A&S Judging: Criteria / Standards

[Matthew R. Popalisky]

On Fri, 25 Oct 1996, Mike Baker wrote:

RE the sound of the music, and can we hear it- most of my fellow music
majors hated early music history for that exact reason.  I was raised in a
high-enough Epsicopal Church, I *like* chant.

As for how it should sound, that is a topic for many, many dissertations.
Realise, of course, that we don't really know how much CPE music should
really sound and how the recording industry has changed how we play.
 > 
> (Side issue / new topic?: Perhaps even more important was the related 
> discussion of the Calontiri system of formal "teaching events" / collegia. 
>  The structure is not something most Ansteorrans would accept immediately, 
> and might lead some to cry "more cookies", but there were some features that 
> we could certainly consider in our efforts to improve learning and practise 
> of the various arts & sciences.)

I'm just not familiar with my own kingdom (this is embarrassing at times).
What is this system, and what is wrong with it?  While I am unfond of
performing, I do love teaching, and know quite a bit about later period
vocal and instrumental forms, plan on knowing more, and gleeful to teach.

> For the purposes of SCA A&S competitions, the primary item that your 
> criteria fails to address and that most judging systems have included as 
> critical is documentation.
> 
Documentation is the easy part.  We have standards for that.  One can walk
up to, say, Master Micheal and say, "where does one start looking for
period music?" (you can ask me, for that matter).  This is, of course, my
own opinion.  I am a string player by training, and I worry about having
too harsh an ear.  This is why I have really had to think about what I
want to hear when I finally make the classroom.

> The arts and sciences that we indulge in as part of the SCA experience range 
> through such an extent that I find it ludicrous that we sometimes force 
> ourselves into strange comparisons  in determining "winners".  This is one 
> reason that I believe that "body of work" competitions AND category-specific 
> comparisons (e.g. some of the specific personally-sponsored item prizes 
> being offered at Laurel's Prize Tourney, or similar "my mead's better than 
> your mead" simple head-to-head judging) are far better than trying to reduce 
> every entry to an arbitrary numerical rating.

Amen, brother.

As a side question, does anyone ever do analysis of music for these
things?

Kateryn