I'm not sure how many of you are terribly interested in hearing about my plans for uber-geekery that can also be described as creating a household within the S.C.A. As such, this may just end up being my way of organizing my thoughts.
This week, I've put a lot of thought into how I want to set this up. I've come up with a few goals, and the beginning of what I'm calling the "Charter". Essentially just a fancy name for a code of conduct and behavior. More importantly, I've got a name. All households need a name, and I've already picked the one for mine. The North Seas Trading Company. The reason I picked it is twofold, though to be honest the second reason was purely incidental. The first is that my persona, one Ruadhan macLochloinn, is a Scotsman and as a merchant ship commander would do most of his business in the North Sea area. The second is that the area we live in, the Barony of Thor's Mountain, is very obviously tied to Norse culture. In this way I make a connection between the house and the barony.
As I've stated, I do have some goals already penned for the household. Primarily, it's about having fun. More specifically though, it's about bringing people together who share an interest/love of the nautical cultures of the period. It's about bringing to life the personas that all of us in the society work so hard to put together. At least I would think the nautical aspect is a natural match for the people of the area, given the Norse penchant for exploration and sailing. The other might be a bit more difficult as it would call for those involved in the house to actually act out their personas as opposed to simply stating what that persona is and then behaving as normal.
The Charter is still very much in the works. I have a few things jotted down that I would like to hope are common sense. Mostly about respecting others, helping those that need it, and keeping mundane issues in the mundane world. Generally speaking, I see the S.C.A. as a world unto itself, and want to try as much as possible to keep the separation between mundane and Scadian in place. So the Charter will be written in a manner consistent with the period, and not simply as a set of mundane world rules brought over into the period.
Then there's the matter of structure. I know that some houses are uber-structured, while others resemble not much more than an amorphous entity where friends can have fun together. Both are fine, though I personally want to have at least a little structure to help when the household gets together for larger events. The way I envision doing this is fairly simple. I've looked at the way ships were manned back in the late 1500's and intend to model the house's staffing after it. Ships of the day didn't have a rigid military ranking system. Instead, they had positional titles and responsibility. The ship's master and commander was equivalent to a modern day ship's captain. As head of the household, I would serve in that capacity, though I would use the title of "Flag" since the idea is to be head of an entire trading company. As such, I would certainly expect others to join as masters of their own ships. Other positions include the cooper who would have been responsible for the upkeep of stores barrels. I see this as analogous to a logistics person or quartermaster. The carpenter of the day would have been responsible for repairs to the ship, though I would probably shift the focus to more of an A&S focus... perhaps coordinating the A&S efforts of our various members. A ship's pilot would be responsible for navigation, though I'm not sure how I would use it in terms of the household. There was also a barber who would work as doctor/dentist/surgeon and in general keep an eye on the crew's well being. Again, I'm not sure how to parley that into a position for the household, but I'm sure I have time to figure it out. Cooks weren't specifically a position so much as they were sailors who were physically incapable of doing much else. I'm not going to use that as a criteria however. Instead, it would be someone who was genuinely interested in the food of the period, and cooking/coordinating meals for the household.
All of the positions I come up with, whether they were listed above or something else I come up with will be purely voluntary. I would only want someone to hold a position if it was something they were interested in. You see, beyond simply holding down a position and fulfilling the associated duties, I would want those in a specific position to become very familiar with all aspects of the actual position as it was performed in the past. For those who don't want to hold a position of responsibility, there will be a kind of informal rank system. Essentially, everyone who joins would start out as a simple sailor. Those who show a willingness to go above and beyond being just a sailor, who exemplify the values I'd like to see in members of the household, would be able to achieve a promotion of status within the household, with names like Bosun or perhaps Gunner, depending on how they distinguished themselves. The ideas are there, but it's still rough. In time I hope to come up with something a bit more definitive, but I'm in no hurry.
I've also come up with a rather interesting way to induct new members, should they choose to accept induction in this way. It's something in keeping with both the period, and the theme of the household. However, as I'd like to keep at least some air of mystery in place, this is one idea that I want to divulge only to those who actually join the household... whenever it is that I manage to start it up.
One more thing I'd like to mention before I wrap this post up, is that I would very much like to put some of the house's efforts into greeting new people and visitors at events. I'd like to have a hospitality tent set up so that people have a place to go for munchies, fellowship, and perhaps to ask those questions that are burning at the back of their brains. Someplace where new people feel welcome and not overwhelmed by all the garb and whatnot. I'm honestly hoping that, by being in character full time during events, we would be able to pique the interest of others with our stories and our living personas.
So far, it seems to be coming together. Given time, who knows. It might turn out to be something fun.
Saturday, March 9, 2013
Thursday, March 7, 2013
Plans and Ambitions
For those of you who don't know, I belong to a group known as the Society for Creative Anachronisms or S.C.A. (look it up). For those of you who do know, and perhaps even know me within the society, I have plans. Not for world domination or even just the subjugation of a local populace, but I do have plans. For some reason, I've decided to divulge them here today.
