Re: SCA Guilds?

[kuijt@umiacs.UMD.EDU]

Yaakov writes:

>I also think that we have a problem with  a mentality that says
>that anyone who wants to do something on a regular basis needs
>to have a guild or an office to organize it.

I agree completely.

Karen L....dottir (sorry, I deleted too much of your message, and
	thereby lost the proper spelling of your name, fair lady) responds:
> ... but why is this 
>a problem, pray tell?  I'm interested in getting a permanent SCA group 
>going here at GMU -- is it a problem that we're getting that done?

Nope.  And there are lots of advantages, in your case, to being a
group.  Easier recruitment, better standing with GMU, etc., etc.

>If I 
>can ever find other individuals interested in quilling, where lieth the 
>problem in organizing some sort of guild to share findings in period 
>designs, or modern sources for quilling-paper?

Let me reflect that question from another direction: if you ever find
other individuals interested in quilling, how will NOT being a guild
prevent you from sharing findings in period designs, or modern sources
for quilling-paper?  Why would you want to call yourself a guild?


Creating a "guild" implies having a "membership" and often (usually) a
"hierarchy".

Defining a "membership" is the same as drawing a line--these people are
IN the guild, and the rest of the world is OUT.  This has a positive
aspect--it can help focus those inside by giving them a sense of identity.
It also has several possible negative aspects--this line can become
exclusionary.  It can be a source of conflict, as with any clique.  It
can prevent people from joining, either directly or indirectly.  It can
act indirectly as a barrier to spreading knowledge to those outside the
line.
	NOTE: I am not saying it WILL do any of these things, but it CAN.

Defining a "hierarchy" is not necessary, but it is very common.  "I'm a
Master, and she's an Apprentice, and you're a Journeyman, ..."  While
there are some real reasons to do this, it almost always seems to become,
soon or late, a source of bad feelings and conflict.  Who decides what
rank everyone has?  What are the criteria?  Who evaluates them?  The most
common thing is that the hierarchy, over time, does not represent the
most active, interested, and even talented participants.  This ends up
alienating them, so they begin to reject the hierarchy, and the hierarchy
is closely tied to the guild (and under the control of those people who
put a lot of effort in at the beginning, but are now less active, less
interested, less energetic, and often deadwood).
	NOTE: I am not saying these things MUST happen, but I've seen
	them happen an awful lot.





>I hope that none shall interpret these my feeble questions as a flame, 
>for I am but a Young Fart and know not of such problems ...

Issues of flaming young farts I shall leave to the imagination.


Dafydd