Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: A Little of Everything, pt. 1
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 21:44:29

    Justin du Coeur wrote:

 JD> Re: Saint's Days

 JD> So, anyone looking for a good coding project? I would just *love* to
 JD> have a program that would spit out the current ecclesiastical day, for
 JD> use in letters and stuff. And now that Fr. John has gone and outlined
 JD> the basics, it sounds to me like it *could* be done, and would make a
 JD> really neat class project for some inspired computer science student.
 JD> Hint, hint...

 Sure, right after the conflict-checking program (see my paper "Suggested
 Taxonomy of a Blazon", with Backus-Naur diagrams, coming soon to a
 Heraldic Proceedings near you...). There are more overwhelmed heralds out
 there than there are scribes who feel a burning need to date their letters
 "and stuff" correctly. (Not that they would know how, anyway; see my
 article "Medieval Official Document Forms" in the Proceedings of the
 Ansteorran Known World Heraldic Symposium, available from Free Trumpet
 Press West).

 JD> On the other hand, that doesn't mean that we are anywhere in sight of
 JD> anything vaguely resembling a consensus. Take for example the points
 JD> that Tadhg has been making on heraldry. As far as I can tell, his
 JD> viewpoint is grounded in the idea that the Society would be
 JD> well-served by having an area of primary (although not exclusive)
 JD> focus for its recreation (defined in the now-oft-heard
 JD> "West/North/South" phrase). I find this view utterly alien -- as far
 JD> as I can tell, the SCA's single most distinguishing characteristic is
 JD> its *lack* of focus, and I often wish the Society would stop
 JD> pretending it has such a focus, and instead let the Kingdoms
 JD> experiment a bit more freely. Our underlying assumptions are so
 JD> utterly different that it's scarcely even worth my while to debate
 JD> with Tadhg -- we simply don't share enough common ground for
 JD> worthwhile discussion...

 Oh, I don't know ... I agree with your analysis right down to the ground
 (and it pains me), but it ain't *necessarily* so. Is the current state a
 bug or a feature? I think it's a bug; you appear to think it's a feature.
 Granted that a solid decision one way or another might save the losing
 side some grief; if I thought that the SCA was doomed eternally to wander
 farther and farther into elfland, I'd quit tomorrow and go devote my time
 to something I considered more useful (say, an organization attempting to
 study and re-create the Middle Ages). And lack of common ground can be a
 real cork; I rarely comment on Duke Cariadoc's posts because of just such
 a discontinuity between his approach to the SCA and mine. Sometimes the
 magic works, and sometimes it just don't.

 On the other hand, the fact that there does seem to be a lack of solid
 consensus suggests that those who care about which side wins (which is
 putting it simplistically, I know, but that's how I've come to think of
 it, ol' simple-minded Tadhg that I am) really need to put their best foot
 forward; except within very broad limits, you can't tell what the dance is
 until the people move. I see this as analogous to "just jamming",
 musically; sometimes it produces noise, but sometimes it produces
 synthesis -- and we never know which we're going to get until it happens.
 But it's very important that the people with the pipes not sit out and
 yield the field to the kazoos....

 JD> We may be talking about the hard issues, but it isn't clear to me that
 JD> we're really getting much of anywhere on them...

 Rome wasn't destroyed in a day.... 8-)

    Tadhg, Obelisk


 * Origin: Herald's Point * Steppes/Ansteorra * 214-699-0057 (1:124/4229)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca