opinions of
what's worthwhile aren't worth a dust bunny from the tiniest crack in the floor
I wouldn't condone spitting on them, but a healthy dose of unobvious disdain
is in order.  They aren't worth anyone having hurt feelings because of their
opinions.  If anything, pity them their ignorance.

Second, as to how recipients or non-recipients view awards.  Perhaps those that
drip awards value them less.  It's sort of the grass is greener syndrome.
However, there are plenty of people who don't drip awards and don't judge
people by their alphabet soup.  For instance, both Ilaine de Cameron and I
seem to agree basically with Arval.  She's got an AoA, and I'v got an AoA and
a baronial arts/service award.  Neither of us are dripping awards.

So, am I saying that if non-recipients disregard those that judge people by
their alphabet soup, their troubles are over?  Not exactly.  Non-recipients
sometimes also have to contend with a black spot that forms when they feel
their worthy efforts are going unnoticed or unappreciated.  I've watched that
black spot eat at people, and all I can say is that awards in the SCA are not
a comprehensive, methodical or all inclusive process.  They are a very nice
official thank you and recognition.  However, the thanks also come in all the
individual thank you's and compliments delivered along the way.  The award is
simply summing up all those comments into one statement.  The official award
is nice, but it's lack doesn't discount all the individual comments.

People are what count - who they are, what they do, their courtesy and
chivalry, their humanity and concern, their expertise and their generosity with
knowledge.  Try to know who you are in your heart.  Try to judge others for
their own inate qualities.  Look to the awards for a road map if you like, but
never take them or their lack as guarantees of anything.  As for those who
judge people by their awards - try to let that be their problem to bear.  Try
not to take it on yourself.

Catrin o'r Rhyd For            Kathryn Gandek
Barony of Carolingia           Boston area
East Kingdom                   kgandek@mitvmc.mit.edu
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca