Monday morning musing: to have or to be [SCA]

[gyzki]

Sunday was a very low-key little May Day event, which was all the more pleasant coming after big showcase-y 40 Year the weekend before. There was good schmoozing; a low-key little court with only one item of business, a Moon for calygrey (hear hear!); a fun commedia performance, which I almost got to be in at the last minute but doing a last-minute

Comments

[siriel]

Interesting question... and one that is not a problem for orders that have specific terms for their members in addition to the order name. For example, if OGRs were having a similar discussion the question would be "Do they have a don/doña" or possibly "Are they anyone's cadet?"

I imagine chivalry is similar, as you'd never say "Do they have a knight?" to mean "Are they already a knight?" but you might say that to mean "Are they squired to anyone?"

So maybe the most clarifying solution would to come up with period/oid terms for members of the other orders. I share your curiosity about whether the choice of "have" or "is" reflects anything about the person choosing.

[gyzki]

Point of curiosity: does anyone ever say "I am a Golden Rapier?" I can believe I've heard "have a G.R." or "am an OGRe," but not that.

[siriel]

I've never heard it.. not even "I have a Golden Rapier." Always "I have/am and OGR."

[gyzki]

(Nor do I own a squawking seabird.)

Neither are you a squawking seabird, so we can leave literal pelecaniformes out of the equation on either side :-) Though it does bring up the question whether the symbol of the order being a living thing (a pelican, a troubadour) or an inanimate object (a sleeve, a crescent moon) might make a difference to anyone?

Myself, I'm sure I'm not consistent but I think I tend towards the 'have' side, in that it's something that happened to me but it's not part of my identity.

[peregrinning]

What comes to my mind is the difference between Orders and Awards. I think that being a member of an order (i.e. I am an ...) is different from having an award.

I often hear Orders discussed as: "I am a member of the Order," and awards discussed as "I have an Award." Since the East Kingdom has polling orders as their AoA-level award structure, they have more people talking about membership in an Order than other places I have lived.

the phrase "do they have a Laurel" is ambiguous. I think it is standard use for both membership in the order, and being an apprentice to someone in the order. It's a phrase where more context is needed to clarify.

[gyzki]

What comes to my mind is the difference between Orders and Awards. I think that being a member of an order (i.e. I am an ...) is different from having an award.

Good point. I have never heard anyone say "I am a King's/Queen's Cyper," for instance.

[baron_steffan]

I think that's because we can relate medievally to "being a knight". It's one of the very few Scadian institutions that a newbie groks coming in. But what the heck is a Laurel (okay, maybe the odd newbie would get "Laureate" but still...). And Pelican?: fuhgedaboudit. So the Laurel and Pelican go into the mental "Boy Scout Merit Badge" folder: I don't *have a knighthood*, I *am a knight*. But I *have* a Laurel, a Pelican, and a forestry badge.

Hmmm. Most modern real-world orders have designators like "MEMBER of the Order of the British Empire"...although one certainly hears "he's an MBE". You don't get "he's a Garter", although you *do* sometimes get "he's a Garter knight". I doubt that you get "he's a Victoria Cross" although I wouldn't be surprised at "he's a VC".

[baron_steffan]

Fascinating question.

I think there are generalities here, but every generality seems to have an exception. Often manySo let's see. For the peerages... One IS a knight but GETS and subsequently HAS a knightHOOD. For the Civil Peerages: one IS a Laurel, GETS a Laurel, and HAS a Laurel. One IS a Pelican, GETS a Pelican, and HAS a Pelican. Likewise for the Rose. In the case of "IS", I'm of course addressing colloquial speech here. One is formally a MASTER/MISTRESS OF the Laurel, etc

[ariannawyn]

Aren't semantics fun?

I think it has something to do with the formation of the name.

In AEthelmearc, I have heard people say they ARE, GOT, or HAVE most of the awards as well as orders (I AM and also HAVE a Keystone (AoA-level service award), for instance). Yet our grant-level archery award, the Scarlet Guard, doesn't tend to be spoken of as "being" but rather "having." Perhaps, like the Golden Rapier in the East, the problem is the addition of the adjective? Yet I have certainly heard top level fencers here referred to as "being" a White Scarf, so maybe that's not it... Hmm.

Well, FWIW, I am a Pelican and Laurel, and I have a Pelican and Laurel, because I got a Pelican and Laurel, but apparently I'm not smart enough to figure this one out. :-)

de minimis curat gyzki

[gyzki]

One can BE, GET, and HAVE a QoC
You do not capitalize the 'O', for Order?

You can BE a cue-aitch-dee
I pronounce it 'cue-hod' myself. Not that I either am or have one.

Re: de minimis curat gyzki

[baron_steffan]

Well, you asked %^).

But no, I don't capitalize the O. No, I don't know why not. I do when it comes first, as in OTC, etc.

As for QHD, 'Speth just does the letters, and she invented it.