First, and the plan I'm closest to bringing to fruition is to become authorized to compete in rapier competitions. I have all of my gear save the mask and gorget, but I'm hoping to have all that in the near-ish future. With luck, I'll be authorized before the end of Silver Star.
Second, I am currently working on getting my mead production into full swing. I've already made a couple of batches that have gone over well, but I'd like to pick up a few more things to up my production level. Essentially, I'd like to be able to have a steady flow of mead for all the year's events. Again, I'm close to getting to that point.
Third, I would like to eventually become a warranted rapier marshall for Meridies. Hopefully by doing this, I can help to bring rapier up to the frozen northern wastes where I live and not have to drive all the way to Knoxville for practices. Of course, this would also help others in similar situations
Finally, and by far my longest term and most ambitious plan is to start my own household. I've already started jotting down notes about what I want, what the household will be about, and how it will be run. I don't plan on starting it any time in the near future though. I want to take my time, get established in the society, and have fun in general before I tie myself down with the duties of running a household. But if it all comes together the way I'd like, I think it'll be worth the wait.
First, and the plan I'm closest to bringing to fruition is to become authorized to compete in rapier competitions. I have all of my gear save the mask and gorget, but I'm hoping to have all that in the near-ish future. With luck, I'll be authorized before the end of Silver Star.
Second, I am currently working on getting my mead production into full swing. I've already made a couple of batches that have gone over well, but I'd like to pick up a few more things to up my production level. Essentially, I'd like to be able to have a steady flow of mead for all the year's events. Again, I'm close to getting to that point.
Third, I would like to eventually become a warranted rapier marshall for Meridies. Hopefully by doing this, I can help to bring rapier up to the frozen northern wastes where I live and not have to drive all the way to Knoxville for practices. Of course, this would also help others in similar situations
Finally, and by far my longest term and most ambitious plan is to start my own household. I've already started jotting down notes about what I want, what the household will be about, and how it will be run. I don't plan on starting it any time in the near future though. I want to take my time, get established in the society, and have fun in general before I tie myself down with the duties of running a household. But if it all comes together the way I'd like, I think it'll be worth the wait.
Friday, February 8, 2013
The Second Amendment
Seeing as how gun control has become a rather popular issue over the last few months, I thought I'd throw out my two cents. As always, keep in mind that this is just my opinion, the way my mind has wandered while pondering the subject at hand, and is not even close to a doctoral thesis.
So... The Second Amendment.
As I recall, the second amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, or at least the part that everyone is concerned with, states that all citizens have the right to keep and bear arms. Let's start with that shall we? The sentence itself is simple and to the point. It grants anyone who is a citizen of this nation the right to keep and bear arms. It doesn't say only hunters can have weapons. It doesn't say the only weapons that can be kept are hunting rifles, archery sets, or swords. It says specifically "arms". Neither does it delineate the maximum number of rounds a person may have available to them while bearing said arms. Seems clear enough to me. Which is what leads me to the next part of this entry.
Many people today are trying to limit the "arms" that we as citizens can keep and bear to those used in either hunting or sports. For justification, they try to say that the only reason the second amendment exists was to ensure that those who hunted for a living could continue to do so. Those who believe such are sorely mistaken. The entire purpose of the Bill of Rights is to ensure that, no matter what, the government would never have the power to turn the populace into a nation of slaves under tyrannical rule. Why else would they specifically guarantee the right to free speech, a free press, and the right to peaceably assemble? The second amendment was essentially put into place to ensure that we as individuals could defend ourselves should the government ever take it upon itself to use armed soldiers to force its will upon us. After all, who in their right mind would ever attack a place in which everyone could and did carry some kind of weapon. In fact, a rather prominent Japanese Admiral during WWII once said, and I'm paraphrasing, that to invade mainland America would be suicide, as there would be a gun behind every blade of grass. So it stands to reason that the same would be true if the Federal government decided to try anything. Hence the reason the second amendment was put into the Bill of Rights in the first place.
Another argument that a lot of anti-gun types are trying to use in order to circumvent the second amendment, is that the men who wrote the second amendment, never envisioned the kinds of weapons available to the average citizen today. That if they had, they would never have left the amendment as open ended as it is. I believe that they made the second amendment so vague, saying only "arms", and not specifying specifically which arms they meant, was precisely because they had no idea what kinds of weapons would be developed in the future. The men who wrote the Bill of Rights were smart men. They were students of history. They knew how weapons had evolved over the centuries from swords, to bows and arrows, to crossbows, to cannon, and on to rifles and pistols. They knew that weapons would continue to evolve in ways they could never imagine. With that said, how could they possibly limit the second amendment to a specific type of weapon or weapons when they would most certainly be rendered obsolete over time. More to the point, they knew that, as weapons evolved, the government would make sure their troops had the most advanced, top of the line equipment. After all, how could they hope to stand against foreign foes if they didn't keep up with advancements in weapons technology. Imagine if our soldiers had gone into WWII with nothing more than muskets. And since the second amendment was meant to give the populace the means by which to defend themselves against a tyrannical government, would it make sense to limit the citizens to those same muskets while the government was carrying M-16's? This, in my opinion, is why they were intentionally vague about the arms we as citizens were given the right to keep.
