msmemory_archive | Recruitment vs high standards

Recruitment vs high standards

This is a half-developed notion. I have this theory percolating around my brain that the SCA's recent higher standards in many areas are in fact a barrier to recruiting new members.

Thinking back, when I joined the SCA, it was very much a do-it-yourself group. Nobody minded if you made a polyester velour tunic, or made a surcoat out of brocade curtains from a yard sale. We all politely ignored the pickle bucket armor, webbing folding chairs, and nylon tents, instead collectively imagining ourselves lords and ladies in samite and fur, living in bright pavilions, sitting on thrones. College students, young adults, and the poor could feel welcome, for their fantasy was just as good as anyone else's.

These days, all the trappings are available to anyone with enough money. You want turnshoes, sheepskin bedding, snowy linen robes, shiny armour? Just plunk down enough dollars and Poof! instant status. That random 19-year-old scholarship student, who would have been a shabby but respected herald in 1982? Well, now he's just shabby.

We've recreated class differences, and based them on modern incomes. No wonder we aren't bringing in or retaining the peripheral, young, or poor members who historically have been the SCA's lifeblood.

ETA: I'm not claiming innocence here either: I am at least as guilty as most of spending my "look! no kids!" income on finery while that early garb molders in the attic.

Threaded | Flat

I've thought the same thing for quite a long time.

We've recreated class differences, and based them on modern incomes.

Welcome to the middle age of just about any group that started off with a bunch of poor university students. Depressing, but accurate.

It is a gimme that higher standards are exclusionary. The SCA's success, and its concomitant academic disrespect, come from its low barriers to entry.

While I am nowhere as active as you are, I've still found the SCA to be largely a do-it-yourself group, with tremendous access to resources that don't require money. When I was younger, I noticed that students often had better kit than their elders, since they had more time.

I find the "cash for flash" availability to a form of parity, frankly.

Just another view. I wonder if you are confusing Carolingia's higher standards of excellence with the rest of the world?

I agree, on several levels. I definitely felt put in my place at the Indian high-authenticity dinner at Pennsic this year. Many members of that community have good careers, houses, etc., and can afford pearls and gold (or even gold-esque) jewelry and elaborately woven silk sarees. While I did wear my nicest and most period cotton saree, I felt distinctly under-dressed. I did, incidentally, go out and buy $50 worth of pearls later on so I'll feel a little bit more up to snuff, but that was pretty much the entirety of my Pennsic shopping budget :/

In Drachenwald, there are re-enactment groups that are even more accurate than the SCA and fancier -- far more expensive than the SCA. One big difference, though, is that they don't tend to run as many events per year as the SCA do, and they focus on a very specific time period. Also, they usually are paid for their performances at castles and various period places. (One reason we can't use Hampton Court, for example, is that we're not a group like The Tudors that work with only one time period.)

But I do agree. What used to get by in the SCA tends to be 'shabby' nowadays. It's become a very expensive hobby. Someone in my area bought some amazing armour not too long ago. I heard he ordered it from Eastern Europe, so it probably was cheaper than had he been an American living in the US buying it from someone stateside. But still, when I heard how much he paid, I was shocked. The SCA isn't a cheap hobby, and here in Drachenwald, where even getting to events can be costly (petrol is running over US $7.00 per US gallon right now, and we need to fly a lot to events), it seems particularly high-priced.

Thinking about this makes me uncomfortable, and hence I suspect you've hit something pretty squarely. Perhaps along the same lines as the fact that virtuously eating organically, sustainably, and locally remains an extremely income-stratified thing.

So is the answer to not eat sustainably, as it were? Or is the answer to make eating sustainably more accessible? It's not an easy thing to answer or solve.

the peripheral, young, or poor members who historically have been the SCA's lifeblood.

To digress, however, I want to poke at this a little. Admittedly I have not been doing this as long as many of my esteemed elders, but I have been at it for fifteen years, and I confess that in two kingdoms and three groups I have not ever really seen this to be the case, at least not so centrally as to be called "lifeblood."

(That, and the whole topic of recruitment and retention is complicated for me. For all that the rhetorical meme of "finding a home" and the "welcoming SCA for newcomers" is so common, I never in my newcomer life experienced it. I just muddled along and figured it out myself. It makes me a little impatient sometimes, I fear.)

Expand the idea. Is it not just the high level of the cost of the trappings but also the high level of what qualifies as "good" and "period" - at least in some activities.

Admittedly I've seen and sat through some stuff that reminds me the SCA is still a pretty friendly place to perform or make things that will embarrass the heck out of you years down the road but... It strikes me that entry level has been kicked up a notch where before borderline sucking but trying was more fun.

Still thinking about this one. I have to wonder if it wouldn't help (at least locally) to spread Carolingia's activities out a bit more? We do a lot of MIT-area stuff, but that's only going to reach a small number of students.

