Mistress Gwendolyn of Middlemarch and Lord Kali Harlansson of Gotland

Theater is one of my own particular activities, and I've heard repeatedly over the years how other groups cannot conceive of doing full-length Shakespeare plays as SCA events, by and for SCA members, or of doing truly improvisational commedia dell'arte performances the way i Sebastiani do. The Waytes have attained a level of skill and professionalism that makes them set the standard across most of the kingdom (and beyond, via Pennsic). The Poulet Gauche strives for higher and higher levels of authenticity and total immersion each time it's held, and does so without leaving people behind but rather meeting the challenge of the rising bar. Carolingia was one of the first groups in the East to develop archery as a group activity, and still there are always Carolingians in the top of every kingdom archery list; similarly with thrown weapons (but you'd know that better than I). Hurley is a very recent example of an activity that (within Carolingia) came out of nowhere to becoming some people's main area of involvement, and to a level where we're challenging the people who developed it first.

It's not so much these activities in particular - and there are so many, many more (look, I left out dance as a Carolingian activity!) - but the *number* of them that most impresses me. Sure, individual activities wax and wane in number of participants and level of involvement, but there's always so many that are at a high level at any time. That's what makes Carolingia truly amazing, by my lights.

I can see some things already that the Coronet could do about it, that Gwendolyn and I would consider doing: regularly visiting all different groups, guild meetings, and practices - not just dropping in, but getting to know the people and the activity, and actively giving the participants a feeling of their context within the goings-on of the whole barony. Encouraging special events that get several different groups working together, like the ballet de cour at the February event. Encouraging guilds to hold "open houses," or some sort of function bigger and more open than a regular meeting / practice, but different from an in-persona baronial Event. Providing public recognition of activity through more means than the existing baronial Orders, especially in court. In general, using the position and prominence of the Coronet to promote synergy in many and different ways.

The most important thing the Coronet can do to alleviate these problems is to travel to neighboring events, not nessarily constantly but regularly, and (most important) *visibly* as Carolingians. With luck they will inspire others to travel with them: the best cure for the image problem would be Carolingians who are recognized as such, and who are having a good time Playing With Others. The second most important thing the Coronet can do is to recognize visitors who come to our events and to make them feel welcome; we do put on large and interesting events, and more people would be happy coming to them from out-barony if they didn't think they'd be ignored or looked down on.

1. The scheduling of events: We've made a deliberate effort over the past several years, and still we seem stuck with a boom-and-bust cycle. This makes it harder for us to retain new members ("Events are what it's all about; our next one is four and a half months away, and it's not a typical event") and for other groups to schedule around us (like one or two years ago when between Festival of Storytelling, Legends of Chivalry, and Falling Leaves Carolingia basically booked the month of September), and most important, makes it harder for us to put our best effort into every event and still have fun. I would get us onto a more evenly paced calendar if I could.

2. More cross-communication and interaction between groups: I am concerned by the tendency for some guilds (and other activity-based groups) to turn inward, to turn their participants into specialists. To a very real extent it's a natural consequence of factors which themselves are good things: having so very many activities going on, each being done at such a high level of proficiency. No one can do *everything*, and doing your own thing takes so much time. But it comes at a cost in community and fellowship, and if I could change the cost without losing the benefit, I would.

3. Recognition of achievement: There are more Carolingians than ever doing more cool stuff than ever, and our means of recognizing them are not keeping up. I want to find more ways of showing the barony's appreciation of the things that make us so great. See the question on the awards system for fuller development of this theme.

My personal views were formed back when this ethic was so universal, it wasn't even articulated. On the other hand, I recognize that the barony has changed since then, has grown so big that not everyone *could* work at any one event, even if they wanted to, and so it's not completely unreasonable to recognize some distinction between those who are doing a lot of work and those who aren't doing any. But then it can get sticky drawing a hard and exact line at which amount of work is worth the cost of admission. Speaking for myself, I would always pay; speaking for the barony, it is the autocrat's decision - ultimately they can do what they want, that's why we call them autocrats.

I think there are also some shortcomings that are inherent in the existing award system. One of the serious ones is the inability to repeat an award: as long as the Laurel recognizes depth of achievement in a field more than breadth over several, for instance, then doing Manche-quality work in four different fields still gets you only the one Manche you got in the first field. I think there are other shortcomings in the order system of as well: the overwhelmingly ubiquitous arts-martial arts-service tripartite division, for example, and the love of "surprising" people with awards. (Come on, how often in the First Middle Ages was a peer of the realm elevated to that rank without knowing it well ahead of time?)

