Symbiosis; Clans & Bloodlines Edition.

[Andre]

For as long as I have been an active member of our city, there has been a debate surrounding the relative merits of the two main forms of groupings we have. Which is better; bloodline or clan? One might think that the answer is fairly clear-cut as, for the most part, clans have been replaced with bloodlines over the years but the answer, as with most things, is considerably more nuanced.

Let us take a look, together, at the various reasonings that seem to pop up whenever this subject is discussed.

The first claim is that families were different in the days when clans were the main wielders of power in the city. This is simply not accurate. Several ‘clans’ at the height of traditional power had membership that was dependant on bloodline affiliation (The Unnamed, the Family of Es, etc) and some clans were run by a single bloodline (the Church of Blood under af Gyllenstierna rule). Still more groups became families based on clan affiliation - the roots of the House of D’dary first took hold while the founding core were members of the Ferrymen, for example.

Families - bloodlines - and clans have always been interlinked by the very definition of both groups in our society: The idea that people will band together in some form or another due to perceived common ground between the members. This is a constant between successful groups of either type, and should always be recognised as being such. Just look at any family you care to mention and you will see several things: A cursory look at any records shows that most seem to have a family motto, they all have a code of conduct and they all have things that they stand for and expect new members to stand for.

Sounds a lot like a clan’s general set up, does it not? And it should, because that is where it comes from. Simply put, to deny the influence of clans on the modern family group, and to ignore the similarities between the two structures, is to refuse to acknowledge our reality.

It goes deeper, too. If one is a member of a clan then it follows that one’s actions reflect back upon that group for obvious reasons - they let you in, therefore what you do implies that your clan is fine and dandy with you doing it, especially if it goes unpunished. A lot of families operate in the exact same way. How many times have we heard people complain about bad sires who let their childer get away with anything? How many times have we heard people implore sires to take hold of their childer that are behaving badly? Like it or not, whichever group one is a part of, individual actions reflect back on those that choose to associate with that person. It is simply how society works.

To take the common ground argument further, some people claim that families are formed mostly by friends with emotional ties to one another that lend themselves better to a familial environment, whilst clans are formed by vampires with more of a professional relationship to one another. To a point, the shallowest most basic point, I would tend to agree. Historically speaking this has been the case in the most general of terms, but the counter argument is also painfully obvious: That this is not always the case.

As mentioned, some clans were in fact militarised bloodlines, and some bloodlines have been, essentially, clans. Gross oversimplifications might sound good on paper and make for entertaining reading, but they lose sight of the actual facts of the matter simply by their very nature. To anyone willing to do the slightest amount of research, it is startlingly clear that the assertion that the groups cannot coexist and are formed from fundamentally different ideals is at best facile, and at worst patently moronic.

Common ground is universal and comes in a multitude of forms for a wide variance of reasoning. To imply that one form of the idea is somehow ‘better’ than the other is unrealistic - common ground is common ground is common ground, wherever it comes from and whatever it means to those people. It could be emotional, it could be cerebral, it could be philosophical, religious, ethical… or informed by clan/bloodline alignment. Again we see the symbiotic nature of both core groupings.

The argument continues that with clans there are schools and that as a result, there is training and that this is something that does not happen with families. This, too, is a simplistic generalisation that does not hold up to reality. To use the House of D’dary as an example (and knowing that a sample size of one is far too small, but doing it anyway) - Forgetting our self imposed seclusion over the last two years; does anyone reading honestly believe that we would have been able to do what we do for just over a decade at the level at which we do it without any form of training? That we would be able to go through multiple roster - and leadership - changes and still be able to function as well as we always have at all levels without education and learning? That families cannot have common ground?

Please.

And we are hardly the only family grouping that tries to educate its members. Indeed, I will argue as I have argued before: If you are not trying to improve yourself and those around you then you have failed yourself and our society. We should not be content to simply play house, siring people on a whim into bloodlines like we are collecting playing cards, just as we should not join clans just to say we are in a clan. There is a reason that the successful bloodlines and the successful clans have a lot in common.

But that, in and of itself, is the key point that I am trying to make here: You simply cannot have a successful group of any type if you do not take the best aspects of both. To be a successful clan your members need to feel valued or they will leave. There needs to be a base level of relationship between members that goes beyond the mere professional. You simply cannot just put people in a room and decide that you are a clan now and that, as a result, everything will work out. Likewise, you cannot simply walk into the tavern and sire the young and impressionable and decide you have a successful family.

Again, I am going to use the House of D’dary as my example as they are the only worthwhile family group I have been a part of, and the Splinters of Dusk were hardly a conventional clan.

We have an entrance exam of sorts. Not because we are elitists, but simply because we believe, collectively, that there are certain basics that every member of the city, let alone our bloodline, should know. This covers things like navigation, earning coin from a variety of sources and basic combat. In a lot of ways, this is like the schools that most clans offered to ensure a base level of competency in all members before they moved into the main body of the clan.

