[Artemisia] Re: thought for discussion-

[Dr. Helm-Clark]

> > Prowess
> > Courtesie
> > Noblesse Oblige
> > Largesse
> > Franchise

you know, I've lived in 5 other kingdoms before moving here - and until
I moved here, I had never heard "the quality of peerage" defined quite
this way... I'm still thinking about whether my conception of peerage
fits into that sort of framework or visa versa.  Yeah, I know -
here 3
years and I'm still thinking about it...  but sometimes it takes
me that
long to know what I really think, and more important, why I think it.

I probably think too much (El Hermoso Dormido would certainly
agree to
that, but hey, I love him anyway  ;-)

> For any given Peerage, it is my opinion that Prowess is bestowed upon an
> individual by others in his/her chased field of endeavor. It would have
> to be readily agreed upon by a high percentage of those with knowledge
> in that field of endeavor that yes, that person is really good at what
> they do.

Godwin, friend, I find I can't agree with that. A person with self-honesty,
integrity, intelligence and introspection can judge for themselves where
their level of skill stands with respect to the efforts of others. That
judgement and the statement thereof can be as prideful or as
humble or as 
honest as the character of the person making the statement and the
intent 
behind the statement.

If you're good at something, perhaps even the best at something,
what is
worse? An honest statement of pride in one's own achievement or
the sham
humility a person may wear as a public face over their
achievement? Was 
the statement of one's own abilities made to inform? to lament the lack
of others with sufficient talent and interest to share those
abilities 
with? to put someone else down?

> Methinks it would be boastful for a single person to state their Prowess
> at something, but the same statement would be truthful and above
> reproach if uttered by several others.

but would it be if those others making the statement had not the
skill 
and/or knowledge to make an informed evaluation?

I am reminded of:

     "Why do you send me idiots to judge my work?!?"

a comment to Julius II, Pope, from Michaelangelo,
referring to the criticism of the ceiling in the Sistine Chapel by the
so-called recognised art critics and art patrons of his day

I made a wonderful thing once, a leather cover to go over some heraldic
ceremonies.  Everyone ooo-ed and ah-ed at the 15th C. cuir cisele' decoration
on the outside of the cover, but only one person took the cover
from me,
glanced at the decoration as if it were an afterthought and then
opened it
up and looked carefully and appreciatively at the hinge cuts. The statement
of my ability from all the people fooled by the "flash" of the
leather 
decoration does not reflect my prowess in the endeavor for which I
got my
laurel.  The assessment of my skill from the person who knew where
to look
for the real leatherworking ability was far better.  

So is the statement of my prowess by those fooled by "flash" a truthful
statement beyond reproach because it was expressed by those who do
not know
enough to even judge my work?  I do not pose the question out of malice,
Godwin, and I know where you're coming from (or at least, I think
I do... :),
but because I'd like to point out that the court of popular
judgement is not
the best place to judge many (but not all) of the endeavors that
people do 
in the SCA

just some random thoughts
ttfn
Therasia