In response to Theo - I believe that Praxian artwork usually appears on
practical objects. Carved horn weapon hilts, easily pocketed icons, beadwork
on clothing, tatoos, face painting, ritual masks, markings and brands on
animals.
Some permanent art pieces will exist, painted by the Oasis folk around each
oasis, some cliff paintings and strange statues located along Waha's paths
in the Wastes. I think that art work has geometrical qualities, animals of
course being the predominant image, even the images of humans have animal
heads - unless they are the rare pictures of none praxians. I think that
there is a great diversity of Praxian art styles, based on Tribal cultures
and even individual Sept ideals. When I was asked to illustrate Tales #14
and #15, I tired to convey the tribal differences in the images - although
some of the images are a little hard to decipher for example the pictures on
pages 8, 9, 22 and 24 are all images of Eiritha, from the PoV of the Sable,
Impala 1, High Llama and Impala 2 tribes. Items 1 and two are small horn
carving that fit into a satchel, Item three is a crude pottery sculpture
that dismantles into three parts - this was not made by a Praxian nomad, but
by an Oasis potter on 'request' the contruction means this is easily
portable, the last is a large Impala mask worn by a tribal shaman. I hope
this helps....a little.
Cheers Simon.
>
> The Glorantha Digest Friday, February 25 2000 Volume 07 : Number
421
>
>
>
> TABLE OF CONTENTS
>
> aelarsen_at_facstaff.wisc.ed Re: The Glorantha Digest V7 #404
> Alex Ferguson Meta-Gian.
> David Dunham Re: infanticide; descent patterns
> Alex Ferguson Re: Jerry Springer panel
> Alex Ferguson Re: Mrs Eel
> Peter Metcalfe Rokari Nunneries
> Theo Posselt DHn sexcapades | Orlanthi lurrve | Prax
> edige_at_juno.com Re: The Glorantha Digest V7 #420
> Alex Ferguson Onslaught recidivism, perhaps sorta about Her
>
> RULES OF THE ROAD
>
> 1. Do not include large sections of a message in your reply. Especially
> not to add "Yeah, I agree" or "No, I disagree." Or be excoriated.
> If someone writes something good and you want to say "good show"
> please do. But don't include the whole message you praise.
> 2. Use an appropriate Subject line.
> 3. Learn the art of paraphrasing: Don't just quote and comment on a
> point-by-point basis.
> 4. No anonymous posting, please. Don't say something unless you're ready
> to stand by it.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 18:00:42 -0600
> From: aelarsen_at_facstaff.wisc.edu
> Subject: Re: The Glorantha Digest V7 #404
>
> >From: Joerg Baumgartner <joe_at_toppoint.de>
> >Subject: Re: Newgrange
> >
> >I said
> >>>If so, no evidence for use as a grave has been found for Newgrange
> >>>proper (dunno about Knowth and Dowth, but I suppose they were graves).
> >
> >and was corrected by Andrew E. Larsen:
> >> Untrue. When Michael O'Kelly conducted a series of annual digs at
> >> Newgrange from 1962 to 75, he found the remains of 2 bodies in the
> >> main chamber, whose bones were scattered about, suggesting that
> >> they might have been moved in there sometime after the site was
> >> built or disturbed at some point by grave robbers. He also found
> >> the cremated remains of at least 3 and possibly more people, as
> >> well as several pendants and other items.
> >
> >This for a site which had ample space for many bodies. Do you have dates
> >for these finds? It is possible that later groups used the earlier
> >monument as a place to bury their dead. This still doesn't mean that
> >Newgrange was primarily a grave - otherwise all of christianity's great
> >cathedrals would have to be categorized as monuments to the dead buried
> >within as well.
>
> I do not know if any dates have been assigned to those bodies, but
> it would be a moot point, since the dating of Newgrange itself is vague.
> The size of the monument in comparison to the number of bodies is isn't a
> real indicator, since the Pyramids were built to house just one body.
> However, you're right that there is nothing to prove that
Newgrange
> was built to act as a tomb. The bodies could significantly postdate the
> structure. However, this is also true of many other neolithic sites.
Most
> passage graves *could* have been built for other purposes. My
> understanding is that most archaeologists consider Newgrange (and Knowth
> and Dowth) to be cemetaries.
>
>
> >> Remember that many burial bounds become megaliths after the dirt
> >> has worn away and the stone structure remains.
> >
> >Only if megalithic techniques were used to build the mounts, which is
> >what I doubt. Mounds like that of the Oseberg ship used different
> >methods, and would yield no great stone remains.
