Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Basic Courtsey
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 10:55:18

>   Without trying to respond point by point to your letter, Angharad, I
>will try again to make my points without being as rude as I was last
>time.

After reading your post, I must say that I can see only a slight
improvement.

>   Probably the first point is that we are *both* reading all sorts of
>things into Stephen's single sentence.  You see it as pointing up the
>van's presence, and the completely non-medieval nature of the poem as
>good reasons for not allowing filk to exist, despite the fact that I
>believe it was about an SCA event (I do not remember the poem - I just
>remember Stephen's comment, and how it made me feel to read it:  I am
>working from Yaakov's post in defense of Christian).  Where do you get
>this information that is a better source than mine?  The sentence:
>      "This is a good example of why filk should be outlawed"
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I never said that, so you can "Shove it up your Mule"

>has no more pointers to your explanation than it does to mine - in fact,
>I would say that both are possibly equally fair translations of it.
>Perhaps you got something different out of it because you had been paying
>attention to the filk discussion before Stephen's infamous comment.  I
>had not - the arguement has little significance to me since I cannot write
>either period music or filk.  However, as a creator of different things
>(needlework, heraldry, prose), seeing that sentence applied to
>Christian's work hit me in the stomach as 'What a rude thing to say!'.
>
>   Now, you may, at this point, say 'well, how the heck do you have the
>nerve to stick your nose in when you haven't even been paying attention?'

Yeah, that did cross my mind.

>It's a fair question.  I've tried to ignore the whole thing, hoping that
>maybe the sentence would be taken differently, and maybe even appologized
>for.  What I saw instead was several days worth of arguing back and forth
>about things that didn't seem to have any bearing.  Finally, someone
>said that they thought that filk should be actively discouraged, because
>it distracts from 'proper' pursuits, and that made my blood boil.

And did you flame the person who said this?  Did you ask if *I*
felt this way?  (Notice I'm not saying either way how I *do* feel
about it.)  Was I even in the argument?

>I know
>how I would feel about someone telling me not to cross-stich those celtic
>birds I spent over a year on (and I'm still working on) because they're
>not done in period colors.  Or the kitten sampler that I did for my
>mother, which I showed around to my SCA friends because they'd understand
>it, which wasn't even remotely period.  That's where my second post
>script came from.  The rest came from people continually trying to
>appologize for Stephen's rudeness by explaining it away, saying that
>its okay to be rude if you're telling the truth, all kinds of stuff that
>just kept ignoring the realities of that single sentence which was, in
>fact, all I had seen of the whole argument.
>
>    My last word on the subject (unless someone decides that the above
>is flame-worthy) is that Stephen screwed up.  If he had intended that the
>'van' subject of the post was the reason such things were abhorent, he
>should have said so.  If he thought that the poem was so awful that it
>proved his point about filk being a waste of time, he should have said
>so.  His sentence was so vague that it communicated little beyond its
>basic rudeness.  And, I suppose that everything said since has actually
>had next to no relation to what was actually in Stephen's sentence,
>except perhaps by accident.  Whether my comments were on what Stephen
>actually posted, or just what I think he posted, my feelings still hold.

After your attack on me, your feelings mean diddley to me.  Your
post was one hell of a lot more inflamatory than mine, so, as you
said, "SHOVE..." well, you get the idea.

>Firstly, filk *has* a place in the SCA, even if it is in the mundane
>outskirts of same, such as the Rialto.  (Maybe Christian just wanted to
>share his experiences at the event with people who would understand the
>idiom?)  Secondly, anyone who thinks to redirect the creative energy of
>a person by forbidding the avenue they've taken is commiting a crime.

So call 911 and report me.  However, I think I'm not guilty of the
"crime" you accuse me of.  You've got a lot of gall posting the
sort of messages you have in the name of "courtesy".

>If
>Christian spends time writing filk, that's fine.  If you don't want to
>hear it *at an event*, that's fine too.  But to ask him not to write filk
>because you don't want to hear it at an event is not fine.  Period.
>
>       Arglwydd Dafydd Cyhoeddwr o dyr Chwilfriwhuan.
>       Former Chronicler of Bhakail, present almost-herald of
>         the Baileywicke of Ivyeinrust, membe of the Order of
>         the Salamander, but never of a higher rank than Lord.

Ooohh... Almost a herald, wow!  Order of the Salamander, very
impressive!

Stephen of the Grove
Steppes/Ansteorra        FIDO 1:124/4229
Stephen.Whitis@f4229.n124.z1.fidonet.org
___
 X MegaMail 2.10 #0:SHOVE IT UP YOUR MULE!

 * Origin: Herald's Point * Steppes/Ansteorra * 214-699-0057 (1:124/4229)