Peers and students, my opinions..
Lori Jones
LJONES at ossm.edu
Fri Jun 6 00:22:30 PDT 1997
>> Aquilanne 6/6/97 2:19 PM
>> Ideally, category A does not compete, nor is compared to, category
>> B....
> Clarissa said:
> This is ideally the best way to do things. However, the few....
> I have entered have been generic... and everything was judged
> together... I don't even see how they manage to determine
> the 'best' item among such diversity.
I agree that judging by categories truly is the ideal method.
However, I'd also have to agree that most of the competitions
I've seen don't work that way. I really prefer to display only.
That way, strange cross-category comparisons don't get made
and I still get helpful critiques, plus the experience of putting
something out for the world to see.
I thought of an interesting comparison when it comes to A&S
competitions that are generically judged. Say theres an A&S
competition with many excellent entries in the textiles category
and only one or two fairly good entries which are functional
metalwork. However, the judges are primarily metalworkers, so a
metalwork entry wins (I've seen it happen often...). This often
results in cries of "foul" from many of the textile entrants and even
A&S people who weren't judges.
Is this any more or less fair than the individual who is never
recognized for service simply because the only service-oriented
people in his area are those involved in a different area (say, the
autocrat/feastocrat type vs. the office-holding type)? How about the
individual who has worked diligently and become an excellent sword
and shield fighter in preparation for tourney season, only to lose to
individuals they'd have beaten sword & shield because most of the
tourneys happen to be "no-shields" lists, or swiss 5's this year?
Not to mention the simple luck of the draw even in lists of their
preferred style. I can't count the number of times I've lost to
fighter "A" in later rounds of a tournament, only to find that "A"
was subsequently defeated by the guy I beat earlier in the day. How
about the guy who gets his AoA after a year's worth of minimal local
activity, compared to the guy whose been active five or more years,
but hasn't been recognized at all.
None of these instances *seem* very fair. My point being:
the game we play isn't "fair". Simple luck is a major factor in
winning/recognition at almost everything we do. Not everyone has
the ability to do A&S in multiple mediums with exceptional skill.
Not everyone has the aptitude to learn multiple weapons styles. Not
everyone has the drive to do long time service like holding an office
(vs. the short-term intense service of autocratting). I think, much
as we'd like for everything to be fair, that it will take a long time
to effect any changes toward that end (if they ever happen at all).
I know it sounds trite, but I think we'd be better off to play for
the fun of participation and the benefit of experiences, etc. It
sure is a lot less frustrating that way. :-)
(another $.02 I'll never see...... by the way, who *is* in charge of
paying us, anyway. They're falling down on the job....)
- Bs. Kat MacLochlainn
Barony of Wiesenfeuer
More information about the Ansteorra
mailing list