Being aware that one is doing Peerage-quality work

#5856

Author: Marion.Kee
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 21:24

65 lines
4347 bytes

Greeting to all from Marian Greenleaf,

I think that people who are doing work *generally* comparable to those
who have received Peerages for similar efforts, tend to be aware of it,
whatever area of endeavor they are pursuing.  This is a generalization
which certainly may not apply to certain individuals.  While it may
*appear* that it's easier to rank your work, using that of others as a
yardstick, if you are a fighter or an artisan as opposed to an
administrator, I think the characteristic also holds for most service-oriented
people who are at, or approaching, the Pelican level.  One hallmark of
being good at running things, tends to be having good instincts for how
well things are going, and what needs to be done to keep them going
smoothly.  Many such folks are good at tasks involving organizing.  These
are qualities that tend to keep one quite well-informed of how well one
is doing whatever one's chosen jobs are.  After all, one NEEDS to know
how well things are turning out at any given moment.  Then there are
also some more "objective" measures of qualifications for a Pelican, as
Justin points out--mostly involved in comparing the length of one's
service and the kind of jobs one has been performing, etc., to the 
same characteristics in those who have received Pelicans.

However, like anyone who starts to think about getting an award, we
service types can also practice self-delusion, or at least be conscious
of a nagging thought that perhaps we don't have enough objectivity
about our own efforts to know if we are REALLY up to snuff, or not.
Still, given some time, it does tend to become more clear if we are
functioning on a level that often leads to a Peerage.

It might be instructive to give some thought to what happens when
someone reasonable, competent and committed becomes aware, over a
period of time, that they have done Peerage-level work but have not
received the recognition for it.  This is often a very embittering
experience.  I think those who are likely to become Royalty (and they
often know who they are, too!), as well as those already members of
Peerage orders, need to make a real effort if they are to be objective
in this regard.  It's easy, and emotionally rewarding, to recognize
those who are popular.  It's not difficult to know what someone has
been doing when they blow their own horn, or at least are able and
willing to be very open about their work.  What's harder is to notice
the work of people who are self-effacing, or just quiet, or so crabby
that few others enjoy their company, or those who live far from the
"bright center" of the Kingdom, or those who have done a great job with
a task that, by its nature, tends to get overlooked, even though it
may require a lot of effort to perform.  (There is also such a thing as
an office that by its very nature subjects its incumbent to
controversy; for example, certain major offices associated with the Pennsic 
War.  Often people who are willing to take on such an office are those
who know that controversy won't kill them (because they are already
familiar with it.)  This tends to further complicate a path to a
Peerage that already was none too broad and smooth; yet one thing that
tends to get agreed on at Pelican meeting time is that such a person 
has worked very hard.)  Whatever Peerage is in question, it's hard on 
anyone to have an accurate notion that, by the available measures of
judgement, she or he deserves that recognition--in the LONG term--and
yet does not have it.

(It would be prudent at this point for me to add that I received my own
Pelican right about the time I started to feel that I deserved it, and
thus was spared the process I have just described.  However, I have
seen others go through it, and it does not tend to be a constructive
experience.)

I thank you for your indulgence, and I believe that I have said enough.

--Marian Greenleaf, O.P.

Re: Being aware that one is doing Peerage-quality work

#5916

Author: Godfrey de Shipbrook
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 13:17

31 lines
2078 bytes

Greetings from Godfrey!

Mistress Marian Greenleaf writes:
> 
> I think that people who are doing work *generally* comparable to those
> who have received Peerages for similar efforts, tend to be aware of it,
> whatever area of endeavor they are pursuing.  This is a generalization
> which certainly may not apply to certain individuals.  While it may
> *appear* that it's easier to rank your work, using that of others as a
> yardstick, if you are a fighter or an artisan as opposed to an
> administrator,

`Appear' is the key word here; individuals' mileage may vary.  I knew
one gentle who expected a Laurel because he did two calligraphy hands
very well; at the other end of the spectrum, I've known others (myself
included) who can look at their works and see nothing but the minor
flaws in execution.

`Ranking one's work' in the service field also isn't always easy.  I
was stunned when a Pelican asked me to take his belt and become his 
protege; not only didn't I think the work I was doing at events was
anything out of the ordinary, but I also didn't believe (and still 
don't) that I had the qualities of a Peer.  He disagreed; go figure.

+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Net:  Jeff Lee / jlee@smylex.uucp / jlee%smylex.uucp@tscs.tscs.com     |
| SCA:  Lord Godfrey de Shipbrook / Wyvernwood, Trimaris                 |
|       Per pale azure and argent, a clarion counterchanged or and gules |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
    "The only thing that helps me maintain my slender grip on reality
    is the friendship I share with my collection of singing potatoes."

What is a protege? (was Re: Being aware...)

#6166

Author: Josh Mittleman
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 00:40

19 lines
1725 bytes

Greetings from Arval!  Godfrey wrote:

> `Ranking one's work' in the service field also isn't always easy.  I
> was stunned when a Pelican asked me to take his belt and become his 
> protege; not only didn't I think the work I was doing at events was
> anything out of the ordinary, but I also didn't believe (and still 
> don't) that I had the qualities of a Peer.  He disagreed; go figure.