With all of that, how can anyone in government, or even as a citizen of this nation be able to sit back and say that it's alright if the government takes away our right as citizens to protect ourselves by whatever means necessary? How can they allow anyone to say that we should only be allowed firearms that meet a certain description, and can only have so many shots at a time? What if the government became so corrupt that they sent troops to your door to take you in, or even kill you, simply because you spoke your mind? Shouldn't you be able to stand your ground for as long as possible in defiance of tyranny? Shouldn't you be able to join together with your fellow citizens to overthrow those who would seek to turn us into naught more than slaves to a central ruling body, using force to overcome the wall of soldiers they would use to protect themselves? Shouldn't we be able to protect what is ours by right, when the government seeks to take it by force?
How can we possibly do all that, if the government reduces us to bearing slings and arrows, while they carry guns and bombs?
The second amendment was written for our protection. If we forget that and allow it to be stripped away little by little, our once great nation will not survive.
So... The Second Amendment.
As I recall, the second amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, or at least the part that everyone is concerned with, states that all citizens have the right to keep and bear arms. Let's start with that shall we? The sentence itself is simple and to the point. It grants anyone who is a citizen of this nation the right to keep and bear arms. It doesn't say only hunters can have weapons. It doesn't say the only weapons that can be kept are hunting rifles, archery sets, or swords. It says specifically "arms". Neither does it delineate the maximum number of rounds a person may have available to them while bearing said arms. Seems clear enough to me. Which is what leads me to the next part of this entry.
Many people today are trying to limit the "arms" that we as citizens can keep and bear to those used in either hunting or sports. For justification, they try to say that the only reason the second amendment exists was to ensure that those who hunted for a living could continue to do so. Those who believe such are sorely mistaken. The entire purpose of the Bill of Rights is to ensure that, no matter what, the government would never have the power to turn the populace into a nation of slaves under tyrannical rule. Why else would they specifically guarantee the right to free speech, a free press, and the right to peaceably assemble? The second amendment was essentially put into place to ensure that we as individuals could defend ourselves should the government ever take it upon itself to use armed soldiers to force its will upon us. After all, who in their right mind would ever attack a place in which everyone could and did carry some kind of weapon. In fact, a rather prominent Japanese Admiral during WWII once said, and I'm paraphrasing, that to invade mainland America would be suicide, as there would be a gun behind every blade of grass. So it stands to reason that the same would be true if the Federal government decided to try anything. Hence the reason the second amendment was put into the Bill of Rights in the first place.
Another argument that a lot of anti-gun types are trying to use in order to circumvent the second amendment, is that the men who wrote the second amendment, never envisioned the kinds of weapons available to the average citizen today. That if they had, they would never have left the amendment as open ended as it is. I believe that they made the second amendment so vague, saying only "arms", and not specifying specifically which arms they meant, was precisely because they had no idea what kinds of weapons would be developed in the future. The men who wrote the Bill of Rights were smart men. They were students of history. They knew how weapons had evolved over the centuries from swords, to bows and arrows, to crossbows, to cannon, and on to rifles and pistols. They knew that weapons would continue to evolve in ways they could never imagine. With that said, how could they possibly limit the second amendment to a specific type of weapon or weapons when they would most certainly be rendered obsolete over time. More to the point, they knew that, as weapons evolved, the government would make sure their troops had the most advanced, top of the line equipment. After all, how could they hope to stand against foreign foes if they didn't keep up with advancements in weapons technology. Imagine if our soldiers had gone into WWII with nothing more than muskets. And since the second amendment was meant to give the populace the means by which to defend themselves against a tyrannical government, would it make sense to limit the citizens to those same muskets while the government was carrying M-16's? This, in my opinion, is why they were intentionally vague about the arms we as citizens were given the right to keep.
With all of that, how can anyone in government, or even as a citizen of this nation be able to sit back and say that it's alright if the government takes away our right as citizens to protect ourselves by whatever means necessary? How can they allow anyone to say that we should only be allowed firearms that meet a certain description, and can only have so many shots at a time? What if the government became so corrupt that they sent troops to your door to take you in, or even kill you, simply because you spoke your mind? Shouldn't you be able to stand your ground for as long as possible in defiance of tyranny? Shouldn't you be able to join together with your fellow citizens to overthrow those who would seek to turn us into naught more than slaves to a central ruling body, using force to overcome the wall of soldiers they would use to protect themselves? Shouldn't we be able to protect what is ours by right, when the government seeks to take it by force?
How can we possibly do all that, if the government reduces us to bearing slings and arrows, while they carry guns and bombs?
The second amendment was written for our protection. If we forget that and allow it to be stripped away little by little, our once great nation will not survive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)