RE: Honor vs. Winning

["Jeffrey C. Sussman" <JSussman@erols.com>]

Poster: "Jeffrey C. Sussman" <JSussman@erols.com>

Greetings from Duke Richard,

It seems the only posts I make these days are about over-generalization.

Everyone, including Dag, who makes sweeping generalizations about a whole
kingdom's motivations is going to be wrong.  I doubt very much that any
significant number of midrealmers decided that winning this particular war
was important enough to change their honorable and chivalrous conduct on the
field.

In all kingdoms, you'll see groups of people who care very deeply about
winning wars.  You'll find groups of people who don't really care about
winning and losing.  And most everyone is somewhere in between.

For example, I like to win.  But given a choice between fighting and losing
a battle and not fighting and winning a battle, I'll choose fighting and
losing every time.  Not everyone makes that choice.

These motivations vary by degree radically across any group of fighters.
Applying sweeping generalizations to whole kingdoms is going to be a rash
simplification at best.  Kingdoms have more in common than they have
differences.

Now, at the top, it's a little different.  For some reason, being king makes
fighters think that they are letting their kingdom down if they don't win
their wars.  Getting big wins at both the Pennsics I was king at, was deeply
satisfying (I'm not proud of that).  Kings would be doing better jobs of
being king if they were more concerned with making the war enjoyable and
less on winning and losing.  This is why, from what I've heard, I understand
but disagree with, King Timothy's actions regarding the field battle.

Yours in Service to Atlantia,
Duke Richard Fitzgilbert
(Jeffrey Sussman)

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