From: lcoffman@aol.com (LCoffman) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: Re: Why the sca is looked down upon Date: 14 Dec 1997 18:05:30 GMT Lines: 3 Message-ID: <19971214180500.NAA06144@ladder01.news.aol.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder01.news.aol.com X-Admin: news@aol.com Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com References: Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!newsxfer3.itd.umich.edu!news-out.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!152.163.199.19!portc03.blue.aol.com!newstf02.news.aol.com!audrey01.news.aol.com!not-for-mail in reading about another society i think i found the clue as to why the sca is looked down on by serious historians the quote is " this group recreats the middle ages as it should have been not as it was" ###### From: bellatrix2@aol.com (Bellatrix2) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: Re: Why the sca is looked down upon Date: 17 Dec 1997 06:51:06 GMT Lines: 13 Message-ID: <19971217065100.BAA05776@ladder02.news.aol.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: ladder02.news.aol.com X-Admin: news@aol.com Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com References: <19971214180500.NAA06144@ladder01.news.aol.com> Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!152.163.199.19!portc03.blue.aol.com!audrey02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail Greetings all, The group does recreate selectively, however historians rarely aknowledge that we have an incredible network and base set for research and practice of period systems and things of the day.. We do not do everything exactly as was done, but provide an atmosphere that is free flowing with the intent of recreating the period and its ideals, and to provide a place for education to take place. BTW I never considered tothe SCA to be a Renaisance recreation group and don't think it was intended to be such, only that many people do the very late period stuff Anyway...pass this on to those historians you talk about. Stephan ###### From: Anthony Bryant Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: Re: Why the sca is looked down upon Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 13:31:50 -0500 Lines: 11 Message-ID: <34981A83.51F8@sprintmail.com> References: <19971214180500.NAA06144@ladder01.news.aol.com> <19971217065100.BAA05776@ladder02.news.aol.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 168.191.38.23 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-AICK1-2 (Macintosh; U; PPC) Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!ais.net!news.sprintisp.com!sprintisp!not-for-mail Bellatrix2 wrote: > Yo! Steve! It's amazing who turns up on Rialto.... How's the family doing? Tell your dad and "Bob" I said hi... Edward of Effingham ###### Path: ccw.ch!usenet From: Neil Franklin (reply remove nospam.) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: Re: Why the sca is looked down upon Date: 18 Dec 1997 03:45:00 +0100 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 36 Message-ID: References: <19971217065100.BAA05776@ladder02.news.aol.com> X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 bellatrix2@aol.com (Bellatrix2) wrote: > We do not do everything exactly as was done > Anyway...pass this on to those historians you talk about. A technique for stalling someone who disregards the SCA for its selective recreating: Ask them to name _any_ other group that does not selectively recreate. If they name more than zero, ask them if the named group(s) recreate(s) any of following provenly period things: - political blackmail - politically motivated murder - wars with live steel and real dead - plundering and raping - burning heretics or witches - plague without antibiotica I would doubt any group with such features to find enough 20th century people prepared to be members. So I assume it not exist. Also you may point out to them that selective _recreating_ does not mean selective _amnesia_. After all you first need to know more than what you are going to recreate before you can _select_ (that imples leaving something away) what you want to recreate. The difference of the SCA is mainly that it _admits_ its acceptance of selectivity up front. That I regard as a good feature of the SCA. -- Neil.Franklin@ccw.ch, http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/ for Geek Code, Papernet, Voicenet, PGP public key see http: Any computer, that is running optimally, is outdated; including my Cx486 ###### From: timo@rehame.com Subject: Re: Why the sca is looked down upon Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 17:11:30 -0600 Message-ID: <882486543.462749701@dejanews.com> Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Organization: Deja News Posting Service References: <19971217065100.BAA05776@ladder02.news.aol.com> X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Dec 18 23:09:04 1997 GMT X-Authenticated-Sender: timo@rehame.com X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.01Gold (Win95; I) X-Originating-IP-Addr: 203.108.36.218 () proxy [mail (MSProxy/1.0) for 138.11.140.107] Lines: 46 Path: ccw.ch!aetna.dolphins.ch!news.planetc.com!leto.ou.edu!hammer.