Random Idea #1: Declare (or hold) a local event "Bring a Newbie Day". Something like Falling Leaves where there's fighting and interesting stuff to look at (as in, I do not think Novice Schola is the best venue for this idea.) Heck, you could even offer a spiffy token (I would donate my home-made pins to this idea) to everyone who manages to bring a new person (handed out at troll or something) or every new person. Or something. And have some sort of totally hands-on activity for newcomers, kind of like a grown-up version of the "draw on your own shield" you sometimes see for kids.

I'm wondering if it is also era, as you and Tibor mentioned earlier.

One of the thoughts that I have had lately was on the use of iPods or MP3 players. I was surprised to see how many people were wearing them in the stores. Seeing them being used walking down the street or on the T is one thing, but when I saw them being used in stores, I thought,"What has our society come to that these people are tuning other people out?" It seems younger people don't know how to do many things, including socialize. This is the Age of MMORPGs, IMs and SecondLife. A lot of these people don't know how to interact with other people face to face. I have a friend from high school who recently moved back into the area. I have been trying to get her out to an event to meet more people and the bulk of our communication is via IM. Kind of frustrating actually, because I would like to sit down and have a glass of wine and chat with her.

Your question makes me think about Johann and his bus. :-)

There is so much I want to say, but we are literally on our way out the door for the weekend. I will read the discussion here and get back to you, next week.

I've written and rewritten thoughts on this several times since I first read it, and I'm still not sure how to pin it down. But I have sensed a barrier of standards, if you will, as something that is present.

This will probably sound ridiculous, but I have never felt like I truly "fit in" socially here in Carolingia. And I've been here long enough that I am pretty sure if I don't now, I'm not going to anytime in the future. Whatever; I do my jobs and projects and run my events and try not to worry about it too much.

What this has to do with economics or class, if anything, I'm not sure.

Other than the other Simmons students, the people that reached out to me when I was new were the laid-back ones I'm still camping with now, eating our hot dogs at the camping events and buying half our kits at Wal-Mart. Doing thrown weapons because it's fun, but also because you don't have to buy anything to participate. Same for dancing. Now, part of that is definitely economic - several of us just don't have much to throw around. On the other hand, I often have the feeling that even if one of us won the lottery, we'd still be eating our hot dogs and playing cards and rolling ice-cream-maker balls around under our hoopskirts. ("We'd still eat Kraft Dinner, we'd just eat more of it, and use fancy ketchup...")

The people I often hang with are not the most period people on earth, and I don't think they have any desire to be. And there are times when I love that, and times when it's stifling. But it makes them accessible. No one has to worry about not being up to snuff, no one feels badly because they accidentally talked about LiveJournal or can only afford cotton garb and a nylon tent.

I don't play at the level a lot of people in the Barony do, and there are a lot of reasons for that, of which money is only one. But the fact that I don't play at that level and probably never will is an awkward thing for me at times, and one of which I am quite often aware. I sometimes feel like there's an unspoken "But you could play at that level, if you wanted to..." And I probably could, but I've made other choices for the time being.

(Speaking of which only a little, does the Barony have a selection of loaner garb? I'd like to get a lot of our old garb out of the soon-to-be-remodelled attic and to somewhere it'll be used, and it's pretty good by 15-years-ago standards.)

I'm grateful to

marysdress for reminding me to return to this topic.

I've been thinking about this, and reading the responses. As usual, the SCA thought process is to either 1: focus on the youth market or 2: blame itself.

But I look at the world as it is, and I see that volunteerism is less common than it used to be, that participatory programs such as the SCA are less popular, and so forth.

My thoughts are: am I correct, and if I am correct, how does the SCA either sieve the world to find appropriate exceptions, or should how should it adapt to new realpolitik?

When I first joined the SCA lo these 24 years ago, things seemed quite different than they do today.

First and foremost, there was *magic* in the air. Granted, I was a college freshman and not yet truly acquainted with the real world, but the utter removal from the world that I knew was in and of itself enchanting. Yes, I was a D&D kid throughout high school (Cynthia's reference to Phil and Dixie just caused me to sniff with nostalgia) and approached the SCA with that mindset. But there was this whole world that, while not existing in history in any proper sense, was a "could have been". Yes, I could put on armor and pick up a stick; in fact, the first demo I saw had me picking up a stick and whacking Nikolai upside the head.

It's not that we were different people, it wasn't play-acting. We got to be us doing different things. We could be polite to each other, for example, without getting run over. We could serve another (or be served!) without running afoul of modern sensibilities on slavery or demeaning behavior. For a shy kid with few social skills, having a group of people with similar interests who were actively trying to build community meant that there was somewhere to *belong*. There was an intensity of purpose.

