learnedax's question:I think heavy list fighting is a critical cultural element in the SCA. Other people have already pointed out the evidence that it is, in fact, so, leaving us the question of why it might be that fighting has the catalyzing effect it does. That is, a theory is needed. That's my cue.
One of the most important things I have learned from the SCA is it's Three-Fold Paradigm of Human Endeavor. My name for it. It's something which most of us Scadians have completely internalized, and every Scadian knows about. Expressed in its simplest form, it might be stated, "All human endeavors can be classified as one or more of 'Martial Art', 'Arts and Sciences', and/or 'Service'."
I'm not going to explore the richnesses of the Three-Fold Paradigm of Human Endeavor here, nor the flaws. All you Scadians know exactly what I'm talking about, and you're whom I'm addressing. Suffice it to say, we have some alternative casts of those three categories, some of which are mutually exclusive. It gets pretty complex.
This paradigm -- which to be honest, I didn't think very much of when first I encountered it -- turns out to be one of the most powerful lenses through which to examine subcultures and communities. But first you have to abstract it a bit.
The abstraction I came to from observing other subcultures might be expressed thus:
(1) There are the endeavors which are vital or important to the continued existence of the culture, but which are not considered by that culture to be intrinsically desirable endeavors. These are "Service". For example, in an artists' colony, keeping the account books may be vital, but the keeping of account books is not considered intrinsically worthwhile; were it plausible for the group to function without any accounts being kept, it would be happy not to have the activity done. However, in a society of accountants, keeping of account books may not be merely something done from necessity; for them it would not necessarily be "Service".
(2) There are endeavors which are advancements of and deepening of the primary ostensible purpose of the culture. In the SCA, it is the study of the middle ages and renaissance, and the considered reproduction or recreation of cultural elements from that time period. In the Society, call that "Arts and Sciences". In science fiction Fandom, it's producing -- writing, editing, illustrating, publishing, etc. -- science fiction or science fiction appreciation. In a religious congregation, it is conducting or performing in the ceremonies of worship, the production of devotional material. At Burning Man, it is the doing of cool art or participation projects.
(3) There are endeavors which are forms of communal/social participation within the society. In a religious congregation, these are the people who show up each week to worship. At Burning Man, it's the people who show up to party and explore.
In the SCA, there's a number of things which suit, but primary among them is fighting.
Each of these three classes of endeavor are necessary to a subculture or purposeful community (such as a religious community, but not a neighborhood). In fact, it is on the boundaries between these three classes of endeavor -- as people begin to identify with what they do -- that classes form up within the society, and tensions often erupt. From these three classes of endeavor spring up three classes of people. Scadians know exactly what I mean if I say "Lord Soandso is Pelican track" or "Lady Foo is a stick-jock".
By looking through this lens and identifying how these three classes are manifested in a subculture, you can start to ask all sorts of nifty questions and learn all sorts of interesting things. One can ask "How do these three relate in this society?" and "Are all three sorts of human endeavor equally valuable in this culture? Does one have primacy?" and "What are the population proportions of associated with these classes?" and "Are there different attrition/recruitment rates for different classes?" and "Where do the boundaries blur in this society? Are there alliances between classes?"
People sort themselves into these classes (or not) on two bases: their personal tastes for how they want to relate to the society in question, and their personal interest topics/activities. The first is whether someone wants to hold responsibility (service), pursue the purpose (pursuit), and/or participate (participation). The second is whether they like snow boarding or calligraphy, discussing semiotics or baking cookies.
These two bases can be in tension, and indeed often are. Where there is tension between someone's interests and the classes those interests are ascribed to in that society, that person is likely to find that society a bad fit, and leave for a better fit.
For instance, if John really likes accounting, but has no interest in taking responsibility for a club's accounting needs, he just wants to hang out with other accountants, play accounting games, and do some ad hoc accounting, then he's not going to be very happy with a club such as the SCA, where the only role for accounting is in Service, but he'll be much happier in an accountant's club.
So one of the interesting questions one can ask about a subculture is, "How well do the ways that the three classes are manifest in this culture map to the interests of the people inclined to join those classes?"
And it is exactly this that the SCA does so terribly well. This is, I submit, the SCA's "secret sauce" which causes it to dwarf every other participatory history club. The SCA's expressions of the three classes are excellent fits for people interested in the associated activities of those classes.
Does the SCA get it 100% right? No. But it gets it vastly more right than the competition. It gets it vastly more right than most subcultures.
What, precisely, it is doing right, and why, is an enormous topic, and beyond the scope of this essay. But one critical part of it has to do with heavy list fighting.
Heavy list fighting is the core participant offering. And it turns out, for a heck of a lot of people who want to be "participant class" in a Med/Ren organization, sword-fighting is right up their alley, and, for the sort of people interested in sword-fighting, being participant class is exactly what they want.
Imagine, if you will, three allegorical people come to an allegorical SCA demo. In our allegory, the demo represents the SCA entire, and our three people are one who comes to serve, one who comes to study, and one who comes to participate.
