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

Re: Pennsic Letter

Poster: Kevin Maxson <kevin@maxson.com>

"H L. Falls" wrote:
> > In the case of children wearing S&M, it appears it did cause mental
> > anguish to the lady who mentioned this.
> Unfortunately, *anything* you do will upset *somebody*.  I've even heard
> some folks condemn the SCA, but I doubt you want to ban *that*!

<shrug>  I just figured I'd point out it bothered someone, or it
wouldn't have been brought up.

> > Let's clarify that:  "The point of Pennsic is to have a really good time
> > with a really big group of people in the Society for Creative
> > Anachronism."
> >
> > Would you agree that is still correct?
>    Actually, no.  While hosted by/under the auspices of the SCA, Pennsic
> has a *loooonnnggg* tradition of being open to other, loosely related
> groups (Tuchux, Marklanders, and others), and indeed dates back to a time
> when the SCA itself was a whole lot more relaxed and laid back.  I
> personally (and yes, this is just my unsupported opinion) think that it's
> way too late to try to put this particular genie back in the bottle...

Tradition, maybe.  I don't know much there.  However, the SCA is
sponsoring it, and covering the insurance so we don't destroy the
Cooper's nice campground.  You can't turn an Eric Clapton concert into
something else just because you go and you don't like the music.  Sure,
you don't have to listen, but it's still a Clapton concert.

> [snipsnip!]
> > > Are you really going to tell someone who paid $80 plus whatever they
> > > invested into camping supplies that they have to leave the game because you
> > > don't like how they look/act/etc.?
> >
> > Unfortunately, yes.  $80 doesn't buy them any rights.
> >
> >
> > If I want to drive my car at stupid-fast speeds, I should sign up on the
> > drag list at Old Dominion Speedway.
>    Personally, I think your analogy would be a bit closer to the mark
> if you were being arrested/banned from the road because somebody didn't
> like your paint job...

Uh-uh.  Kilmeny mentioned "don't like how they look/ACT/etc."  My
analogy was addressing the action part, just like speeding on the road. 
I guess my post was covering all points of the seneschals' review all at
once.  Sorry 'bout that.

> [more snippage...]
> > "I want you to
> > stay and have fun with us, but I want you to wear something different to
> > play with us."
>    Actually, I quite agree.  And I think "courts" and such are the wrong way
> to approach this goal.

Well yeah, but they've said they don't intend the
courts/review/inquisition to include garb infractions.  They've just
given people an official avenue to say, "Garb is more appropriate than
blue jeans here."

> > Perio.. per.. periodi... how do you pronounce that?  ;)
>    How about perioidity???  :-)

Perioddity?  :)  A good Landsknecht is full of perioddity!  :)

>    You know that, Kilmeny knows that, I know that...  Problem is when
> some people think that "fun" means beating up on other people for not
> conforming to their notions of "Period"...

That'll happen no matter the rule or the event.  There's jerks
everywhere.  Someone posted something about autocrat's staff yelling at
someone buying garb?  Sad, but there you have it.

> > Pennsic is not a public venue, it's a private party.
>    Ummm, well... no, not really.  If they were holding a *private* party
> their own back yard, yeah...  Carrying your logic to its absurd conclusion,
> they could declare Pennsic "Elizabethian only" if they wanted...

Same difference.  Whether it's their own back yard, or they rent someone
else's.  And yes, if they posted rules in advance and made it
Elizabethan only, they could do it.  There's a yearly private
Elizabethan party held somewhere.  People in my household go, I don't. 
I don't do Elizabethan, so I'm not invited.  :)

FWIW, it's not an SCA event, but the same premise holds.  I wouldn't go
to this party wearing a Norman tunic.

> > Well, they've obviously modified the terminology on this one.  A
> > "seneschals' review" sounds more appropriate, and better communicates
> > what I think their purpose is to be.
>    I dunno, a rose by any other name...

Careful, they're using that new V-chip to watch you now....

If it'd been called a review first before a court, I think it'd be a big
difference to you.

> > If all this can be done with minimal offense to the offenders, increase
> > peace, love and happy chocolate - and maintain attendance, fantastic.
>    *HEY!!!*  Chocolate's not period!!!!  [G,D,RLH!!!]

As a drink it is.  "Happy" doesn't have to mean "solid".  :)

|+^+|  Kevin of Thornbury
|/+\|  (Kevin Maxson)
 \_/   kevin@maxson.com   http://www.atlantia.sca.org
List Archives, FAQ, FTP:  http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
            Submissions:  atlantia@atlantia.sca.org
        Admin. requests:  majordomo@atlantia.sca.org