>
> Agreed. But the vast majority of neolithic sites that I have seen
> in the British Isles (excluding stone circles) originated as grave
> structures, from which the dirt and burials have subsequently vanished,
> leaving odd arrangements of stones.
>
> Andrew E. Larsen
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 00:44:58 GMT
> From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_cs.ucc.ie>
> Subject: Meta-Gian.
>
> Before we get down to the nitty-gritty, let me first of all declare my
> top-level stance on the Great GianFranco Issue: I think he was, as
> others have said, both somewhat 'spikey' in his own remarks (nothing
> unusual there), and rather over-sensitive about others' (again, this is
> just Standard Digest Samsara...). No reason for him to feel forced to
> leave, I'd have thought, but clearly that's a matter entirely for
> himself. I do feel he was somewhat over-zealously 'List Admined'
> -- but I may be somewhat biased, having felt that that way about such
> practice for some time. But equally, I feel he somewhat over-reacted
> to that, too -- again, not that I can possibly second-guess his feelings
> about such a matter.
>
> I too have had some discussion with Gian off-Digest, though I hasten to
> add, certainly not to abuse him. I felt he he something to contribute
> to the Digest, and hoped he'd 'see his way clear' to continuing to do
> so, but alas, it would seem not to be. I don't think we can expect
> the Digest to change to suit Gian, and equally Gian may not wish to
> accomodate the undoubted oddities of the Digest.
>
>
> Andrew Larsen:
> > If someone out there wants to attack Gian, they could at least
have
> > the honesty to say what it was that he did to offend them.
>
> And who is it that you think might be attacking him? If you're
> referring to the passage snipped from private mail, it seemed to me
> to be a long way short of an attack, and that entirely aside, surely
> the quotee is the wronged party in this exchange. Firstly, by being
> 'end-arounded' by having private statements selectively made public,
> and furthermore, that this be done by means of quoting a private email,
> which is even at the best of times, if we're going to get down to
> 'written rules' both a clear breach of "netiquette", and arguably a
> form of intellectual property abuse.
>
>
> > If the offense he committed was using a pseudonym, he's hardly
alone
> > in the Internet community in doing it. On this list alone we have
> > TTrotsky, Terra Incognita, and someone named Sergi (which I assume is a
> > pseudonym).
>
> I can't say any of these cases bother me in the least, though I confess
> a bias in that I believed that I knew the name of all three. (Naovely,
> I assumed Sergi Diaz's real name was Sergi Diaz -- at least, it looks
> like a name, and it seems to ethnologically match his top level domain
> name, which is more detail than I'd trouble to worry about, normally...)
> But it's one thing to have a consistent pseudonym, and quite another
> to multiply them, and indeed to post in circumstances tantamount to a
claim
> that you're _not_ the same person.
>
>
> > He has not
> > attempted to manipulate or deceive the list by using it.
>
> Well actually, it seemed to me that he's done both to some extent. It
> may not have broken the actual intent of Rule #4 (though as
> Constitutional Conservatives would say, if we don't mean what we say we
> mean in drafting the law, why pay all these lawyers and politicians so
> much to do it?), but it would be at best a Melodramatic Stunt, and at
> worst is an attempt to mess around with our collective heads. However,
> that's largely by-the-by, since Gian's concerns seem to largely
> ante-date this entire controversy, as I understand it.
>
> Slan libh,
> Alex.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 16:51:18 -0800
> From: David Dunham <dunham_at_pensee.com>
> Subject: Re: infanticide; descent patterns
>
> Keith Nellist wrote
>
> >I think I originally agreed with John Hughes about infanticide but have
since
> >been convinced that it is, in fact, kinslaying and therefore is unlikely.
>
> "Infanticide" is used loosely. It can involve something like
> "accidentally" rolling over onto your baby at night, to leaving it
> exposed on a hilltop (in which case it would be Orlanth or the Lady
> of the Wild who took it, and thus not kinslaying). Or you could go
> the Phoenician way and sacrifice to Baal, but this seems even more
> unlikely among the Orlanthi.
>
> The sex pit that drove Ragnaglar mad is an example of Orlanthi
> virtues taken to extreme (see also the Mallia story). I don't think
> it, in itself, tells us much.
>
>
> Alex Ferguson wrote
>
> >A very messy area is 'child custody'. Patrilineage is More-Than-
> >Orlanthi-Universal, but 'patrilocality' is much less certain.
>
> Greg once messily wrote that about 1/6 of the Sartarite clans
> practiced matrilineal descent, but never gave details.