I would like the Coronet (whether that's me or anyone else) to look for other ways to award the Carolingian orders more promptly and more often, and for ways of extending recognition besides order membership. Badges of favor, for instance, or less specific gifts from the Coronet can be meaningful expressions of public recognition; the creation of a Baronial Guard or Household, putting the best of the barony out in full view. Aquel and Johanna began to do some of this; I would like to see it taken further.

I feel, strongly, that the "pay to play" name is both too flip and a grave misnomer to boot: regardless of membership, we pay to attend almost every event anyway [see next question for a completely different facet of this], and it is that money which pays for our "play". Anyone who comes to an event and pays the site fee, even if not a paid member, is "playing"; someone who sends in their money and gets a membership card, but doesn't come to events, isn't. Money sent to Milpitas doesn't get the feast cooked, the music played, or the pots scrubbed. The "play" depends entirely on local money and local volunteer labor.

Which is not to say the Corporation has absolutely no merits: local money doesn't pay for insurance, and volunteer labor won't save us from a lawsuit. On the other hand, there are other organizational models that can address these concerns. Add to that the secretive, deceitful, and patronizing way in which the Board acted in making that decision, and I take rather a dim and skeptical view of mandatory membership (my name for the policy).

That's my opinion. It's a strong one, but it's personal. Again I emphasize that, were I Baron, my opinion would not be any more pertinent than that of other Carolingians.

King Gyrth organizing pillow-fights at the rained-out Peace, saying it was in fulfillment of his coronation oath; the charge of the Western knights at Pennsic 6; Caryl and Asenath wading downstream in their shifts, herding rose petals; the long walk through the black woods to the parking lot at Legends at midnight, with just a candle-lantern; the jongleurs singing "Rosa Vernans" in Memorial Hall; the first sight of the fort on the field at Pennsic 30; the songs and the faces around many a campfire; single, one-armed combat on the bridge at Pennsic 15 (or so); Grendel's Arm at the Beowulf event. The memories keep coming, but I have to stop typing because I have five more questions to go.

When I dislocated my shoulder at a tourney at Tufts in 1980, Aquel and Johanna drove me and Caryl to the HCHP clinic. They waited with us while the clinic took an unconscionably long time confirming it really was dislocated. They kept Caryl company while I was wheeled away and put to sleep for half an hour, and gave us a ride back to the Buttery. They didn't have to stay with us all that time - I obviously wasn't going to die, or anything - but they acted as though this was a perfectly natural way to spend the afternoon, and that there was absolutely nothing worth going back to the event for.

While I won't say this was the kindest thing I've *ever* seen done in the SCA, it set a high standard I've tried to live up to ever since.

I hope these answers help to give you some idea of who we are and what we'd be like as baron and baroness. If you have more questions, or want a fuller response to one of these, feel free to ask.

This explicitly does not mean we have any intention of going in and summarily eliminating the current Champion positions, or even radically shaking them up. More a matter of discussions with the various communities concerning their needs for support and visibility, how well the various champions meet these needs, what works and what's still not working yet, and matters like that - all so that we can set up this Guard structure (if we still think it's a good idea) to include or to complement the Champions structure in a way that works well for all concerned.

So to finally give a short answer to your question, I in general favor an inclusive "single structure" path, but I don't think I have a clearer view of a "big picture" than you do at this point.

But not that we want to increase the level of pageantry, processional, and precedence. On the contrary, there would definitely be times as well when we want to be informal and approachable, and a good way to signal that would be to release the entourage.

Gwendolyn and I each have families, and therefore have certain outside commitments that are irreducible. On the other hand they are two separate families, and separate commitments, and the hope is that this will give us a little extra flexibility to help us meet the Coronet's demands on our attention.

So I'll answer your constituent's instead: Gwendolyn and I have no particular duration in mind. We do intend to stay in office more than two years (Fate willing, of course) - we believe we'd only really have found our style and be hitting our stride in our second year. On the other end, I gave up the seneschal's position after five years, and that felt about right, and Aquel & Johanna are giving up the Coronet after six, and *that* feels about right, so five or six years seems likely. BUT, anyone who comes around after 4 years 11 months and starts asking impertinent questions will suffer The Displeasure Of The Coronet (that's just Kali talking, not Gwendolyn, she'd never say anything like that).