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp2.dejanews.com!grunt.dejanews.com!not-for-mail In article , Neil Franklin (reply remove nospam.) wrote: > > bellatrix2@aol.com (Bellatrix2) wrote: > > We do not do everything exactly as was done > > Anyway...pass this on to those historians you talk about. > > A technique for stalling someone who disregards the SCA for its > selective recreating: > > Ask them to name _any_ other group that does not selectively recreate. > > If they name more than zero, ask them if the named group(s) recreate(s) > any of following provenly period things: > > - political blackmail > - politically motivated murder > - wars with live steel and real dead > - plundering and raping > - burning heretics or witches > - plague without antibiotica Just a non-SCA person delurking for a moment: This really puzzles me. I understand why the SCA doesn't enforce authenticity in equipment and behaviour (but encourages it), but I cannot understand why many SCA people equate authenticity with 're-creating the Black Death'. No group does that and no-one has ever said the SCA should. Most of the groups and academics who have a low opinion of the SCA do so because the SCA allows people to wear and use equipment which is inaccuarate, not because it doesn't re-enact the social ills of the period. Its about accurate footwear, not burning heretics. As I said, I understand the reasons for the SCA's stance on authenticity, even if these critics don't, but this response to them is a straw man. Back to lurking ;) Tim O'Neill Tasmanian Devil -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet ###### Path: ccw.ch!usenet From: Neil Franklin (reply remove nospam.) Newsgroups: rec.org.sca Subject: Re: Why the sca is looked down upon Date: 19 Dec 1997 04:51:42 +0100 Organization: My own Private Self Lines: 70 Message-ID: References: <19971214180500.NAA06144@ladder01.news.aol.com> <19971217065100.BAA05776@ladder02.news.aol.com> <882486543.462749701@dejanews.com> X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 timo@rehame.com wrote: > Just a non-SCA person delurking for a moment Delurking:-) I like that one. bellatrix2@aol.com (Bellatrix2) wrote: > We do not do everything exactly as was done > Anyway...pass this on to those historians you talk about. (reply remove nospam.) wrote: > A technique for stalling someone who disregards the SCA for its > selective recreating: timo@rehame.com wrote: > Most of the groups > and academics who have a low opinion of the SCA do so > because the SCA allows people to wear and use equipment > which is inaccuarate, not because it doesn't re-enact the > social ills of the period. > Its about accurate footwear, not burning heretics. > This really puzzles me. I have re-read my original post. It was not particularly clear on what I was trying to say, so I am adding a few clarifications. I hope that will end your puzzleing. I belong (I should have perhaps mentioned that) to those who regard the SCA as _both_ recreating the equipment and the society of the period. In fact I regard recreating the period society as the more important part, the equipment only being one tool for doing this. Therefore I apply the word accuracy (and critics of the lack of it) to both of these. While many groups surpass the SCA in equipment many of them are at the same time often far more lacking in the society aspects. Even in the SCA social authenticity is at lower levels than equipment, but at least it is a concern for balancing the two. This is why I prefer the SCA, despite many other groups being available over here in Europe. My post was intended along the line of: Look at this big (and inavoidable) hole in their recreations (using it as a satirical hint at their total lack in this respect), doesn't this relativate the importance of equipment? Why are the critics only looking at the lesser inaccuracy of some of our equipment instead of the greater inaccuracies of their (and our) society? Of course I would regard it as wrong if they did those things mentioned, but the same I regard it as wrong, that they _only_ do equipment and then criticise us. I regard our middle path (both equipment and society, with limits in both accepted) as better, and certainly not as worse (which is what they call us). timo@rehame.com wrote: > As I said, I understand the reasons for the SCA's stance > on authenticity, even if these critics don't, but this > response to them is a straw man. I hope this post has added some flesh and bone to the straw man. If not (or if any other questions remain) post or mail me. BTW: For arguments on the relative accuracy in the SCA you may want to read: http://www.pbm.com/~lindahl/cariadoc/staying_in_persona.html particularly from the line "If we try to apply this common set of standards to the many dimensions of the Society as it now exists, what do we see?" onwards. -- Neil.Franklin@ccw.ch, http://www.ccw.ch/Neil.Franklin/ for Geek Code, Papernet, Voicenet, PGP public key see http: Any computer, that is running optimally, is outdated; including my Cx486