Our first point of common ground as a group is that everyone should have that level of what we consider basic general knowledge. This also allows us to get to know prospective members better and come to a conclusion on whether or not they would be a good fit. It is equally important to note that this goes both ways - as we form that opinion of the prospect, they too form that opinion of us. Regardless of if they actually join the bloodline or not, that person has still been rooted in what we consider to be the basics of city life - just like a member of a clan school who decides to not join the clan proper.

It should be noted that we are not really a ‘pure’ family in the way the city tends to see them. If anything, we have instead taken the original definition of clan - which is to say a group of people united by actual or perceived kinship - and applied it to a vampiric bloodline structure. If you are here with us, then we want you here with us and vice versa. We have an emotional tie tempered with the sort of general standards that traditional city clans espoused - work ethic, work rate and the ties of mutual interest. If anything, we have found that this set up seems to provide a longer lasting, more tight knit bond than the extremes of either option.

That, right there, is the issue that many groups seem to find themselves suffering with as we have seen recently: If your group is a ‘pure’ family, then it is certainly possible that any cracks there may be become more pronounced under stress, leading to the eventual collapse of the family unit to some degree, especially if there has been no time or effort put into educating the members of that bloodline. It is not their failing, it is a failure of leadership. Just as with a building, if you put no effort into ensuring the foundation is sound then it will collapse at the slightest tremour rather than be able to roll with the punches.

If your group is a ‘pure’ clan, then it is likely the downtime between brief spurts of activity that becomes the issue, as its presence leads to stagnancy and a lack of interest in general day to day business. Just look at all the clans that have collapsed for one reason or another in the last few years. Despite occupying positions of perceived strength, they were rendered obsolete by the very fact that they made themselves obsolete through lack of effort and application, brought about - I would argue - by the ties that bind not being present.

The trick is simply to see the merits of both ideologies and try to find a way to meld them together into something greater than the sum of their parts.

Now, it is true that in the last two years the House of D’dary (again, to use what I know) has rather been put through the wringer. We started a misguided court system, were systematically beaten around the head with it and then committed ritual suicide to bring an end to that sustained assault. We took some time away to try to find some refuge in seclusion and then, when that shockingly did not work, we began to drift back into city life.

We are all still here though. Unbroken and sporting some shiny new scars that tell our story in just the same way that the old ones do. Our commitment to maintaining a group that is close emotionally, shares as much common ground as can be reasonably expected and exercises ruthless professionalism when it comes to training, education and what we consider the important areas of city life is unchanged, and I would argue that it has served us well. After all, we are the longest active group of our type in the city, let alone city history. That does not just happen.

How do I know it serves us well? Because it feels natural. It is not easy, but it is worth it. If holding your family group together exhausts you and makes you question why you are doing it, then you simply should not be doing it. You are labouring to hold together a group that has no desire to actually be together. I would never argue that it should be easy, as nothing worth doing ever is, but it should be worth the effort. If your general philosophy of leadership and worth is a ledger of pros, cons and maintenance costs then, simply, you are not fit to lead and have no concept of what leadership actually is.

If you need to question whether or not the ones you have tied yourself to via either type of group are worth being tied to, then they are not and you should sever those ties in favour of something more fitting to your needs. And before someone says this is a plea to join the House of D’dary - it absolutely is not. If we want you, you know. If you want us, you know. We have no desire, or need, to advertise.

Here, though, is my plea:

Form clans. Form bloodlines. Talk to people. Talk to people you have been told not to talk to. Demand to know why you are not supposed to talk to those people. Question what people you know say about people you do not know. Make friendships. Make enemies. Talk to me. Talk to people that, for their sins, are not me. Find and forge your own path, make your own decisions. Think for yourselves.

There is no ‘right’ type of organisation, there is simply - just as there ever was - what is right for you. Calling for a return of one, or for the other to become ascendant, is puerile and ultimately pointless - one will always be informed by the other, as any rational person is able to clearly see. Whichever way you choose to go, remember that leadership - true leadership - and organisation is more than simply proclaiming that you have a leadership position and then marginalising everyone that disagrees with you. Capadocious tried that when he decided he was the prince of the city, and look where that got him.

Try not to be Capadocious.

[Dae]

A wonderful read as always...you have given me something to think about.

[Vulture]

Indeed, it was a very insightful read.

[Amaya_Shannis]

Thank you for your insights and explanations.

[ophelia]

and some clans were run by a single bloodline (the Church of Blood under af Gyllenstierna rule)

This is historically (or factually or both- pick your poison) incorrect. The Church of Blood was never in its history, from start to finish, under af Gyllenstierna rule. No clan or group has ever been under af Gyllenstierna rule other than af Gyllenstierna lineage and even then ‘rule’ is not the best term to use.

[Eli Hartley]

Enjoyable read as usual. Looking forward to the next piece.

[Michiru]

It was a very good read Andre.

[Gypsy]

Great article Andre! I've said the same thing for years. You have to do what is best for your group and I love that you said being part of D'dary is natural. What an awesome way to describe how family should feel.

[Vex]

The clan vs. family argument is old as dirt, and I love this overview of it all. Well thought out and equally well-written.