>
> Conceivably these could be clans who worship Ernalda as their main
> deity (as in King of Dragon Pass).
>
>
> David Dunham <mailto:dunham_at_pensee.com>
> Glorantha/RQ page: <http://www.pensee.com/dunham/glorantha.html>
> Imagination is more important than knowledge. -- Albert Einstein
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 01:49:18 GMT
> From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_cs.ucc.ie>
> Subject: Re: Jerry Springer panel
>
> Kmnellist on the Convulsion "Jerry Springer Glorantha Panel":
>
> > guests: [...[
> > "Has Charsimatic Wisdom"
>
> Hey! I'm still haggling about my kick-backs... eh, that is, coming to
> satisfactory contractual negotiations about the modalities of my
> proposed manifestation. Yeah, that's the ticket.
>
> Cheers,
> Alex.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 01:51:00 GMT
> From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_cs.ucc.ie>
> Subject: Re: Mrs Eel
>
> aelarsen:
> > Speaking of Godlearner sex toys, is it possible that Mrs Eel is
not
> > the debauched Lunar matron she's been depicted as? Could she be a
devotee
> > of Uleria, doing her part to restore the fertility of Prax through
vigorous
> > worship and the use of arcane objects?
>
> Maybe I'm getting _too_ cynical and jaded in my old age, but: the
> implied difference in this distinction being? ;-)
>
> Cheers,
> Alex.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 15:01:51 +1300
> From: Peter Metcalfe <metcalph_at_bigfoot.com>
> Subject: Rokari Nunneries
>
> Trotsky:
>
> >Now, granted, life in a nunnery isn't exactly free of restrictions, but
> >at least its free of bossy blokes...
>
> I prefer David Hall's suggestion that the nunneries are where
> future wizards are concieved. Thus they have to put up with
> Father Superiors and other bossy blokes.
>
> - --Peter Metcalfe
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: 25 Feb 2000 19:58:33 -0600
> From: Theo Posselt <tposselt_at_dttus.com>
> Subject: DHn sexcapades | Orlanthi lurrve | Prax
>
> DARA HAPPA
>
> Thanks to Keith for giving me someone to talk to...
>
>
> > This seems to me to be a good source of both female Adventurers
> > ("those bastards threw me out, now I am a sword for hire") and for
> > Lunar Levitating Bald Chicks.("those bastards threw me out, but now
> > I'm the Examiner for Kostaddi"
>
> Good hooks! If the DHn culture is really as sexist and patriarchal
as
> I described it, one can just imagine the collision between it and
> Lunar culture (which, after all, is majority female in terms of the
> gods it worships).
>
>
> >> Female children are treated as household servants-in-training by
> >> the men. Infanticide is, however, not practiced.
>
> > I don't see why Dara Happans would avoid Infanticide. They seem
more
> > likely candidates than most, especially for those not of Yelmic
> > descent, or those "impure" in some way.
>
> My thought on this is two-fold:
> 1. Since Yelm was one of the first victims of Death (?) I would
assume
> his culture would be very focussed on the sanctity of life.
>
> 2. Yelmic culture would seem very rule-bound, and so laws against
> killing would be enforced across all conditions - ie, no fuzziness at
> the extremes of age. Following this view, btw, I imagine Yelmic
> culture is very anti-abortion.
>
> But really on this issue I could go either way, so long as all of the
> rules were zealously enforced.
>
> >> Traditional DHn culture has no representational sexuality. There
> >> was male nudity in statues, but no female nudity.
>
> > I do not agree that the Dara Happan have nude statues; IMO the
> > Pelandans do, the Darsenites, the Darjiini, etc but NOT the Dara
> > Happan who invented civilisation after all.
>
> In this case I see the DHn male nude as being very desexualized, and
> as being more a representation of physical 'perfection' than being a
> real model of a real person. So I would expect that the nude form
> would be very stylized, and probably never modeled on a real person.
>
> I should say that I know almost nothing about the other cultures
> mentioned in this last message.
>
>
> =======================
>
> ORLANTHI
>
> On to Alex's comment
>
> > Allegedly though, it's not the homosexual 'slur' per se that's the
> > mortal insult, it's the imputation of 'passivity'. i.e., had the
> > insult been "you use the Troll of that mountain like a woman every
> > fortnight", then it would be no worse in principle than an
> > accusation of poor taste...
>
> Hmm... I can see some cultures definitely taking this view - that
it's
> the active/passive split that matters, not the actual gender who's
> playing opposite you. But like Alex said, there's a blurry boundary
> between this viewpoint and misogyny. I'm not sure if a
non-misogynous
> culture would view the world this way.
