[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Search Archives]

TRM's letter

Poster: Leila Mohajerin <lmohajer@email.unc.edu>

Greetings all!

Frankly, I was surprized and pleased that any response to this letter took
so long to appear.  Last Monday, after our regular canton meeting,
serveral of us PRIVATELY dicussed the letter, our feelings about it, and
it's implications. Believe me, we all took different views.  

One of our number was outraged that the Royals felt the need to write such
a letter. Not mad at them, but that gossip and talk about them made them
feel the need. This gentle felt that the public shouldn't comment on the
Royal behavior.

Another felt that the letter made him feel insulted, like here is Our
attitude, and the populous will just have to lump it. (I think we changed
his mind)

I disagreed with both of these friends. I felt that the UNEXPLAINED 
absence of one of the Royals during court or feast, at an event at which
they were obviously attending was discourteous to the populous and other
Royalty present.   Not that they should have to explain, but that they
shouldn't be surprised that people comment on it. I feel the letter did a
great deal to explain to
the members of this kingdom who may not be aware of Micheal and Sionaid's
personal situation, what those reasons for missing courts are. I commend
them for addressing the topic in an open form, rather than grumbling back
about the grumblers.

And, although it is nice to have both thrones filled when in court, I
respect and admire Royalty that do split the responsiblities of events.
Once case in point was the Duke Logan attending Feast of Hern, and
Duchess Arielle attending a rapier event the same weekend this Fall. I
thought that was terrific!

That's my opion, and mine only.

Lady Sveva

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