HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: 0003900943@mcimail.COM (Marla Lecin)
Subject: Teaching dance at revels
Organization: The Internet
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 16:29:00 GMT

Unto Lady Vashti, and the other visitors to the Rialto, greetings from Jessa
d'Avondale! 

Vashti asked how different people handle teaching (or not teaching) dances
at revels.  Here's what I did for Crown Tourney. 

Many of the people who stayed for the dancing had travelled a long distance
just to attend the ball - so, luckily, they knew a good number of the
dances. A lot of the local people who stayed to dance did *not* know the
dances. 

When we did dances that put everyone in a large circle (or a long enough
line of couples that it became a circle :-), I stood in the center and
called out directions, demonstrating the steps. 

When we did dances that required breaking into smaller groups, I made sure
that someone in each group knew the dance, and wandered around the floor
giving advice when necessary. 

It was not an easy hall to be heard in - but many people came up to
volunteer to help me.  By the end of the evening, to get people's attention
I had only to go to the center of the floor, and raise my hand. One of my
erstwhile volunteers would see me, and cry "Oyez!" 

There was only one dance that I announced would be done without teaching.
Several of us wanted to do Geloxia (an Italian ballo).  We put together 3
sets, which included 4-5 people who didn't already know the dance. We did do
a quick walk-through before the music; but that was nothing like teaching
the dance to everyone in the hall!  I like to think that we did it more as a
performance piece during a break in the dancing. 

As for the teaching/not teaching during the revel dilemna - usually, the
only events I've been to where we had "teaching" during the day and
"dancing" in the evening were events advertised as a Day of Dance, A Ball,
or a Dance Collegium.  Often there's not enough time or room to teach during
the day, or so many people are involved in the other activities, you'd have
to teach them the dances later anyway. I haven't noticed any widespread
frustration (around here) with this; people have come to expect to see the
dances taught before the music starts. 

I'd love to see lots of people going to dance practice to learn the dances,
so that we could just get on the floor and do them at events.  But not
everyone can make it to practice, so if you want to see dancing at events,
you've got to teach them at the events. 

One of my main reasons for becoming the dance mistress in my area is - I
want to dance at events!  And that means teaching at practices and at
events, so I have someone to dance with, and I have to own all these manuals
and recordings, and take them along to events, and find opportunities to run
dancing at events if it wasn't otherwise scheduled. (Selfish, aren't I? :-) 

Terpsichorally yours, 

Jessa 
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
From: u883161@postoffice.utas.edu.au (Alex Tewes)
Subject: re: Scaddians
Organization: University of Tasmania, Australia
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 22:29:30 GMT

>William de Corbie writes:
> By "all of us", I did not mean idiots, analphabets, the mentally
> handicapped, people who never went to school, who are deaf and blind
               ^^^^^^                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> (or dead), natives from the New Guinea jungle, or small furry creatures
> from Alpha Centauri. I meant normal people with an interest in the
> middle ages and renaissance -- the kind of people who make up the SCA.


This sort of comments really show up the writer's cultural blinkers!

There are quite a number of mundane Australians , including the Seneschal
of our local group who have been born in the New Guinea Jungles!

IMHO there is no bar to *anybody* being involved in the SCA, all that is needed
is the tiniest spark of imagination and curiosity.

Martin de Mont Blanc (mka Alex Tewes)

Shire of Ynys Fawr \ Lochac \ West    ( That is Tasmania, Australia)

U883161@postoffice.utas.edu.au
From: Suze.Hammond@f56.n105.z1.fidonet.org (Suze Hammond)
Sender: postmaster@therose.pdx.com
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: Perceptions of the SCA
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 1992 17:14:00 -0700

CL>  Unto all on the Rialto, Greetings from Pedro de Alcazar!
CL>
CL>     It's my opinion that we ought to listen to the academics.
CL>  These guys (and I intend to become one after I graduate) have
CL>  spent a good deal of their lives researching the time period, and
CL>  are,
CL>  IMO, held to a stricter level of accuracy than the typical SCAdian.

