Informal A&S Query

[Heidi J Torres]

Mari aqui!

I must be feeling ethereally loquacious these days -- I seem to be doing 
a lot of posting.

On Thu, 26 Jun 1997, Pug Bainter wrote:

> The only thing I *know* is that to achieve the Laurel, you must be as
> good in quality in at least one area as the existing Laurels. 

Uhm, I really don't think that's *quite* the way it works.  You see, 
there is so much variation even within a certain art or science, e.g. 
needlework, brewing, that it's often difficult to compare a candidate's 
works with anyone elses.  The instances where such comparisons can arise 
are pretty few and far between.

In my experience, very little of the "so-and-so isn't as good as I am in 
this", or "Lady X couldn't embroidery her way out of a paper bag" occurs 
in our Circle.  In fact, it seems to work much the other way.  My Laurel 
friends and I will go to a Laurels' Prize Tourney, or a Kingdom A&S or 
some such, see what people are doing these days and we have to run off 
site and drown ourselves in margaritas repeating the mantra "We're not 
worthy!  We're not worthy!  We should all just give up our Laurels and go 
be hermits somewhere!!!!"  Fortunately, the tequila renders us sluggish 
and incoherent and we've thought better of this tactic by morning.

But seriously folks, there are some very impressive artisans in this 
kingdom and it is a humbling task to "judge" works of art better than 
what I myself can produce.

The Arts and Sciences is an area that develops and changes at a more 
accelerated rate than other things in the Society.  Every time someone 
takes a class, discovers a new way to do something, or introduces 
everyone to a new art, the yeast starts bubbling, so to speak, and the 
fermentation process begins again.  Also, we know so much more now than 
we did five or ten years ago.  New processes develop all the time.

Also, Laurels are not chosen merely for their talent and mastery in the 
arts.  They should also be good teachers, humble critics, avid learners, 
wise counselers and have all the courage and integrity one expects in a 
Peer of the Realm.  It is certainly what the Crown and Kingdom should 
expect from us.

> Not to mention, that it's a good thing to slow down the elevation of
> peers when there are too many being made. (That or the current ones
> aren't continuing to improve.)

I don't think I can agree with that statement above.  Personally, I am 
conservative about the making of peers, but when one is ripe and ready, 
he or she ought to be elevated, no matter how many have been done of 
late.  Of course, the judgment of when someone is "ripe and ready" is one 
the Laurels merely give counsel on.  It is the Crown's decision.

Also, I may be mis-reading the rest of your statement, but it looks kinda 
like you're advocating not elevating new peers if the old ones are 
sitting stagnant.  If such was the intent of your statement, I can't 
agree there either.  I don't think it's right to "punish" others for 
something they really can't control.  People will be people and Laurels 
are people too.  Some of us go into slumps from which we never recover.  
Some just up and disappear.  Some just keep doing the same thing we've 
always done, for better or worse.  You just can't control people.

Besides, sometimes the addition of a new Laurel sets all the others off.  
Like a catalyst.  Like baking soda and vinegar.  Or choclate chips in 
cookie dough.

OK, I'm rambling....sorry, sorry, nasty habit.

Pug, if I misread your statements, consider me apologetic.

Later folks!

Mari