There were NO barriers to entry, except perhaps getting a ride somewhere. An overly-large T-shirt, belted around the middle, was all that was necessary: an *attempt* at period garb. There were, of course, always people who were willing to help, to coach, as soon as someone wanted to step up and do more. Want better clothing? Talk to this person. Feast gear? We're all going down to Pier One (remember that?) for wooden bowls and candlesticks. Some people sold their old garb to the newbies, at relatively low prices. The standards were in what you DID, not in what you wore or carried.

The lack of barriers, of course, carries with it some problems. Most of us were a little odd, but there were some that were just plain weird. I'm sure you know the types - sitting and talking to them make one feel a little... uncomfortable. And of course there are the elf ears and fangs. But there were people like that in period too, and there was still that magic.

But now? Well, I'm older now. Married, kids, house, and 3-4 separate jobs rather than schoolwork or minimum-wage fry cook. I am far more acquainted with real life than I think I ever really wanted to be (no regrets on wife, kids, house, mind you). I've been to few events in the past 10 years or so. Some of that is life intruding, and some isn't. The last few events I attended just didn't have that same magic. There were people forcibly playacting - something I always found a bit hokey - or it was the same people I see outside in funny clothing. It's the *same* world. There's no sense of "other". In contrast to what I saw before, where people blossomed differently in different soil, what I saw was some (few) people living out sad fantasies. It wasn't real. No, it was TOO real. The same behaviors, the same pettiness, the same competition... It was the same world I had left at the door - and who needs to take the time and trouble to *get* to the event if we just happen to be doing a few different activities.

Court? No thanks - I just had a four-hour meeting at work. Music? Well, I'd love to, but building the proper lute is a little beyond my spare time right now (though some day...). Brewing? This summer I brewed an average of twice a month, and with methods not too far from period (until we get to sanitation, and kegging). Fighting? I've still got nerve damage from previous forays into armor. Fencing? Maybe... though it seems like it's more about process than end-results (for all of above). Kathryn mentioned those "goofy" plays, and filk. Much of that *isn't* period - but it still had that magic.

(to be continued - sorry)

Thank you for bringing this up, and thanks to everyone else for keeping the conversation going long enough I can still chime in after a weekend away.

I don’t know what the membership numbers really are; maybe we are facing a real and significant decline in numbers, but I don’t see it. (The fact I’ll now elaborate on what I do see instead doesn’t mean my mind is closed on the question, just that in this venue all we can do is weigh anecdotal impressions against each other.) I see a decline in participation. People do hear about the SCA through lots of different channels – some of them demos, many through media coverage or word-of-Web or whatever. And they’re happy to join - I can’t tell you how many e-mail contacts I got when I was seneschal of the Towers to the effect that “I’ve heard about the SCA and I think it’s the coolest thing and I sent in my membership money to California and they say you’re my local group. So what do you do?” I’m not saying it’s a huge number, maybe a dozen or so over a couple of years, but it’s the kind of first contact I never remember having over five years as baronial seneschal, a generation ago.

The point is, people can hear about us and find us, but then what do they do with us, and we with them? In my case in Towers, I found all too often they expected to be entertained: when they asked “what do you do?” and I explained about canton project days, and more activities in Boston like dance practice and various guilds, and six to nine events per year, they mostly wanted to know when was the next show – oh that’s right, “event” – because they can hardly wait to watch. There wasn’t as much interest in doing things as in attending events.

And when I hear about other groups that are having trouble getting people involved, it’s mostly the same sort of thing: they have large numbers of members, the problem is getting officers or a critical mass of musicians or autocrats. (I think there was someone from the Phoenix AZ group bringing this up on [Bad username or site: ”sca” @ livejournal.com] recently.) And why is this?

Some of it may well be a sea-change in the mass culture, as plenty of others suggest here. Some of it, I’ve felt for a while, is simply that our large groups have too many members. In a smaller group, everybody does everything, because they have to or it doesn’t happen. But in a larger group we can specialize: we have the Waytes, and the Quire, and the Mummers, and the fighters, and the officers, and the People Who Stand Up in Court (barons, heralds, champions),…and an increasing sector of the population that sit and watch and listen to them, and don’t do anything. And eventually get bored and go off looking for the next show.

This is getting too long; I’ll choke the comment buffer. It’s not a recruitment crisis, it’s a participation crisis. And over-centralized control by the Corporation. And as for the concept of buying spiffiness, obviously I’ve done a little of it over the years but just as obviously, not very much; I’m intrigued, surprised, and disappointed to hear that people have been able to buy status through spiff.

I think the most important thing is to be kind and welcoming, and treat our level of authenticity as a personal foible if at all possible. Of course, what do I know? I wear plastic shoes at Pennsic. :)

Threaded | Flat

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Firehose on!

Don't try to be clever; we are all clever here. Try to be kind, a little kind.