The one who comes to serve approaches the demo table and says, "I share your taste for transport and for exoticism and for floofy white shirts. I have come to labor; what have you for me here?" And the allegorical Chatelain says, "Here, we will endow you with ultimate responsibility for our money, our civil authority, our very gatherings, our communications, and all real daily power. All that you want of these is yours for the taking. And through the taking of this power, you may attain honor in our eyes, and be granted high station among us." The one who comes to serve says, "Well it is. I shall be one of you."
The one who comes to study approaches the demo table and says, "I share your taste for transport and for exoticism and for floofy white shirts. I have come to study; what have you for me here?" And the allegorical Chatelain says, "Here, we have all the human thought, and art, and work for over one thousand years. All of it is open to you. Through any exploration of this vast trove of treasure, any path at all you choose, you may attain honor in our eyes, and be granted high station among us." The one who comes to study says, "Well it is. I shall be one of you."
The one who comes to participate approaches the demo table and says, "I share your taste for transport and for exoticism and for floofy white shirts. I have come to do; what have you for me here?" And the allegorical Chatelain says, "Here, there are battles to be fought and glory to be garnered; here may you test your mettle and exercise your nobility. Through your striving, you may attain honor in our eyes, and even win the highest seat of all, among us." The one who comes to do says, "Well it is. I shall be one of you."
There's lots of other things, too. But, "In our club, you get to play out every childhood fantasy you ever had of being a 'knight in shining armor' in the mother of all games of Let's Pretend, with all the resources of grown-up-hood to accouter it" is pretty hard to beat, from a participation stand point. In our club, the participant mode has an activity -- heavy list -- which is pretty fantabulous from the point of view of participating.
Believe it or not, in a lot of other subcultures, the participant activities are pretty poor matches for the participation-oriented people. One common reason is that the activities provided are, of course, run by Service and Pursuit people, and they run activities to their tastes, not to the tastes of Participants. Often the participant class winds up being considered second-class citizens; that's the case at Burning Man where people who come "just" to party are often scorned by the Pursuit class as parasites on what would otherwise be (to their mind) a festival of artists. Compare that to the SCA which literally crowns participant class people.
This is lovely for the participant class in the SCA, but it also has important positive consequences for the rest of the SCA. Because, unlike in so many subcultures, all three classes in the SCA have strong offerings, it is much, much easier for entire families and cliques can join. No matter what class of endeavor your spouse want to belong to, we can offer them something that will probably scratch their interest itch. There's still the issue of basic premise -- someone who is completely turned off by our fancy of the middle ages isn't going to be happy here. But if they get over that low hump, we can generally find a reasonably intriguing place for them.
Few other organizations can say that. Imagine the artist colony where there's nothing for non-artists to do. Being a member of that colony means leaving behind one's non-artist Participant best friend, that's a discouragement to the artist from joining and it means the colony doesn't get the benefit of the Participant. Every subculture which has in common usage the expression "[activity]-widow" -- "dance-widow", "craft-widow", "bowling-widow", etc. -- is a subculture with exactly this problem.
When I used the term "dance-widow" at a KWDS meeting, more than half the people looked at me blankly. They had never even heard that formulation before. Even in highly "traditional" rural SCA groups where heavy list is the predominant activity for men and their mates often follow them into the Society, the non-fighting women are expected to avail themselves of one of the other roles and have an interest and identity in the Society of their very own. Being left behind as a "fight-widow" is not expected or considered normal.
Also, because we have such rich offerings for the participant class, we get to keep them around. Often in subcultures the participant class is the one with the most "churn" -- the most turn over in membership. High churn makes their population numbers volatile, which is often dangerous to the group, financially! By having rich offerings, they get emotionally and socially attached to the subculture, which makes the population more stable.
Additionally, by being around longer, they get more thoroughly inculcated with the actual culture of the subculture; a danger of high-churn is that even when you have stable numbers through heavy recruitment, the culture itself is not strongly embraced by the individuals. The "ways" of the people are not as deeply understood, enthusiastically espoused, diligently promulgated, or assiduously observed by people who have only been around for a little while. With high-churn, the very cultural elements that make the subculture different from the main culture bleed away, because enculturation doesn't happen fast enough to keep up with the churn. Since much of culture is imparted simply by immersion, that's a reinforcing feedback loop; when the culture is not being imparted thoroughly enough because of churn, it becomes harder and harder to impart it because fewer people are expressing it from whom newer members can pick it up.
(Locals: for an example of high-churn eroding a cultural element, consider borough turn-over and the Carolingian tradition of equeries and demioselles.)
(So, which Carolingian borough member wants to ask "What's 'equeries and demioselles'?" this time? :) Don't worry, it's part of Carolingian tradition to do so. Sort of like the youngest kid asking "Why is this night different from all other nights?" at Passover, only less well scheduled. :)
All these benefits accrue to the SCA as a subculture and a club because of heavy list fighting. I do not think that is the only reason fighting is critical, but it is one powerful anthropological reason.