This has one problem, in that many of them are bound by their particular 
subject, and have little time or inclination to do anything as broad as what 
we attempt. We should *respect* them, and listen, but be aware that the man 
studying 12thc military history will likely know almost nothing about what 
12thc women did, or anything much at all about the 15thc. The strict level 
of accuracy requires a certain sacrifice of other interests. This does *not* 
mean the man is a cretin if he doesn't know what you do about 14thc 
children's clothing, nor does it mean you are a genius because you know a 
little about a lot of stuff.  :-)

We have to be careful not to hold these scholars to as improper a standard 
of knowledge as some of them do us.

CL>     How to change their opinions? Well, that's an interesting
CL>  idea. The local medieval historian, Prof. Greg Guzman of Bradley
CL>  University, is both my adviser and quite enthusiastic about the SCA.

Good! He probably has figured out what we really do!

CL>  As far as I can tell, he sees it as a way to get non-history majors
CL>  interested in history.

And he'd be right. History is *miserably* taught in our public schools. I 
can't count the number of local SCA folk who've admitted that they loathed 
history until they hit the SCA. History taught with no humanizing context is 
as dry and moldy as old bread to most people. It takes a certain mindset to 
be able to appreciate it in its minutiae. Showing it can be *fun* can 
nurture this in people who would otherwise scoff at history.

CL>  -you find turkeys everywhere; but that's no reason
CL>  to be anti-historian. Telling them we're a re-creation group, and
CL>  having them come down to an event, might not be a good idea-

If you ever do it, only do it if you have something really useful to this 
person to show them. They won't care for our mixed-period courts, or our OOP 
dances, or our reconstructed filk. They just might be happy to see a good 
recreation of a 15thc woodworking shop if such you have in your area.

CL>  history types would froth at the fantasy types in our society (as, in
CL>  fact, do I).

tsk tsk.... Where do you expect to get your fresh blood if you condemn folk 
before they've had a chance to learn better?

Moreach

reply ONLY to: trifid@agora.rain.com 
 
From: Beth.Appleton@f4229.n124.z1.fidonet.org (Beth Appleton)
Sender: FredGate@ocitor.fidonet
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Patent revokation.
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992 12:38:32

 TP> This either implies that the actions didn't justify 
 TP> the award, or the award
 TP> was given improperly.
  As I'm sure Arval will tell you, the king gave it improperly.
...
 TP> on this net is that peers are recognized, not made.  Thus the award is
 TP> only a recogninition of her existing status.  She 
 AHHH.  But..... she *wasn't* given a true, straightforward peerage.  
 Just a patent.
.....
>Would we do her a courtesy by leaving her forever 
>as an example of how the
>King of Meridies screwed the Board and sneaked one 
>past the rules (whether
>deliberately or not, the rumor mill works just the same)? 

 TP> Or would we do her and the Society a favor by 
 TP> leaving her forever as an example
 TP> that the BoD can rise above mundanity, and follow justice rather than
 TP> rule-mongery.
 IMHO, if the king felt she'd served the kingdom that well, and that 
 his precedessor muffed by *****not giving her a patent at the appropr. 
 time *****, then he should have tried to give her a full peerage, not
 just a Patent of Arms.  
    Views on the Subject of "naked" Patents and rulings thereon.
    disclaimer - rules by memory, possibly muffed.
 The impression I've gotten over the years is that the Peerage Level 
 Order of the Rose is a kludge.  People have felt "funny" that there were  folks who were noblity, but not a member of the peerage.  As you may be 
 able to tell, I don't think that being a member of the noblity has the 
 same qualifications that being a member of the peerage does.   (BTW, 
 this opinion has NOTHING to do with this particular lady.  I don't know 
 her and do not presume to judge her fitness.)   I think that the reason 
 the Board doesn't want naked Patents given out is that they don't want 
 the Crown just handing out Patents for high-level niftiness.  Either 
 you qualify for one of the Peerages, and are voted in properly through 
 a circle, or you don't really need a Patent.  
.......
...Now back to the specific case.... Perhaps the BoD has actually done 
 this lady a favor.  How?  If, as the king seems to think, she's so much 
 of a peer to begin with, then the appropriate circle will go ahead and 
 give her the honor she deserves.  If the king was merely awarding her 
 general qualities, then his action will not have blocked her from 
 receiving her due later when her activity has matched her quality.  
 I certainly would not wish to be the recipient of a peerage when the 
 peers in question did not feel that I merited the award and that the 
 crown had forced their hand or ignored their input.  Ok, so maybe I'm 
 not much of a monarchist........
     Gwenllian Cwmystwyth

