ANST - RE: A&S Judging
amazing at mail.utexas.edu
Wed Aug 13 13:07:37 PDT 1997
Hi all. Aquilanne here.
>> Of course, the backside of putting together as detailed a set of judging
>> criteria as shown in the Calon form
then Daniel "the grammarian" de Lincoln corrects me with:
Thank you, Daniel. Though the backsides of many things tend to also be the
downside, unless you change position; but we won't go there.;->
>Whoever wants to do this should first talk to Robin of Gilwell
>and ask him to tell the story of the Trimaran brick. It's very
>important for this.
I've heard this, and other similar apocryphal stories, many times. All I can
say is that the folk judging the brick must not have had adequate judging
criteria. Even with a rudimentary system like that displayed in the form
from Atenveldt's Estrella war that Damon listed in his posting, you'll
notice that "complexity" and "aesthetic value" are two of the major
criteria--20 out of 45 possible points. Now, while one might argue that a
well-made brick is a beautiful brick (it takes all kinds, you know), I think
most folk will agree that a lone brick leaves a bit to be desired on the
aethetic side. Certainly, the making of a brick is no arduous process,
thereby shooting the "complexity" score all to hell. Now, OTOH, if an
entrant went to the trouble of making all the tools, forms, *and* a kiln to
do a kiln-dried process, and included the whole shebang in their
presentation along with appropriate supporting documentation, *then* I could
see the possibility of such an entry earning a masterpiece score.
So, the story of the Trimaran brick is an excellent example of why we should
give good thought to developing A&S criteria, though most reasonable
judging/scoring systems should prevent a brick from winning a reasonably
well attended competition.
To be removed from the Ansteorra mailing list, please send a message to
Majordomo at Ansteorra.ORG with the message body of "unsubscribe ansteorra".
More information about the Ansteorra