femkes_follies (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
femkes_follies) wrote2011-06-15 04:47 pm
femkes_follies) wrote2011-06-15 04:47 pm
Musings on the true "usability" of dress diaries and such
Warning: Possible vicodin-induced fog-laden rambling. I had a root canal yesterday, and this is what I distracted myself with as I was being tormented.
I really do have to wonder whether all the encouragement and stress we put on "teaching" in the SCA has the effect we want it to. Let me 'splain.
1. We arm-twist people who have no desire to teach or "share" to do so. We convince them that they want certain cookies (and maybe they didn't, until the sales pitch started) and then drop the bomb that in order to get it, they must "share their research." Ergo, we generate whole Universities full of classes taught by people who would rather not to students who are now wishing they were ANYwhere else. And puts a lot of people off A&S classes in general. They're "boring."
2. We also insist that research for the sake of research is not enough, and that you must teach people to "do" your art. But it's hard to teach somebody how to make something that you spent 5 years researching in a "simple and easy" handout or website. Sooo.... we dumb it down. We go with the least common denominator.
3. People will simplify, simplify, simplify. Even if you put up a diary that explains carefully that you COULD to this, this, or this. That the garment in question came in the following variations, etc. And everybody will go make a copy of the dress as shown. Worse yet, if you make a recreation of an unusual style - even if you specify that it's the exception, rather than the rule - you'll get even MORE imitators. Because it's "different."
4. Lemmings will be lemmings. Each Laurel with a magnetic personality, Queen with an entourage, etc. will create a pool of slavish imitators. A group with ONE person who's adept at sewing will tend to have a population clothed in his or her predominant style.
I wonder if this isn't why we're awash in pomegranate chicken, Viking apron dresses, ring belts, and other things that shouldn't be nearly as prominent as they are. Granted, there will always be things that are a little to twee, or have just become SCAdianisms, or otherwise garner affection.
But I also wonder how many of the cliche's are our own fault, for pushing people out of their comfort zones in a bad way.
I really do have to wonder whether all the encouragement and stress we put on "teaching" in the SCA has the effect we want it to. Let me 'splain.
1. We arm-twist people who have no desire to teach or "share" to do so. We convince them that they want certain cookies (and maybe they didn't, until the sales pitch started) and then drop the bomb that in order to get it, they must "share their research." Ergo, we generate whole Universities full of classes taught by people who would rather not to students who are now wishing they were ANYwhere else. And puts a lot of people off A&S classes in general. They're "boring."
2. We also insist that research for the sake of research is not enough, and that you must teach people to "do" your art. But it's hard to teach somebody how to make something that you spent 5 years researching in a "simple and easy" handout or website. Sooo.... we dumb it down. We go with the least common denominator.
3. People will simplify, simplify, simplify. Even if you put up a diary that explains carefully that you COULD to this, this, or this. That the garment in question came in the following variations, etc. And everybody will go make a copy of the dress as shown. Worse yet, if you make a recreation of an unusual style - even if you specify that it's the exception, rather than the rule - you'll get even MORE imitators. Because it's "different."
4. Lemmings will be lemmings. Each Laurel with a magnetic personality, Queen with an entourage, etc. will create a pool of slavish imitators. A group with ONE person who's adept at sewing will tend to have a population clothed in his or her predominant style.
I wonder if this isn't why we're awash in pomegranate chicken, Viking apron dresses, ring belts, and other things that shouldn't be nearly as prominent as they are. Granted, there will always be things that are a little to twee, or have just become SCAdianisms, or otherwise garner affection.
But I also wonder how many of the cliche's are our own fault, for pushing people out of their comfort zones in a bad way.
no subject
That's a constant almost argument with someone in particular. She tells me *all the time* "you should teach!", I respond all the time with "I can't". She's even seen me in action. I can deal with one ( possibly two if I'm feeling good) at a time, and only if I'm having a good day. She's even suggested that setting a class up will give me mental prep time so I can handle it better. Uhm, no. I'd be even worse off.
If no teaching = no cookies, I'm ok with that.