One of those conversations

[hrj]

There’s a conversation I have occasionally at SCA events that I’m never quite sure how to handle and it came up again this past weekend at Crown. It generally starts off something like, “How come you don’t have anyone fighting for you in Crown? We have to find someone to fight for you.”

The very existence of the conversation demonstrates that the other person isn’t aware that we live on completely different planets, which is what makes things awkward. I could have this conversation as an extended philosophical discussion taking up several hours, but it’s very hard to have it as a casual chat. (And I’m not talking about the obvious things like, “Um … you do know I’m gay, right?” They always do.) So I usually fall back on something along the lines of, “Having survived 30 years in the SCA without anyone ever asking to fight for me, I figure I don’t need to spend much time worrying about it.”

This response has the disadvantage of sounding vaguely meepish and pathetic when it’s intended as a pragmatic statement of fact, but it has the advantage of being less snappish than the other things that come immediately to mind, like, “So you figure that my SCA life is incomplete if I don’t participate in a pseudo-romantic relationship with a man even on a metaphorical level?” or “Because, of course, none of my accomplishments or contributions mean anything unless I have some guy hitting people with a stick in my name.” But those don’t really represent my position accurately either.

I don’t utterly discount the concept of person A taking up endeavor B by the inspiration of and to do honor to person C. (I do get a bit annoyed by people who don’t believe the template exists other than on the combat field.) Goodness knows, I’ve been person A myself on occasion. But to the extent that this motif is important, it’s more important than being a tick-box on someone’s SCA resume. (“Let’s see … held an office, check; autocratted an event, check; been fought for in Crown, check.”) And for that matter, the people who raise this conversation don’t seem to consider it a tick-box – they seem to consider it more on the level of having food to eat and clothes to wear. (You get that question, “How come you don’t have anyone fighting for you in Crown?” with the same tone of bewilderment that they would ask, “How come you’re standing there naked in the snow with nothing to eat?”) That’s where the “different planets” thing comes in with a vengeance. But on the other hand, while people pay a fair amount of lip service to the motif of taking the field to do honor to someone worthy, the pragmatic facts on the ground are that 90% of the time what you have is someone fighting for their romantic partner of the opposite sex. And I don’t live on that planet either.

And this is all before getting into the hypothetical nuances of meaning and expectation that people bring to the process. Is fighting for someone a gift, or is it an exchange, or a contract? Do you expect someone you’re fighting for to drop everything else they’re doing and suspend all their other commitments to watch you when you’re on the field? Does everyone else expect them to? Why? Do you expect someone you’re fighting for to provide quasi-home-maker support when you enter a tournament: providing access to material goods, service, and personal attention in support of your activities? Does everyone else expect them to? Why? Do you consider these questions a hostile challenge of the status quo or a philosophical exploration of cultural subtext of the activity? Why? (Repeat this process for the hypothetical scenario in which you actually win the tournament.)

As I say: an extended conversation taking several hours, but not a brief chat. So I fall back on bland statements of fact and on metaphors.

The statement of fact is: In order for someone to fight for me in Crown, the first thing that would have to happen is for someone to ask to do so. None of the hypothetical philosophical discussions are relevant in the absence of that event. I do not expect this to happen – not in the sense of “I consider it highly unlikely” but simply in the sense of “I do not consider it a wrongness in the universe that it has not happened.”

The metaphor is: If someone wants to give me roses, I’d be happy to receive them. But if I want to have roses, I’m not going to stand around wailing, “Oh me, oh my! Will no valiant knight win me roses?” I’m going to pick up a shovel and start planting more rose bushes.

Comments

[wingedcorset.livejournal.com]

*shrug* I kind of figure you for the kind of person who knows what she wants and will work to make her desires a reality. The thought of someone fighting for you in crown never even occured to me; it just doesn't seem like a side of our multifaceted game that you're interested in. Honestly, the fact that you're gay never even occured to me regarding this topic.

As someone who has one of my closest friends fighting for me, I have to say that I don't fully understand the champion/consort relationship. I suppose, like any relationship, it's defined both by societal expectations and by the persons in the relationship.

Hamish and I have a pretty mellow relationship. I run off and herald or work in some other way at events. I try to watch his fights, but if I'm not there, it's not a big deal. We actually have a standing joke that he does better in tournaments when I'm not there. We try in little ways to take care of each other. We know what the other needs to have a happy event, be it hydration, food at specific times, a break from the dog, etc. I'm not sure how much of this is the realtionship of close friends and how much is the relationship of champion/consort.

