brewer wrote:InsaneIrish wrote:You stand back and point and laugh and cast disparogies(sp?)
disparagies.InsaneIrish wrote:at the SCA yet you offer no positive advice or options to help us change. You call us absurd yet in the same breath name those "who do strive to learn the ways of the time they claim to be representing," as good and worthy of your notice. You don't like the SCA, fine, don't play. The SCA will go on without you.
You're right, sir. The SCA will go on without those for whom accuracy is a priority. Good thing, too. That's as far as we agree.
There have been plenty of bits of advice, options, and information floated on this BB and elsewhere from reenactors to SCAdians. Why is it our fault that people like you don't want to listen? After all, there's only a few ways to accomplish the change of which we speak, but the intense inclusivity (anyone being welcomed as a full participant who makes any attempt to wear something that doesn't look like modern American street clothing, which seems to be what "makes an attempt at pre-17th century garb" means), coupled with intense animosity toward any attempt to heighten standards which would violate that inclusivity, negates any advice which we give.
For my part, I refuse to accept your ire for your refusal to fix your problem, even after I've given you the tools, methods, and encouragement.InsaneIrish wrote:I do not understand why people who have either tried the SCA and didn't like it or just looked into the SCA pasted it by, need to "throw stones" at us. I never here anything from people in the SCA about living history guys other than that they have higher standards than the SCA and that they look cool. On the other hand I hear about everything wrong with the SCA and how Living History is better when I talk to LH guys.
It's been said before, but I'll say it again: Not every LHer is like that. In fact, I know very, very few who have such a lack of social skill to say such a thing. All the LHers I know say how the SCA is perfect for what it is. We just get our knickers in a twist when someone equates our hobbies (the SCA and LH), because they are different, to a very marked extent. Is one better than the other? No, not in the grand sense. We both fill different niches, that's all.
Brewer I think we miss understand each other. My post was directed AT Durin, not Living history/re-enactment in general. If you wish to call it a flame, ok. I have been on this forum for quite a while. Not as long as some, but longer than most. I have noticed a trend, that trend being that there allways a group on this forum that casts down the SCA every chance they get. Durin's post was nothing but a flame and he got a flame in return. I did not mean to encompase all of LH and re-enactment in that post. I know that many have offered help from the outside. I have taken advantage of that offer many times. Your right, it IS my Problem (my meaning I am part of the SCA and I need to help fix it, not others from the outside). And I do try, I am constantly working on getting my garb and rig and campsite looking more period. I also push those around me to better themselves as well. And because of a certian percentage "pushing" others along and SCA has grown by gigantic huge leaps and bounds since its conception. I know the SCA has a long way to go, and I am trying to help get it there. I also know the SCA will never be LH or re-enactment, that is good because I don't want to do those things. As you posted above the 2 hobbies are different.
Over the years I have seen the SCA down troden(sp?) by LH and re-enactment not every LH and re-enactment person and certianly not all the time but enough for me to take notice. I guess I am tired of hearing about it in my old age