You seem to have the notion that a protege/apprentice/squire has to
demonstrate skill in order to "earn" his position.  I've run into that
notion frequently, across the SCA, often tied to the idea that these
relationships confer rank on the dependent (which idea I certanly don't
attribute to you, Godfrey).  I find this a peculiar notion.

Why do people think this happens?  Is it a misunderstanding caused by the
behavior of some/all peers?  Is it built into the system?  

===========================================================================
Arval Benicoeur                                       mittle@watson.ibm.com

Re: What is a protege? (was Re: Being aware...)

#6227

Author: Ian "Rhys" Klinck
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 15:54

20 lines
1557 bytes

In article <1993Jan27.004037.26919@watson.ibm.com> mittle@watson.ibm.com (Josh Mittleman) writes:
>
>You seem to have the notion that a protege/apprentice/squire has to
>demonstrate skill in order to "earn" his position.  I've run into that
>notion frequently, across the SCA, often tied to the idea that these
>relationships confer rank on the dependent (which idea I certanly don't
>attribute to you, Godfrey).  I find this a peculiar notion.
>
>Why do people think this happens?  Is it a misunderstanding caused by the
>behavior of some/all peers?  Is it built into the system?  
>

I think it's from the (also mistaken) idea that protegees/apprentices/squires
are specifically "Pelicans/Laurels/Knights in training", and that you have to
be a squire to become a knight, etc...

No matter how often I hear someone (and usually a Peer) explain that this is
by no means the case, popular belief remains otherwise...

Rhys

Re: What is a protege?

#6147

Author: dp
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 17:10

24 lines
1808 bytes

> mittle@watson.ibm.com (Josh Mittleman) writes:
>>...........................................  I've run into that
>>notion frequently, across the SCA, often tied to the idea that these
>>relationships confer rank on the dependent (which idea I certanly don't
>>attribute to you, Godfrey).  I find this a peculiar notion.

and icklinck@cayley.uwaterloo.ca (Ian "Rhys" Klinck) writes:
>I think it's from the (also mistaken) idea that protegees/apprentices/squires
>are specifically "Pelicans/Laurels/Knights in training", and that you have to
>be a squire to become a knight, etc...

	However, I have heard it said that in practice that it is the 
squire's knight or master who nominates said squire for consideration for 
the Chivalry.  That would seem to make squire-hood a prerequisite for 
knighthood.
	Please correct me if I'm wrong on this  (--- oh yeah, like I have to
ask on _this_ group :-}).
					dp
-- 
___________________dp  ==> dprosser@student.umass.edu______________________
``Cowboy coffee, chemical cream --- Ride ride ride on my stallion of green.
	Midnight showers, sleep in the flowers, and dream hurricane, 
     break-neck-speed, rapid-fire dreams!'' ---the mighty, mighty bosstones

Re: What is a protege?

#6190

Author: Nigel Haslock
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 01:38

39 lines
2542 bytes

Arval asks:
>You seem to have the notion that a protege/apprentice/squire has to
>demonstrate skill in order to "earn" his position.  I've run into that
>notion frequently, across the SCA, often tied to the idea that these
>relationships confer rank on the dependent (which idea I certanly don't
>attribute to you, Godfrey).  I find this a peculiar notion.

>Why do people think this happens?  Is it a misunderstanding caused by the
>behavior of some/all peers?  Is it built into the system?

I believe that this happens because there are people who are impatient with
normal process of getting a peerage and seek a 'fast track'. Since these are
people who believe it is their manifest destiny to be a peer, they assume
that the cachet of 'protege' confers status. The folk of this type are so
obnoxiously blatant about it that they suceed in acquiring some status. They
become well known because they will force themselves on anyone who can push
them another step along the fast track.

The result may even be a fast track, because they will not be overlooked when
they finally develop peerage qualities.

This is not to suggest that all protege's are of this type. I am certain that
the majority of protege's and apprentices are shy and unobtrusive.

It is a function of the system that requires that status is granted to folk
who have been noticed. Status seekers take pains to ensure that they are
noticed and take pains to ensure that any trappings of status are noticed. It
is, therefore, not a fault of the peer.

It would be wrong to assume that the peer lacked judgement in taking on such
a protege. It is possible for the crown to suggest that a peer adopt a person
with these qualities in the hope that the peer can train or otherwise control
the status seeker so that the 'notice me' antics can be transmuted from
potenially destructive acts to neutral or even constructive activities. For
example a heckler at court can be turned into a personal herald.

	Fiacha
	Aquaterra, AnTir

🚀 go-pugleaf

Thread View: rec.org.sca

Being aware that one is doing Peerage-quality work

Re: Being aware that one is doing Peerage-quality work

What is a protege? (was Re: Being aware...)

Re: What is a protege? (was Re: Being aware...)

Re: What is a protege?

Re: What is a protege?

Thread Navigation