>
> Since there seems to be consensus that (all) Orlanthi culture is
> (relatively) non-misogynous, I'm not sure that they'd take this
> viewpoint. As Alex said in his next post 'they're fairly open-minded
> about people who do not conform to their gender stereotype'. This
> doesn't seem describe a group of people who would heavily criticize a
> man for being another's 'woman' - if they discriminate against
> homosexual behavior, surely they do it against both parties involved.
>
> Did that statement make sense?
>
>
> ==============================
>
> PRAX
>
> On to a new culture (now if only someone could do Kralorela).
>
> I think the post is excellent in general, Andrew. It certainly makes
> nomadic sense. One question:
>
> > Praxian art is probably more abstract than that, but certainly
> > contains figures with enormous breasts and penises.
>
> So, sexual art aside, what in general is Praxian art like? Cave
> drawings, little statues of extremely fat women?
>
> Theo
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 21:19:37 -0500
> From: edige_at_juno.com
> Subject: Re: The Glorantha Digest V7 #420
>
> On Fri, 25 Feb 2000 15:57:43 -0800 Alex Ferguson writes:
> >Thomas McVey:
> >
> >> And in Njal's saga from Iceland, an insult by one male warrior to
> another
> >> saying "the Troll of that mountain uses you like a woman every
> fortnight",
> >> is enough to get a whole family killed.
> >
> >Allegedly though, it's not the homosexual 'slur' per se that's the
> mortal
> >insult, it's the imputation of 'passivity'. i.e., had the insult been
> >"you use the Troll of that mountain like a woman every fortnight",
> >then it would be no worse in principle than an accusation of poor
> taste...
> >
> Although I'm often nervous about drawing too strongly on-real world
> analogies for our models, there's an interesting gaming article which
> supports and adds to Alex's comment. In (defunct) "Interactive Fantasy"
> Magazine #4, Lee Gold talks about self-censorship in writing gaming
> sourcebooks on Japan and the Vikings. He says, "The Eddas refer to Odin
> and Loki--the most morally ambiguous of the gods--as having taken on
> female form, but the only references the sagas made to homosexuality was
> in insult contests. The law codes ruled that you could be outlawed for
> accusing someone of being a passive homosexual--or for being a passive
> homosexual yourself" (101). Interestingly he goes on to talk about what
> he calls "effeminate sedir magic," as I take it some kind of visionary
> shamanistic practice based in the cult of Odin. For this magic the shaman
> is "involved (in) such practices as to make people believe that he played
> a woman's part in the sexual act" (Foote and Wilson, qtd. in Gold 103).
> It is an interesting possibility, although perhaps not for the Orlanthi,
> to have a myth cycle in which a male god has to turn female in order to
> learn or gain command of "feminine" secrets. That seems to be the origin
> of these practices and apparently these shaman were gossiped about
> regarding this.
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
> Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
> Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
> http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 02:29:23 GMT
> From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_cs.ucc.ie>
> Subject: Onslaught recidivism, perhaps sorta about Heroes.
>
> > >Martin Laurie:
> > > Given that I'd rate Onslaught at 4 masteries in his best skills
> >
> > >Given that I wouldn't,
> >
> > Er, given that I write him, I think its only fair to kinda allow me to
> > quantify him according to the rules I play on a very regular basis.
>
> I don't think it's exactly infringing your authorial perogatives to
> discuss how your portrayal of part of Glorantha, the HW rules,
> and HeroDom all match up, surely? If I'm disputing that Onslaught
> as he's portrayed is an authentic part of the Gloranthan mythic
> landscape as _I_ perceive it (and the numbers discussed imply a
> pretty significant bit of such landscape), then conceding the contrary
> case before it's been made would seem tactically unastute, to say the
> least.
>
>
> > Hmm, we have a scale in the rules that is quite definite in most areas.
I
> > don't see any harm in quantifying. Whats the point of having a scalable
> > system if you can't actually say - this is how tough a hero is. By
defining
> > it, we can play it. RQ had us all stumbling around in the dark. Now we
KNOW
> > that a god is 8w on average and a hero is 4w.
>
> Because to focus on that aspect (and answering a point about myth with
> an answer with W's in it implies such a focus) tells us no more than
> all those 'super-RQ' systems that many of us have spent so long in
mocking.
>
> Ob-pedantry: don't write 4w when you mean <something>W4, else
> Roderick will smack your wrist. (And then I'll tell him I-told-you-
> so about a confusing notation, but that's another tale...)
>
>
> > Methinks though that your point was more to do with - how does one get
to
> > those stats mythically? Or did I miss?