 * Origin: Herald's Point * Steppes/Ansteorra * 214-699-0057 (1:124/4229)
From: dustin@ocf.berkeley.edu (Dustin Tranberg)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: Skewering mundanes
Date: 7 Nov 1992 21:52:03 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
NNTP-Posting-Host: tsunami.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Nov4.180351.9972@pbhya.PacBell.COM> whheydt@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt) writes:
}In article <1992Nov4.103025.2848@doug.cae.wisc.edu> pavao@cae.wisc.edu (Pavao Aaron) writes:
}}Also, if
}}we're talking about gun-totin' rednecks, you're probably dealing with a rifle
}}or shotgun, which is a) more accurate than a pistol and b) more powerful than
}}a pistol.  Also, condider the caliber/gauge of the weapon.  If it's large/small
}}enough, the sword wielder at short range will probably have his/her momentum
}}suddenly reversed (or at least directed away from the gun-wielder).
}
}This is false--purely from physical principles.  There can be no
}change in momentum (M*v) of the target that is greater than that of
}the one holding the gun.  If being hit could actually stop a
}person--let alone reverse their velocity vector, then the wielder of
}the gun would be bowled over from the recoil (Mv = mV, Newton's Third
}Law).  There are special circumstances where a bullet may actually
}accelerate the target *towards* the gun (cf. the works of Luis
}Alvarez).
}
}My apologies for introducing OOP physics into this discussion... :-)
}At least Newton is *close*....
}
}	--Hal
}
}        Hal Ravn, Province of the Mists, West Kingdom
}        Wilson H. Heydt, Jr.,  Albany, CA 94706,  510/524-8321 (home)
}-- 
}Hal Heydt                    |    "Boycott Time-Warner"
}Analyst, Pacific*Bell        |         --J. Danforth Quayle
}510-823-5447                 |    "... kill all the lawyers."
}whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM    |         --William Shakespeare

Hmmm, perhaps I am missing something, Hal, but how then is it
possible for me to knock someone down with a push of my arms
without falling down myself?  It seems to me that bracing is
important; the firer is braced for the recoil, and the target
likely is not. 

But then, I got a C in physics.  :-)

Respectfully,

     -- Thorvald Haakonson  (Dustin Tranberg)

Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
From: carl@silver.lcs.mit.edu (Alexander of Kiev (mka Carl Alexander))
Subject: Re: SCA character (was: OOP dancing)
Organization: The Rialto
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 22:42:15 GMT

T. Archer writes:
>[Arval] writes:
>>....SCA events are open to anyone who makes an attempt at medieval
>>dress and generally behaves himself.  
>
>True, but should they be?
 
I don't know; why don't we try actually enforcing the rule and see.  Tell 
elf-ears & polka-dotted-wonder-ninja & blue-jeans & can't-be-bothered-
to-cover-his-hockey-pads-with-a-surcote to either get into garb or 
get the hell off the site (yes, offer them loaner garb).
 
The Society has only this one general rule for participation:  a 
reasonable attempt at pre-seventeenth century costume.  And we 
almost never enforce it.  I suggest that if we did, it would 
improve the atmosphere at events significantly.
 
Alexander of Kiev                       Carolingia, East

Carl Alexander                          Harvard Square, Cambridge, Mass.
alexander@pfc.mit.edu 
carl@silver.lcs.mit.edu
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: Out-of-period dance styles
From: mjc+@cs.cmu.edu (Monica Cellio)
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 17:59:21 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

Daniel of Falling Rocks writes, of the fact that longways dances became
more numerous in later editions of Playford:

>What this is taken to mean is that longways dances for as many as will
>were part of a style of dancing just beginning then, or at lesat, just
>beginning to be popular.  

The key to this argument, then, is that when something is published is 
highly correlated with when that thing was popular.  This is often the case,
but there are exceptions and we should be careful when using arguments of 
this form.  The argument would be more compelling with additional sources
contemporary to Playford showing a similar trend -- but of course we don't
have those, so we have to guess.

