From: ddfr@quads.uchicago.edu (david director friedman)
Subject: Removes, Persona
Reply-To: ddfr@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 07:16:34 GMT


"And, by the way, speaking of feasts, someone recently mentioned the
"remove" was not a period term.  What was, and why is a "remove"
called a "remove", anyway." (Stephen Greyhawkes)

The period term was "course." I believe that "remove" is a post
period term for a dish that is removed before the end of the course.
"A dish in a meal replaced by or replacing another" according to my
Webster's.

Dorothea supports Tadhg in objecting to my claim that Cariadoc is a
better story teller than David. I find it hard to believe that they
both disagree with what I thought was an obvious point, so perhaps I
did not express myself clearly.

It is more interesting to hear medieval Islamic stories told by a
medieval Islamic storyteller than by a modern American. If I tell the
story as Cariadoc, I (David) am acting the role of a medieval Muslim,
thus projecting to my audience the illusion that they are in the
Middle Ages listening to a medieval Muslim tell the story. If I tell
the story as David, I am a modern American academic talking about
medieval Muslims. Hearing the former is more interesting than hearing
the latter, hence Cariadoc is a better storyteller than David. Of
course, you can claim that David is doing the storytelling in both
cases--but in the second case, David is telling the story, while in
the first David is playing the role of Cariadoc telling the story.

If you (Tadhg and Dorothea) really disagree with that, do you also
disagree with the claim that it is more interesting to hear Hamlet
talking than to hear an actor talking--which is to say, we enjoy
Hamlet more when the actor is playing the role of Hamlet than we
would if the actor was speaking the lines as a 20th century person?

My original comment was in the context of a discussion of a lady who
was using a particular device to "strengthen the illusion that she
was a lady from that society rather than a modern teacher or an SCA
generic medieval person." I can understand that some people may not
enjoy this--some people do not like plays either. But I cannot
understand how anyone could miss the point that you can do different
things with teaching a class when you are playing the role of a
medieval person than when you are not--which is equivalent to my
point about storytelling, which Dorothea and Tadhg seem to be denying.

"I do have a complete "persona story" that I could tell if I wanted
to, including how Hal and I picked each other up at the Sack of York
in 866--but it's easier just to wave the hands a bit and say
"Ninth-century English," and it's even  easier, particularly if I'm
tired, to say, "Oh, you know, Early Period Northern European." I have
probably just given Cariadoc a raging headache." (Dorothea)

I have just finished doing my taxes, so I am pretty numb. What gives
me, not a headache, but a sense of frustration is that it sounds as
though you think what I am arguing for is having and telling
elaborate persona stories--which is in fact one of the things I have
argued against for many years. From my standpoint, the elaborate
story, your short answer, and the question ("what is your persona")
that you are presumably answering are all about equally bad, since
all of them make it obvious that the conversation is taking place in
the 20th century, and thus make it hard to maintain the dramatic
illusion that we are actually sometime else.

David (Cariadoc)