Re: Smoking and Law

[Kensei <kensei@concentric.net>]

Poster: Kensei <kensei@concentric.net>

>At 06:14 PM 11/20/96 -0500, you wrote:
>
>Poster: homan@nando.net (Fred Homan)
>
>>Lance Harrop wrote the following:
>> But on the other hand, I don't always wear period shoes, and I have not 
>> made period glasses, so I shouldn't critize people for obtrusive modernerity.
>
>Speaking as a glasses-wearer, I would say that while glasses might be most
>annoying there are downright necessary for some of us and I have not seen
>any frames which would look proper (nor have I the skill nor time to make
>any myself).  I will continue wearing my modern glasses because I have no
>choice else I be handicapped at an event to the point where I might even
>need a guide.  For the same reasons, I do not expect wheelchair users to
>attempt to disguise their wheelchairs or go without as the chair is a
>necessity and can be excused for making our events available to more
>people at a slight cost to period authenticity.



The debate between those supporting strict authenticity and those willing to
sacrifice period for modern and mundane conveniences/necessities is an
interesting one.  I, for one, favor strict authenticity.  If people are
willing to expend the time and money constructing period garb, armor,
baggage, pavilions, and so forth, why is it so difficult for people who
require modern aids (glasses, wheelchairs, etc.) to make the effort to
construct or obtain period-looking counterparts (if not actual period
replicas)?  For me, nothing looks worse than a person in medieval garb and
modern plastic-framed glasses.  Mundanes seeing an individual so outfitted
think "Who is this idiot?" versus "Where is the movie set?"  I don't mean to
be insulting, but one can hear these comments, verbatim, at demonstrations,
fairs, and anywhere else the SCA and modern worlds intersect.  The smallest
modern article--easily recognized as such--simply ruins the effect; much as
the proverbial Coke can on the feast table.  I realize that the SCA is not
supposed to be a medieval movie reenactment, but consider the effect a
number of actors in the movie "Braveheart" would have had if they had gone
through their roles wearing obvious modernities (such as plastic-framed
glasses) with their garb.

Possible solutions?  Why not buy contacts?  Why not obtain period-looking
metal frames?  It's all a matter of selective spending and willingness to
fully immerse into period, in my opinion.  And, before anyone takes umbrage
with the foregoing, I'll note that I am a glasses wearer myself, but have
invested in contacts.  Furthermore, I have a bad case of astigmatism and am
very near-sighted, in case anyone should claim that contacts are unavailable
for those reasons.  Regarding costs, if one can afford to make garb and
armor, participate in events, and otherwise expend money on a regular basis
with the SCA--frankly stated--they should be able to drop $50-$100 at the
opthamologist's office.

At the risk of being long-winded, the real issue at the center of the
debates which have been going on the past few weeks is this:  a number of
people are unwilling to give up their modern, personal conveniences for the
sake of period authenticity and want everyone else to accept that.  I really
don't believe those seeking authenticity should have to.  Wasn't the search
for the medieval what SCA was founded on?  If cigarettes are not period,
don't smoke them at events.  Buy or make a clay pipe and use loose tobacco.
Get period glasses or wear contacts.  Put your Coke into a period container.
And so on.

One last thought.  Being a smoker, it strikes me that the courteous thing to
do--since many are offended by smoke--is to simply smoke in an area well
away from others and not in the midst of the throng.  N'est ce pas?


Anyway, for what it's worth.

=======================================================================
List Archives, FAQ, FTP:  http://sca.wayfarer.org/merryrose/
            Submissions:  atlantia@atlantia.sca.org
        Admin. requests:  majordomo@atlantia.sca.org