|
|
|
|
|
Eloquent Conversationalist
|
Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:35 am
|
|
|
|
Kittywitch While that time period is not my area of expertise; in many time periods in question marrying someone from a different religion wasn't treated anything like it is now. It was not a question of talking to your parents, it was a question of killing everyone involved; and it may have been handled differently than most other examples in period. Like I said, this particular culture is not my area of expertise.
I don't think I ever mentioned cross-religion marriages, only cross-nationalities. Let me be more clear now: My rabbi's heritage is Egyptian Jew, Arab Jew, Moroccan Jew, Tunisian Jew (I've asked again since we last spoke). His wife's family are French Jew and Italian Jew. Many, many nationalities; one religion. You're very correct, marrying outside the faith (for any faith) was taken as a very serious offense, back in the day, and among some of us it still is (albeit not a killing offense, G*D forbid, at least not with Jews -- we mourned then, as now, as if the person were dead, but we don't hasten death itself, because we hope they'll both come to their senses and return to the faith of their ancestors... but I digress).
Also, regarding time periods:
* Not all of us are historical scholars, so we don't always know we're mixing time periods. The point of the SCA, as I understand it by reading the mission statement on the SCA website, is entertaining education -- we come to learn, not just to show off what we're already experts in.
* Not all of us can afford to be that historically accurate when it comes to being able to buy the fully-historically-appropriate garb.
* Not all of us have the skills to construct historically appropriate garb, much as we'd like to do so, once we've learned what the appropriate garb would be.
* Not all of us are in good enough health to use perfectly accurate items. For instance, my flatmate narrowly avoided knee surgery, and therefore probably won't be buying or making perfectly historically accurate footwear, but rather, footwear that will help maintain proper foot and leg positioning/alignment. I've had nearly a dozen foot surgeries myself, so I'll be going for comfort over accuracy, too, especially since I recently fractured the same dratted foot (you're hearing my frustration, right?) while stepping off a curb, and my foot's all swollen now.
* For Europe, time period mattered a great deal. Things changed a lot in Europe over short amounts of time, in quick bursts. Fashions, technology, culture -- all have an impact on what a European persona would wear. In non-Europe, time period mattered a little bit less. It wasn't entirely inconsequential, of course, but fashions changed very slowly. How long has the sari been worn in India? How long has the abaya been worn in most of Africa and the Middle East? Those really don't change much at all. Those styles are at least two thousand years old, and people are still wearing them. So as you see, mixing time periods isn't as crucial for a Middle Eastern, North African, or Indian persona as it would be for, say, a Norse, Dutch, English, Irish, French, et cetera persona.
* If something is still usable, even a little bit, people in the Middle Ages tended to keep using it rather than toss it away. The same is true of not-so-wealthy folks here and now. My grandmother's got a sugaring kettle that she isn't strong enough to lift anymore, and because I'm the oldest granddaughter, I'll probably be the one to whom she leaves it when she dies. Doesn't matter to me that the thing was old in 1932 when my grandmother was born. If someone's using something too 'new' for them in Period, yeah, that's a problem. But if they're using something too 'old' for them, maybe it was passed down -- or maybe they just make it "the way their family passed down the design," or something.
