From: aryk@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (A.J.S. Nusbacher)
Subject: Re: History vs. dreams
Organization: University of Toronto -- Hart House
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 22:44:05 GMT

>>In article <1992Sep6.195201.8461@odin.diku.dk> rancke@diku.dk (Hans Rancke-Madsen) writes:

Hans had written:

>>>... I've been browsing on the
>>>Rialto for the year and more we've recieved it here in Denmark, and I've
>>>been saddened to note the vigour of the historical reenactment movement.

In article <1992Sep8.205327.4432@odin.diku.dk> rancke@diku.dk (Hans Rancke-Madsen) writes:

>aryk@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (A.J.S. Nusbacher) writes:

AJSN>>You play your game, Hans.

HR-M>Oh, I do, I do; but that's another story.

AJSN>>Let us re-enactors play ours.

HR-M>If you're reproving me from expressing an opinion when I'm not directly
HR-M>involved in the matter, then I apologize. If you are telling me that you
HR-M>have your opinion and you don't care about mine, then I think the most
HR-M>courteous thing would have been to just ignore me.

No, it's door number three.  I am reproving you for being "saddened to note
the vigour of the historical reenactment movement".  There are an awful lot
of people who enjoy it, and who think that a vigourous historical re-enactment
community is a good thing.

Hans had said:

>>>If anything it seems to me that an insistence on historical correctness
>>>will drive out the dreamers. And if things develop to a point where a
>>>split becomes inevetable (note the if), then I think you should remember
>>>that the dreamers were there first.

I had replied:

>>The split is there already, and there are dreamers on both sides, thank you.

Then Hans said:

>I didn't mean to imply that there weren't. I was just trying to find a
>convenient label for the "other side" (or my side, depending on how you
>look at it). If you'll tell me what label would be more appropiate I'll
>use it....

There is a distinct difference between the mainstream of the SCA and
historical re-enactment.  A "split", a "schism", but hardly a yawning gulf
of any description.  There are people who could be called re-enactment
buffs who are in the SCA.  There are idealists and romantics in re-enactment
and re-creation groups, in spite of insistence on historical accuracy.  Some-
times they are the same people.

I do not disagree that many people would be driven away from the SCA if 
the SCA ever decided to undergo a transformation into a re-creation or re-
enactment group.  Since that likelihood is very close to nil, I would
consider that a moot point.

You (and others) have depicted a stark dichotomy which assumes that 
romanticism and historical re-creation are incompatible (or fun and historical
re-creation, or good music, or good beer, etc.), and assumes that all
mediaeval re-creation must be conducted at events sponsored by branches
of the SCA Inc.  I believe that these are false assumptions, and that
the dichotomy is a false one.

The SCA Inc. encourages this dichotomy by subscribing to its underlying
principles:  the 20th Anniversary Edition of the Known World Handbook has
an article reprinted from the Tournaments Illuminated which draws a stark
dichotomy between an "authenticity maven" and a "fun maven", the two of
whom can coexist peacefully, but quite separately, through mutual respect.
And in casting as wide a net as it does, the SCA Inc. quite unwittingly
makes it difficult to conduct mediaeval re-creation outside the SCA.

In fact, romanticism, fun, amusing songs, and good drink, are not in-
compatible with historical accuracy.  Re-enactments and re-creations can
be conducted outside the SCA, thus not depriving the elf-ear aficionado
of a venue for self-expression.  They can be conducted within the SCA
under certain conditions, as self-contained allocations of time and
space.

There is no call for strictures on re-enactors.  They are not a threat to
the SCA.

Aryk Nusbacher
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca