Previous Entry Share Next Entry
That was actually a good curia
Yeah, yeah, I know -- contradiction in terms and all that. But really: we whine when the Royalty screw up, and should acknowledge when they get it right.

Mind, I was kind of dreading this curia: there were several items on the agenda that I disagreed with, and there have been a few recent curiae that (based on the descriptions I've heard) would have caused my head to explode in anger if I'd been there, because of how they were run.

But this one went well, largely because Their Majesties Got It. Specifically, they encouraged the members of curia to discuss the topics seriously, and paid attention. So the uncontroversial items passed quite quickly, but we got pretty deeply into the issues surrounding the ones that had problems. In the cases where the objections weren't terrible, TRM went with their original plan, but for the ones that *did* have serious issues (which included one or two that His Majesty felt especially strongly about), they agreed to remand the decisions to next reign, so that they can be given the time and consideration they need to produce better law.

So overall, a good curia. I don't agree with every decision, but I don't think anything terrible came out of it (which, in and of itself, is better than many). And the process was right: instead of ramming decisions through suddenly, TRM had enough faith in the Kingdom to let things take time and be done right. Kudos to them: Law is something I care quite passionately about, and I appreciate Royalty who don't simply assume that they know better than everyone else...
Tags: ,

  • 1
I figure the law will get updated eventually, but what were the highlight decisions? some interesting items up -- Troubadour/Muses award, new king's honor, the bit w/the tygers, court baron limits, email comments, polling limits. (I haven't steeled myself to receive EK list email yet)

Court Baron limits? Je suis Refuse du Blanc for only a limited time?

Nous sommes des ouiseaux sans pieds.

Nous sommes les détritus blancs sans terre?

no, a limit on how many can be given in one reign. Some royalty are generous with them and some are not. I figure its up to the crown and shouldn't be regulated, but others have different opinions.

Once you have one, you have it for life :)

Justin's newer post reminded me that I had heard something about that.

Personally, I received my CB during a reign where they gave out A LOT (sixteen?) and I don't feel that it's cheapened in any way by that. In fact, it actually created a certain bond among the people who all received them during the same reign. When I look at that list, I go "Hell yeah, we all busted some ass together."

That's entirely reasonable, and probably needs to be expressed more. While I do think there's some genuine disagreement about the point of the CB, I suspect there's also a lot of pure miscommunication going on as well: much of the work that goes into a typical CB is often invisible to most of the Kingdom, so it winds up *looking* like it means less than it actually does.

(As I mentioned to Liam in the other thread, I'm mostly bugged by the recurring argument itself: I don't have an especially strong opinion one way or t'other. I think both sides of the debate have valid points, but are generally proceeding from different visions of what it's supposed to be given *for*...)

Do you, personally, think that the kingdom's understanding of the CB needs to become more uniform?

I'm struck here by the apparent "what is an elephant like?" quality of the views of a CB, and it also reminds me of some arguments over what is really a marriage. My response to the CB question is a lot like my response to the marriage question -- the worth of a CB is between the Crown and the recipient, and may or may not be understood or valued the same by the rest of the Society.

As it happens, I got mine in another kingdom, from a King who was of the mind that there should be fewer of them, zero or one per reign.

But that is a piece of info which I think is neat, but which I don't engrave on my coronets because it's really between me and him... and maybe the people at that court and my shire at the time who wrote me in. Like a wedding ring, there's no way to quickly tell whether it was a casual award or a very serious one, or somewhere in between. And I think that's fine.

Do you, personally, think that the kingdom's understanding of the CB needs to become more uniform?

Yes -- but keep in mind that that's relative to an extremely low bar. My sense is that the extremes are *way* apart at this point. (Probably more in terms of perception than reality, I should note: while the Royalty disagree, I don't think they disagree as much as people think they do.) As I mentioned somewhere in the thread, I think that "rough consensus" would be ideal. I don't think that we need anything like total agreement here, I just suspect we've drifted a bit too far apart in terms of perception.

Mind, I do understand the "depends on the Crown" argument, and have often used it myself. But I get the feeling that it's being somewhat overused. It only goes so far, since memory is short. You're actually a particularly good example: almost no one in the East knows how to evaluate yours, since we don't know the King in question.

So ultimately, the coronet *itself* is going to wind up carrying most of the meaning in peoples' eyes, and there's a fair amount of disagreement about how to interpret that. And yes, it does bug me that the interpretations range from "walks on water" to "meaningless bit of candy" -- the implication is that the coronet *is* nearly meaningless in this Kingdom.

(I should once again emphasize that this is *not* a hobby-horse of mine. I have some opinions about the principle of the thing, but I'm bothered more by the arguments over the topic than by the topic itself. To me, this is an interesting sociological discussion, not something that Really Matters...)

I'm as passionate as the King on this one, and (as I pointed out at Curia) I've had a very long time to think about it. There are no criteria for CB's (as there are none for AoA's): the only governing law anywhere is one line in Corpora where the bestowal of baronages is listed among the privileges of royalty. Full stop. And trying to define criteria for something whose very essence is its undefinability...that's not a good path. As goldsquare has said in a different context, defining metrics can lead to a situation where only those metrics are met. A CB means what it means, individually. If it's a canonization, fine. If it's a lollipop, fine. And if the same CB is a canonization in one pair of eyes and a lollipop in another, that's fine too. That's exactly as it should be. You can regulate precedence. You can't (or, at least, you shouldn't) regulate prestige.

Regarding Court Baronies

I have to say, I am impressed when anyone is able to step back from a view they hold strongly, and even more so when the person in question has the ability and power to do what they want.

  • 1

Log in

No account? Create an account