I'm not making excuses for anyone or saying that this SHOULD always happen, of course. I'm just saying that it's possible to judge our neighbor with kindness, giving the benefit of the doubt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 11:37 am
|
|
|
|
Divash Kittywitch While that time period is not my area of expertise; in many time periods in question marrying someone from a different religion wasn't treated anything like it is now. It was not a question of talking to your parents, it was a question of killing everyone involved; and it may have been handled differently than most other examples in period. Like I said, this particular culture is not my area of expertise. I don't think I ever mentioned cross-religion marriages, only cross-nationalities. Let me be more clear now: My rabbi's heritage is Egyptian Jew, Arab Jew, Moroccan Jew, Tunisian Jew (I've asked again since we last spoke). His wife's family are French Jew and Italian Jew. Many, many nationalities; one religion. You're very correct, marrying outside the faith (for any faith) was taken as a very serious offense, back in the day, and among some of us it still is (albeit not a killing offense, G*D forbid, at least not with Jews -- we mourned then, as now, as if the person were dead, but we don't hasten death itself, because we hope they'll both come to their senses and return to the faith of their ancestors... but I digress). Also, regarding time periods: * Not all of us are historical scholars, so we don't always know we're mixing time periods. The point of the SCA, as I understand it by reading the mission statement on the SCA website, is entertaining education -- we come to learn, not just to show off what we're already experts in. * Not all of us can afford to be that historically accurate when it comes to being able to buy the fully-historically-appropriate garb. * Not all of us have the skills to construct historically appropriate garb, much as we'd like to do so, once we've learned what the appropriate garb would be. * Not all of us are in good enough health to use perfectly accurate items. For instance, my flatmate narrowly avoided knee surgery, and therefore probably won't be buying or making perfectly historically accurate footwear, but rather, footwear that will help maintain proper foot and leg positioning/alignment. I've had nearly a dozen foot surgeries myself, so I'll be going for comfort over accuracy, too, especially since I recently fractured the same dratted foot (you're hearing my frustration, right?) while stepping off a curb, and my foot's all swollen now. * For Europe, time period mattered a great deal. Things changed a lot in Europe over short amounts of time, in quick bursts. Fashions, technology, culture -- all have an impact on what a European persona would wear. In non-Europe, time period mattered a little bit less. It wasn't entirely inconsequential, of course, but fashions changed very slowly. How long has the sari been worn in India? How long has the abaya been worn in most of Africa and the Middle East? Those really don't change much at all. Those styles are at least two thousand years old, and people are still wearing them. So as you see, mixing time periods isn't as crucial for a Middle Eastern, North African, or Indian persona as it would be for, say, a Norse, Dutch, English, Irish, French, et cetera persona. * If something is still usable, even a little bit, people in the Middle Ages tended to keep using it rather than toss it away. The same is true of not-so-wealthy folks here and now. My grandmother's got a sugaring kettle that she isn't strong enough to lift anymore, and because I'm the oldest granddaughter, I'll probably be the one to whom she leaves it when she dies. Doesn't matter to me that the thing was old in 1932 when my grandmother was born. If someone's using something too 'new' for them in Period, yeah, that's a problem. But if they're using something too 'old' for them, maybe it was passed down -- or maybe they just make it "the way their family passed down the design," or something. I'm not making excuses for anyone or saying that this SHOULD always happen, of course. I'm just saying that it's possible to judge our neighbor with kindness, giving the benefit of the doubt.
This.
I wear Birkenstocks and NAOTs a lot, mostly because I have knee issues. They pass the ten foot rule, but the reason I don't have period shoes is because I need more than good sproing in my shoes. My NAOTs have buckles on them in Mary Jane style, and probably aren't as period as I'd like, but for my health and safety's sake, I'm going to wear them until I can get around to having boots/shoes with proper support and shocks made for me. Plus, y'know, I'm also half-blind and a poor college-type person, so my plastic frames aren't going anywhere for a while.
I do, however, take off my watch at events unless it's absolutely direly necessary, and if push comes to shove, I try to hand sew as much as humanly possible (despite the fact I hate sewing).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 1:08 am
|
|
|
|
Civilian13 hellogoodbyetoday ok the people try as much as they can its not perfect so get over it the only thing that bothers me is the pirates (non sca members who come to one event dressed in halloween costumes) i'm mildly offended by that (not in a snippy way, but in a jesting way) i AM a pirate and i try very hard to put together a really cool outfit. if your reffering to the artificially tattered black and white/red striped capris with a parrot attached to your shoulder then i agree with you. i actually saw at an even someone dressed EXACTLY like capt jack sparrow right down to the beard braids...it made me twitch so bad. You find those fellows everywhere, actually. Believe it or not, one showed up to the Ball at the last Civil War re-enactment I went to. (He made a good Jack Sparrow, admittedly, I was just wondering what on earth made him decide to dress like that for a re-enactor's ball.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 9:40 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 6:17 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 11:05 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 11:21 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 6:50 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 9:45 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 4:12 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 6:54 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 8:22 pm
|
|
|
|
Dragostae Kittywitch It's probably regional. But from context, I'm guessing it's a place where you're asked to stay in persona. Enchanted Ground is a concept that Duke Cariadoc of the Bow came up with. You are right, in that it's about staying in persona. More can be found in this article. Yeah, that sounds like him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 8:43 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:28 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:42 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|