One feature of our slate that's unique among the ones standing for election: we are not a couple. We're married, but not to each other. Carolingia has not had a baron and baroness in this situation before, but it's been done several times at the royal level. The advantages are that family emergencies are much less likely to disrupt the Coronet's activity, since we come from two separate families. Further, we will have that extra bit of stamina and stability because we are not each other's only source of emotional support - we believe that makes us a little less likely to burn out than a Coronet pair who were relying only on each other for support.

And a third point: we have both got a strong history in theater, so we believe we will have a feel for how to effectively "stage" court, how to keep people's attention, or to sense if we're losing it. Of great importance, we both know how to project, so people can *hear* what's going on in court.

Now, is that enough to make us "good"? Up to you, and the barony, to decide.

We intend that one or both of us will attend every Council meeting; continue most of the activities we currently participate in (though possibly a little less intensively); attend sessions of other activities that have regular meetings - we'll be attending such meetings regularly, but it may feel only occasional to the members of those groups, there being so many; perhaps the occasional Open House; and otherwise being accessible to anyone who wants to communicate, whether by phone, (e-)mail, or just talking face to face.

I was once in the House of the Great Bell; while it never formally dissolved, it did scatter to three coasts and I'm the only one left in Carolingia. I did swear fealty to Sir Patri, but he's not very active either. I don't anticipate either of those relationships would be a factor if I were Baron.

(I was also one of Vissevald's thegns many years ago - Thegn 1A in fact.)

- Most borough members joined the SCA here, and of those who already joined, most are new to Carolingia; to that extent, the Coronet's general duty of welcoming newcomers is all the more important among the borough populace.

- Being attached to mundane institutions, the boroughs are geographically and demographically bounded groups; the Coronet's obligation to keep all groups in Carolingia in touch with each other and involved with the barony as a whole applies especially to them.

- The boroughs represent transient populations: most students are in and out of college in four years; if they didn't join the SCA first thing (I know I didn't) then they're only part of Carolingia for two or three years. The Coronet's duty to notice individuals, to help them connect and to recognize their achievements, is the more urgent for borough members.

The single most important thing we could do to address these duties would be to make regular visits to meetings of the boroughs - which we would be making to all the guilds, practices, cantons, and other such groups anyway - bearing these special circumstances in mind as we do. Then from these regular contacts could grow other things to meet these needs, things to encourage and facilitate involvement with more of the barony: co-hosting other group meetings at the borough at a higher level than just providing room space, for example - I'm thinking especially of the way Felding has hosted Calligraphers' Guild and Low Company meetings in the past - and connecting borough members with particular interests with guilds and individuals outside the borough interested in the same things.

Furthermore, the boroughs take on the majority of the barony's recruitment work. During demo season, the Coronet's duty to represent the barony to itself means they would have to working closely with the boroughs to present a good-looking and well-defined image of the barony, so that new members' first impressions are both favorable and accurate.

On the other hand, if I've been seeing them at more closed events where they evidently paid a site fee and otherwise consciously chose to come in, I'd be less likely to come straight over. I'd probably ask around a little first, see if anyone knows who this person is, whether anyone else has ever seen them in garb (maybe I've only seen them coming to or leaving the event), whether anyone else had already talked to them in the manner suggested above. I'd likely still approach them and engage them in talk, but just what tack I'd take would depend on what I'd learned from the asking-around stage.

I would likely do things a little differently as Baron. If they seemed shy and genuinely unaware, I'd worry lest having The Baron Of Carolingia approach them might be intimidating (gentle and lovable though I am); I'd probably ask a known responsible and discreet friend (member of entourage?) to go and try my first approach. On the other hand, the more it seemed that they had already had some exposure to our mores but just didn't care, the more likely I'd be to approach them in person - still open and friendly, but letting them know that collective appearance really does matter to us.

I can't give a clearer answer, it would depend a lot on the situation.

Considering my dislike of particularism (see above), I'm a little leery of creating too many different baronial champions too easily. Gwendolyn and I have talked about looking for other ways of recognizing and celebrating the best of different activities, perhaps something more like a baronial "household," using the word in its more historical sense - the term is so firmly locked into a different SCAdian meaning that we'd probably have to call it something else.

I have no doubt that I would become aware of other roles, more specific to the situation of the fencing community, after getting greater familiarity with their interests and activities, and after listening to their own ideas.