Heck, the facts *could* be explained by the assertion that John Playford
didn't like longways dances as much as his sons did.  I am not trying to
make this argument; I'm just pointing out its existence.  We have *one*
source and we're trying to draw conclusions about all of English dancing
from it.

Ellisif
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
From: schuldy@progress.COM (Mark Schuldenfrei)
Subject: Re: Group activity
Organization: Progress Software Corp.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 15:45:55 GMT

Arval get's very astute.
  I think a more important question is whether holding a published event is
  fundamental to "playing the game".

I think, it's one of the better ways of "playing the game" for a group to
do.  It is hardly the only one.

                                      Is there something anything wrong with
  a branch where the members want no organized activities other than local
  workshops, classes, and revels?

Wrong?  If the membership feels well served, why would this be wrong?

                                           I asked the same question of
  Duchess Sedalia, the Eastern seneschal, who has a similar requirement in
  her official policies.  Her answer, as I understood it, was that the
  kingdom expends a certain amount of its resources supporting each branch,
  and therefore the branch owes something back to the kingdom.

*This*, I find highly interesting.  Perhaps one of our Kingdom Officers,
or former Kingdom Officers, could enlighten me on what services the
Kingdom provides branches, even moribund ones, that merit compensation?
And, is running an event an appropriate and suitable form of compensation?

	Tibor
--
Mark Schuldenfrei (schuldy@progress.com)
[I'm just showin' you my opinions: this ain't a gift]
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
From: cctimar@athena.cas.vanderbilt.edu (Charles the clerk)
Subject: Re: gun toting rednecks
Organization: Shire of Glaedenfeld
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 06:27:06 GMT

To all upon the Rialto doth Charles the clerk send his greetings!

Jeff Suzuki writeth:
> 
> >Oh, most definitely not. Rednecks are typically endowed with massive
> >amounts of machismo and prefer to intimidate their opponents to killing
> 
> Exactly my point.  Why antagonize them?  Why not just --- even though
> it sounds very much like wimping out --- ignore them?  If the gun
> toting rednecks get their joy out of intimidating people, do you think
> they're going to hang around a bunch of people who won't be
> intimidated?  

Although this looks remotely similar to my previous comment, I cannot
agree with the policy of ignoring people who are trying to bully you.
This method only works if the bully really can't hurt you.

In general, people trying to bully you will escalate as far as they can
before they finally give up.  They want to see you scared, and they
will go as far as possible to make you scared.

How far is this?  Well, it is a reasonable guess that gun-totin'
rednecks will think they ain't doin' nothin' wrong if they fire a
coupla shots over your heads - after all, they ain't hurtin' nobody.
By the same token, they may think that they won't hurt anybody if they
only shoot at the guys wearing armour.

Of course, this is assuming we are dealing with the more rational and
slightly sober subspecies.  It is possible that the redneck in question
is extremely drunk, and can't quite manage to fire above your heads -
but he still didn't _mean_ to hurt nobody, honest!  It is also possible
that he doesn't consider men in skirts to be human, so that shooting
them is no different to him than shooting deer, and he'll be quite
surprised when the police inform him there is a difference.

I think, if he has a gun, and he wants you to be scared, be scared.
Run away.  It'll make him happy, he'll feel like a victor, and he's
not likely to escalate.
--
    -- Charles, student, in Glaedenfeld, Meridies
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
From: habura@vccnorthb.its.rpi.edu (Andrea Marie Habura)
Subject: Re: Catrin's Wedding; Dance in the Society; Authenticity; Period Dance
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 14:25:33 GMT

Justin writes that the basic level of authenticity has improved in the SCA
since its inception.