>
> More or less, though I was observing that the whole 'stats'
> characterisation was essentially a digression (and simularly system, etc,
> so several such points snipped, if I might crave your indulgence).
>
>
> > > (And on a scale which itself is another Digest free-fire zone, to
boot.)
> >
> > Hmm, how so? Do you object to the scale or the fact that there is one?
Or
> > something else?
>
> If you missed those particular exchanges of fire, then consider
> yourself Blessed... (Thrice- at the least, in fact.) If you want
> to know more I'll summarise in email, or better yet, over that pint
> you're doubtless going to be offering to buy me in July, now that
> you're confirmed in Convulsion... (I have the Scotsman's Wallet
> heroquest to enact here, and intend to do so with all my might...)
>
>
> > >> Heroic abilities are simply abilities beyond the norm, they are still
> > >> scalable IMO.
> >
> > >Perhaps this is why we're talking past each other here. If we're going
> > >to make argumenta ad greg, he's stated the contrary loudly and often
> > >in recent years. Yes, HW game mechanics represent them all in
> > >this manner, but I don't think anyone would claim that's strong
> > >evidence of anything.
> >
> > Then what is the point of building a scalable game at all if we don't
use
> > it?!? Baffled.
>
> You're saying that because the game system is scaleable, this is a
> priori true in the _world_? I think this isn't something either the
> author of the world, or of the game system, would seriously suggest.
> The system is scalable so it doesn't break, that's the point. In what
> way am I implying we should 'use' it? _How_ you use it is another
> matter entirely, though as I understand the whole design philosophy of
> the game, it's mechanical backbone is to support Narrative
> considerations, not to 'model' the world. (Though I've argued myself
> this is not really a distinction of kind.)
>
>
> > >If you practice blowing long enough and hard enough, do you become
Orlanth,
> >
> > Possibly. Lokamayadon came pretty damn close.
>
> Definitely not, as I understand it. L. seems to be a perfect exemplar
> of the 'Ah, if you want to be becoming a hero (or a god, even), I wouldn't
> be starting from here' school of development.
>
>
> > >I think in order to become a strong-sense-Hero, you have
> > >to first of all re-make yourself in the image of the Other Side,
> > >and if you want to go all the way in the Hero Biz, you have to then
> > >re-make the Other Side to incorporate yourself, into it.
>
> > Yes and no, from what I've read of the rules. I think you have to make
> > yourself DIFFERENT from your god and THEN tear a hole in the God plane
on a
> > god quest that takes you through death and into godhood.
>
> Well, becoming a _god_ is somewhat of another matter, though in one
> sense is 'more of the same'.
>
> To become a Hero, you have to 'do' something different from your god,
> yes (or 'rediscover' some such act -- polite term for same thing,
> effectively), but the devotional-theistic process is fundamentally about
> identification and emulation, first and foremost. An Orlanthi
> HeroQuestor isn't likely to be going around, wondering how he can be
> sure and keep his Brand Identity different from his God's: rather, the
> difference that will eventuallly form the basis of his hero cult
> (assuming one comes to be) is implicit in the situation he finds himself
> in: what _would_ Orlanth have done, had he been in this particular
> spot, as it were. You won't get very far (with this method) if you
> flaunt the emulational model at every turn: Orlanth would have left the
> checkered battle to go play footsie with Ernalda, but _I'm_ going to
> grind out a painfully long Karpovian mate in 56. Much more
> characteristic is to discovered a _different_ 'checkered battle', and
> apply the 'same' solution. (I apologise for the mildly peacenik
> example: repeat as necessary with Humakt the Champion, the Sword
> Story, the Lead Cross, etc.)
>
> Note that I do stress, by that particular HQ method, I wouldn't want
> to imply that that's the _only_ means of interacting with the Other
> Side. It's certainly the characteristic Orlanthi method, though,
> and meandering on to others would be Beyond the Scope of The Present
> Article -- and would risk me talking (more) uninformed nonsense,
> I fear.
>
> Of course, one way to be sneaky about it, and still 'work' with the
> above scheme is not to be identifying with the entity everyone _thought_
> you were, all along. "Hey, Humakt the Champion wouldn't do a thing
> like that!" "True, but then I'm Eurmal the Murderer" *splat* Or more
> subtle such wrinkles. (Hey, they don't call 'em cult _secrets_ for
> nothing...)
>
> Cheers,
> Alex.
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of The Glorantha Digest V7 #421
> ***********************************
>
End of The Glorantha Digest V7 #423
Powered by hypermail