[Artemisia] In Praise of Play

[Bruce Padget]

What follows comes out of several discussions in various fora in Artemisia.  I write fully realizing that some of this may offend.  Sometimes a little offense is needed.

When I moved to Caid, I was worried that I was moving to a Kingdom of bureaucrats, based both on what I had heard, and what I had seen at inter-Kingdom events.  I've discussed the ideas that follow with folks in my new home, and I've been told that Caid once was the Land of the Bureaucrat.  Much of Caid has made a conscious move toward a more play-centered SCA, I've come to suspect that the problem I identify here is a natural part of a group's life cycle.

First, imagine two shires.

Shire one works very hard.  All offices, even the optional ones, are filled, and all reports are on time.  But nobody in shire one plays.

Shire two plays creatively and authentically, but no one works.

With which shire do you want to spend time?

The work is important, but it is *not* the goal of the SCA. I've seen branches in Artemisia for which the the work had become an end in itself.  People in such branches are surprised that their branches often struggle.  The usual response is that the branch needs more people to work.

Sometimes branches do need more people to work.  More often, I've found that branches need more people to play.

I grew up playing Three Musketeers.  You probably had some similar youthful play, and I'll bet some of your best moments in the SCA hearken back to it.  You probably joined the SCA in part to fulfill that play need.

I'm pretty sure nobody here
 grew up playing Exchequer.  Even if you are one, and good at it. 

Let me suggest an approach to analyzing life in the SCA -- when you think about doing something, ask:  Is this the sort of thing I joined for?  

If the answer is an unqualified yes, play on!  

If it isn't what you joined for, question whether it is necessary.  Unless the answer is a clear yes, don't do it.  The farther removed from what you joined for, the more you should question it.  Work that does not in some way facilitate play shouldn't be taking time and energy.

What's wrong with extra work?  Time and energy are finite.  Time and energy spent working can't be spent playing.   

Also, we do have a play need, and it will be fulfilled one way or another.  No-rules all-terrain Bocce?  Big fun.  No-rules all-terrain "Who's Our Next Seneschal?"  Not so much.  I have found that work-centric branches do play.  They just don't play fun games, and they don't play nice.

Regards,
Niccolo
bapadget at yahoo.com


P.S.  One might respond that my hypothetical shire two will not have official events or practices, and will soon loose its shire status.  Two counters -- 

1.  So do just enough work to maintain official status.  (Doing extra work doesn't make your branch, event, or practice extra-official.)

2.  Some of my best times have been with non-official groups.

P.P.S  Rotund one, you're promoting an SCA of nothing but mindless hedonism!

Those who play with mindless hedonism are already doing so, and they will continue to do so.  You don't counter them with work, you counter them with good examples of play.