I must agree. In my main field of interest, heraldry, the average level of
authenticity of the names and devices passed has risen dramatically. (For 
proof, check out older listings in the SCA Armorial and Ordinary. All entries
are dated; and the earlier the date, the less authentic the item, in general.
There are exceptions, natch, like Dorothea's arms.)
	This is *not* to say that we are now Completely Authentic. We still
get submissions that would make a medieval historian run screaming into 
the night. However, the aggregate authenticity quotient has been rising...
mostly because the research in the field has been continuing, and new people
can take advantage of the work that's already been done. 
	As other evidence of this: Check out the work that pepople got Laurels
for twenty years ago. I've seen some of it; it wouldn't rate a Kingdom arts
award today. Why? Not because the Laurels twenty years ago didn't deserve their
awards, but because the level of knowledge then was lower, and you had to do
lots of research just to do something that would be merely passable today. It's
the old "if I have seen farther, it was because I stood on the shoulders of
giants" syndrome. In my now nearly nine years in the SCA, I have seen some 
serious improvements in authenticity, and I think this is a Good Thing. 

Alison MacDermot
*Ex Ungue Leonem*
From: SAUNDRSG@qucdn.queensu.ca (Graydon)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: visible inauthenticity of archery
Date: 10 Nov 92 03:15:00 GMT
Organization: The Internet

Not that I can answer for someone else, but Dave Aronson and
others might be interested.  Yew is horribly hard to get; about
the only way to get it, even if you are a bowyer professionally,
is to go cut it yourself.

After you do that, it takes between three and four years to dry
the billet you split down to a moisture content suitable for a
bow.  There is no guaruntee that the billet will be straight
enough grained to make a bow, either.

As for working the stuff, to quote Robert Hardy's 'Longbow':
"Since the foundation of the Worshipful Company of Bowyers,
and long before that, bowmakers have had their secrets, and
suffered their secret troubles, which I believe stem from
their work with the dark, sinister, ancient, sacred, poisonous
yew tree.  That is the wood for longbows; no other is as good.
....
In the days when longbows were made in huge quantity, the young
yew trees were tended, generation by generation; suckers, pins,
and twigs were removed and everything possible done to encourage
straight growth, to discourage the writhing and wind-twisting,
the gnarling and fasciation to which yew habitually resorts
when left to its own devices."

Yew is *not* fun stuff to work.

Graydon, who has a rock elm log drying.
From: mittle@watson.ibm.com (Josh Mittleman)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: re: The Society's Paradox
Date: 9 Nov 92 22:12:22 GMT
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM

Greetings from Arval!

Robyyan posed some interesting questions, which I would like to think on
before discussing.  However, there is one point in his article that I'd
like to address:

> 2.  Decide we're a fantasy organization.  This will resolve all the 
> authenticity vs. fantasy arguments, as authenticity will no longer be 
> a goal worth seeking.  It will require admitting to the IRS we aren't 
> an educational organization, and will lose our tax exempt status.

I've heard this statement many times; I believe it to be false.  I do not
believe that our alleged educational purpose has any real bearing on our
tax status.  Surely there are tax-exempt not-for-profit groups devoted to
science fiction and fantasy fandom, not to mention purely social
organizations like bowling leagues.  This resolution to the "paradox" of
the SCA (quoted because I haven't decided if it actually exists) has
interesting consequences, but this is a red herring.

===========================================================================
Arval Benicoeur                                       mittle@watson.ibm.com
From: salley@niktow.canisius.edu (David Salley)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Patent of Arms / Order of Precedence question
Date: 7 Nov 92 04:31:32 GMT
Organization: Canisius College, Buffalo NY. 14208

> An important correction: Duchy, County, and Viscounty ranks _are_ peerages.
> These peers do not necessarily have a patent of arms, but Corpora defines
> them to be peers.  And "peer" means "equal".
> ===========================================================================
> Arval Benicoeur                                       mittle@watson.ibm.com

Interesting point.  Question: where does someone with a Duchy/County/Vicounty
rank WITHOUT a patent of arms rank on a Order of Precedence?  With the others
of their rank?  Just below?  Where they were before?  Below all the patents of
arms?
                                                       - Dagonell

SCA Persona : Lord Dagonell Collingwood of Emerald Lake, CSC, CK, CTr
Habitat	    : East Kingdom, AEthelmearc Principality, Rhydderich Hael Barony
Disclaimer  : A society that needs disclaimers has too many lawyers.
Internet    : salley@niktow.cs.canisius.edu
USnail-net  : David P. Salley, 136 Shepard Street, Buffalo, New York 14212-2029
Pirates of the Carribean Event - Dec 12 - Rhydderich Hael - Write for details.