Ugh. Sorry about the thread hijack. But thanks for making me think about this topic. It's one that is (for some) such a big part of our game, and not one that I've really put much thought into.

[msmemory.livejournal.com]

Hah, it's right up there with other nosy questions, like "How come you two aren't married yet?" and "Aren't you ever going to have children?"

I've had the privilege of entering as a consort twice, for my protegee's soon-to-be-ex husband. I do make a point of watching his bouts, along with those of a couple other people for whom I would end up head-of-entourage rather than queen, if they were to win. But he can bring his own lunch.

[(Anonymous)]

"I don’t utterly discount the concept of person A taking up endeavor B by the inspiration of and to do honor to person C. ... Goodness knows, I’ve been person A myself on occasion."

You are also often person C ... the source of inspiration.

I agree with wingedcorset that this whole aspect of the game has never seemed to be something that appealed to you, but I think you'd be fun as queen or princess. You'd shake up many people's pre-concieved notions about what is and is not important for royalty to do, but in a good and well considered way.

As for the romantic aspect of the consort bit, I have a skewed view. I've never been fought for by someone who was in love with me. The first time I was fought for, the guy won me the Crown. Both times the Crown has been won for me the guy had lots of other stuff going on in his life so basically turned the reign over to me. They both told me they fought for me because they thought I'd make a good queen and since neither one participated much in the reign and just let me do my thing pretty much, I believe them. The point being, that a friend fighting for you simply because he thinks you'd be good at the job of queen or princess, without any other agenda, does happen.

JIMR

[patsmor.livejournal.com]

I'm glad to know that I'm not the only one who dislikes the "get all the boxtops" philosophy. I do understand, appreciate, and embrace the notion of Person A inspiring Person B, but I, too, find that inspiration appropriate for all sorts of endeavors, not just martial ones. Music, poetry, all the arts and all the ways people stretch themselves in new endeavors can be caused by inspiration from another individual.

[mastersantiago.livejournal.com]

Personally I think someone would be wise to consider asking you (or someone like you) to be their Queen. A strong, reasonable and rational Queen who shows a geniune concern for the development of the Arts and Sciences and can speak her mind would be fantastic.

Lets face it, more often then not we get Royalty that don't put the kind of effort into the rest of the Kingdom that they do into "FIGHTING(tm)."

I have often heard it said that the Queen is supposed to be the patron of all things A&S, and all things Pelican, but how often do we get a Queen who does more then mouth the formulas? Not often. When we do, we almost always end up having stellar reigns.

A Queen or Princess who picks a cause and focuses upon it during their reign makes a significant impact and I can see you being a strong voice and leader in that fashion.

A King who truly wants to help the Kingdom grow and thrive would look for a Queen who would be strong in those areas.

[patsmor.livejournal.com]

Well, I'd be happy to be a strong Arts Queen if you know a fighter looking for a consort ;-)

Seriously, were I to be fought for, it would be with the clear understanding with my consort that encouraging the arts and service would be a strong agenda for me, not just fighting.

[semy-of-pearls.livejournal.com]

I include my opinion that HRJ would make an excellent Queen. The reign would probably be one of the better run and better thought out than several I could name. That in itself is a reason to find someone to fight for her.

That does not, however, mean that she should be forced to do anything she doesn't due to (I use the modern term) peer pressure.

[patsmor.livejournal.com]

Hear, hear. Absolutely agreed.

[callistotoni.livejournal.com]

What leaps to my mind is how such a comment illustrates what different games the SCA is for people. Since I don't know most of the crown-level fighter anymore, I honestly feel unaffected by who is on the throne. I see a two wieghted groupings: one that is fighter-centric and one that is arts centric. Of course there are crossovers, but no one in my mostly art-centric group would ever ask such a question. I just doesn't enter into our game.

Now, that is not 100 percent true, come to think of it. When I re-joined the SCA after almost a 10 year absence Marguerite asked me pretty much the same question. But I was able to respond Been There Done That Got The Coronet. In my almost 8-year return experiance no one else has asked that. The subject has just never come up.

Then there is the whole Ward of the Crown thing. I have to say that when my friends -- very well meaningly -- insisted I go up to court as a Ward I have to say that my gut reaction was one of feeling like a loser. Totally irrational, of course, but that was my un-examined knee jerk reaction. I wonder if anybody else thinks we as a culture have outgrown the Ward concept?

