|
One of my favourite books is by the author Tim Parks entitled Medici Money: Banking, Metaphysics and Art in Fifteenth-Century Florence. Granted slightly grandiose title, but its a cracking read which explains in some sense the rise of the merchant banks and what we perhaps take for granted when it comes to the heady world of banking and finance.
What is interesting are some parallels between banking at that time and how it was viewed, to the debate over reselling and trading in games like Entropia Universe. One of the interesting quotes for the book really struck a chord:
[quote]"Once again, language is used to perpetuate a contradiction rather then offer clarity"[/quote]
For banks of the Renaissance, the contradiction is the charging of interest on deposits and loans, or usury as it was then known. At the time the dominant power was the Church and in their view charging interest or usury was tantamount to heresy and would send your soul to hell. It was illegal because it unbalanced the natural order of the world. Contro Natura! - Against Nature!
Too be honest there was more material reasoning, everyone had a place in the natural order, whether it was peasant or noble. Loans and the ability to get credit would allow people to potentially increase their standing in life and that in the Church's view was un-natural. In the stratified class society of the Middle Ages, this was unthinkable and was therefore condemned.
Yet language and therefore technicalities were used to create loopholes in this view. Bank, comes from the world "banco" which means desk/bench on which transactions would take place. Hence such phrases like "above board" or "under the table". The banks would accept discretionary deposits from clients and because interest was not allowed the banker would instead give a "gift" into those accounts which would amount to the same amount of interest.
The irony is that many people who did discretionary deposits were members of the clergy, cardinals, bishops and the occasional Pope. Even the Church had need of bankers to ensure the wheels of saving people from damnation were lubricated with money and could spin freely.
Things have moved on, today interest on loans and savings is the norm. Usury is now used to denote the kind of punitive interest that you might get from a loan shark.
This kind of language contradiction applies to the trading and reselling debate in many games, none more so then Entropia Universe. At the end of the day they are both one and the same thing, just worded differently. The act of buying something and selling it on for profit is both reselling and trading.
The same trading parallels existed in Florence with the banks, to pay that interest they had to trade and this development created the concept of the merchant banker. To ensure efficient use of their liquidity they would buy and sell across a vast network that stretches across Europe. Money has a life of its own, it wants to be used and cash that was stashed in a strong box or under the mattress was lifeless, over time lose value due to inflation and other pressures.
The other parallel that I've seen in arguments is that trading/resellings upsets the natural order of the game. Contro Natura! As the Church would say.
After-all traders/resellers if they are good will make decent profits and could move their standing up in the game without having to hunt, mine or craft. They have in effect bypassed the mechanics of the game.
Still, just as usury has gone from meaning all kinds of interest to exorbitant interest, we now use resellers to denote the kind of ruthless speculation and profit making. It is perhaps ironic that human beings have a knack of turning what is black and white, into shades of grey.
Aziphirael
4th April 2009 Comment on this article...
|
|