[msmemory.livejournal.com]

I'm not from your kingdom. What's a Ward of the Crown?

[callistotoni.livejournal.com]

Out here in the West, in the early days of the SCA, it was decided that single ladies with no one to defend their honor would be under the protection of the King, and were thus Wards of the Crown.

This concept went hand in hand with the idea of a tourney to determine the Ward Lord, who would champion the honor of the wards on behalf of the King. The (silly at the time) idea was that the Ward Lord, who was by definition single, would get to see the available ladies from which he could choose.

Remember, this was the late 1960's/early 1970's. If you want more thought on the whole ward-thing you are welcome to click over to my LJ.

[msmemory.livejournal.com]

Thanks!

Ward - no thanks

[dame-cordelia.livejournal.com]

I remember doing that once. It made me feel like a piece of meat. Never wanted to do it again. Bleah!

[liadan-m.livejournal.com]

being fought for in Crown will be part of my game, when I graduate and can then not have my attention already split between school and work. There are things that I want to do as Crown in terms of the A&S side of things that work better from those thrones. Garrick and Yasimin did it in Calontir during their reign, and I want to do something similar somewhere. And I don't need my consort to be anything other than a very good friend, who will work with me as a partner in the really challenging bits of dealing with a kingdom.

For me, being Crown is another act of service (hopefully for the good), and one that I want to try at least once. It's not a check-the-box thing, it's a where-else-am-I-capible-of-helping-us-grow thing. I need some time to grow up, and some time to let my mistakes die a bit in the generational shifts. But it's something I want to do...someday.

you'd be a good Queen if someone asked you.

If You're Looking for Suggestions.... :-D

[shalmestere.livejournal.com]

...for answers to "Why isn't someone fighting for you in Crown?", the line I would use (and have) is "Because I don't want to be Queen." Assuming that it's true for you as well, I believe that this would be the best answer to use because it's direct and brooks no argument (one can't easily contradict "I don't want to..." other than with "Well, you should...", which is weak, and can be deflected with "Thanks for your concern. Good afternoon!" :-D).

Re: If You're Looking for Suggestions.... :-D

[hrj.livejournal.com]

If it were that easy, it would be that easy. But it isn't accurate that I actively would want not to be royalty. And it's hard to get the nuances into a snappy come-back.

Re: If You're Looking for Suggestions.... :-D

[shalmestere.livejournal.com]

If it were that easy, it would be that easy. But it isn't accurate that I actively would want not to be royalty. And it's hard to get the nuances into a snappy come-back....But it isn't really about whether I would be interested or not -- it's about the assumptions and expectations that everyone is interested.

Ah. I seem to have badly misunderstood your subtext; I thought you wanted a way to stamp out such conversations before they start. Fitting "It might be interesting/rewarding to be Queen, but I haven't bought into the paradigm that Becoming Royalty Is Job One" into a pithy soundbite is more difficult. Or maybe I've just misunderstood again :-/

[hrj.livejournal.com]

I could be misreading them (goodness knows, intentions are slippery beasties), but in the situations where The Conversation has come up, it seemed more like they were thinking only of the social context -- i.e., they assumed I was missing out on an essential part of the social experience of the SCA in not participating in the process, as opposed to being focused on any particular end-point.

[cellio]

"I don't want to be queen" -- or, alternatively, "why would I want the hassle of a reign?" -- is a fine response that usually shuts down that line of questioning.

I have been fought for once and fought once for someone else (one coronet, one crown). In both cases everyone involved (including spouses) was clear that there was no romance involved. Both prospective co-rulers were also clear that I was not going to spend the reign being decorative. Life is too short to waste it on that; if I were to become queen (or princess) it would be to accomplish something, not to be a figurehead for a year and then collect the commemorative coronet.

[anotheranon.livejournal.com]

Not being SCA, I'm kind of flummoxed as to the importance of having someone fight for you, especially as it leads to Queenship - I've heard from SCAdians (current and estranged from the organization) that being royalty is genuinely hard work.

Having said all this, from my perspective, if I wanted to be Queen I'd go out and be that by right of arms - I'm a fencer and can fight for myself :P And frankly I'd rather be fighting for a woman than have a guy fight for me, romantic or not (yes, I get the chivalric ideal thing, I just think it sounds like more fun to play the "male" than "female" role).

[goldenstag.livejournal.com]

I've known you most of the 20 years I've lived in the Bay Area, and I have to say that I never thought you would be interested in being Royalty. That said, as others have noted (I did read responses before saying anything <g>), you'd probably make a damn fine Princess or Queen. But we each play the SCA game the way that suits us. This kind of conversation really does point out the differences in how and why some of us play, though, doesn't it?

[hrj.livejournal.com]

But it isn't really about whether I would be interested or not -- it's about the assumptions and expectations that everyone is interested. (That's for various people -- not just you.)

[goldenstag.livejournal.com]

Sure. I think the problem is, and this is just based on observation -- not any scientific evidence (disclaimer complete), many people seem to feel like "This is how I view the <insert favorite thing here>, and it's how everyone should ...". Someone earlier in the thread said something about how there are people who have expectations of "Married and having kids". My spouse deals with that at work. People look at her and say things about the fact that she doesn't have children, and make it sound like there's something wrong with her.

There are people in the SCA whose world view (for the SCA) is very limited to the romantic ideals, including the whole having someone fight for you and win a crown or coronet for you, and they don't understand, nor try to, the people who don't have that same need/want/desire/whatever.

Well, that's my two cents, anyway. <g> I see it in the real world as much as I see it in the SCA, I think.

[talonvaki.livejournal.com]

The early days of Jade...much as I may mock them...he had the good sense to not fight for the same woman he was dating.

That's actually something I've been curious about, the 10-some-odd years I've been mundane, given the evolution of those sorts of things in the mundane world. I mean, here in Mass, people can get married.

When (if ever) will the SCA allow a same-sex consort to be fought for? It's an interesting concept. Completely not period, but...it does fall into the whole "Middle Ages as they should have been (no religious persecution, plague, etc)" mantra...

Hell. I'm still pissed they wouldn't knight a non-human, so probably best not to listen to me.

[goldenstag.livejournal.com]

Early days of Jade: that's not always the case. He reigned with Shaheena three times, and he was definitely dating her. He made Anastacia and Amanda Duchesses, then reigned three times with Shaheena ... after that, I don't believe he's had a lot of steady relationships (not that I pay that much attention to Jade's love-life, but normally you at least hear rumors ...).

[gunnora.livejournal.com]

Being gay, and in an extremely long and happy relationship with my lady, has not stopped me from either fighting in Crown Tournaments myself when I was able, and recently from having people ask to fight for me.

I dunno how I would feel about it if I myself had never fought in Crown on my own behalf, but indeed a number of people have at one time or another fought for me.

From a persona standpoint, I would see having someone fight for me (and win) in a very Norse sort of way as an alliance for political and power-mongering ends (grin).

But having met a lot of people who think the ground you walk upon is holy and who venerate you for your erudition, your wisdom, and your wit, I'm guessing you get the question because they think you would make a GREAT QUEEN.

My kingdom has in the past been cursed with one of the worst possible queens anyone could ever get. And you guys I think exported her to us! So I expect you know very well that there is a HUGE difference between a queen that is AWFUL and one that is medicore and one who is FABULOUS.

I figure the Kingdom Seneschal is there to run the kingdom. The Crown is there to Give Good Court. And behind the scenes to help fire people up, to set directions, and to inspire.

Face it, you're inspiring. And people ask not to get your bewildered reply, but because they think you'd be the perfect leader and source of all types of inspiration.

[vesilehti.livejournal.com]

Entering crown (fighting or being fought for) is just another fun thing to do. At least that is how I look at it.

In my opinion you would be not only a Good Queen, but also a Good Thing. And I would be happy to fight for you. For what it's worth. Now, to try to talk JG into flying over to see you when you have crown tourney over there...

[acanthusleaf.livejournal.com]

A lot of people think that because the tournament is in the center of the event, that the whole universe, not just the whole event, revolves around it.

Having fought for others and been fought for myself, I will generalize that I never got the sort of consistent support when fighting that I feel I gave when being a consort. Those who fought for me expected quite a bit of attention while they were still in the tournament. Having someone at the side of the field who gives a damn really does make a difference in one's attitude and performance on the field.

I often tell people in peerage vigils that inspiration is real and that people will look to them to be an example even more now that they are becoming a peer. I agree that this is certainly not limited to the fighting field - many a scroll has been done in anticipation of making someone smile whose smile has helped the scribe in the past.

From a former female fighter's point of view, if I had to pick a consort who would make a good co-monarch, I'd say a huge majority of the people I'd consider are female.