Informal A&S Query

[Pug Bainter]

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

That's okay. You'll get better.

> > 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.

I know that it is difficult to compare one art or science to other, or
even to itself. In most cases though you can tell if the person is
consistantly producuing at least as good of quality as the other
Laurel's. One time does not make a Laurel. Only quality and experience
of many things does.

> 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.

Well I would hope it would be more of "I don't think they are quite
ready due to ..."

> 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.

Good! I'm glad there are that many great artisans. I know I was quite
amazed seeing the display at Steppes this year. I will have to attend
the next Laurels' Prize to see how great that is.

> 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.

That's how we continue to grow, levels of standards increase, and all of
us benefit. That's why I feel that new candidates must live up to at
least the levels of the "typical" active Laurel. (Since we shouldn't
require them to be better than the best *before* we make them a Laurel.
That would be crazy.)

> 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.

Yes, but all of those reasons are laid out in Corpora. At least, in my
interpretation of the guidelines. These are the things that make a Peer
worthy of respect. There area of *expertise* decides which Order they are
chosen for.

> > 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.

Btw, I meant that the growth of the order is a good thing that will slow
the elevation down; not that the elevation in general needed to be
slowed.

> 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.

Although the Crown makes the decision, it is not a good idea to go
against the majority of the Peers in it. You make the Order and the
person suffer.

This is why the counsel is given.

> 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.

Not at all. What I tried to state is that if the Peers are sitting stagnant,
there will be an even faster number being elevated. After all the
measuring stick doesn't continue to rise, so the new prospects don't
have as far to jump to get there.

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

No problem. Especially since you didn't say anything that needed to be
apologetic about. *smile*

I hope I've made my stance a little clearer on this topic.

Ciao,

-- 
Phelim "Pug" Gervase  | "I want to be called. COTTONTIPS. There is something 
Barony of Bryn Gwlad  |  graceful about that lady. A young woman bursting with 
House Flaming Dog     |  vigor. She blinked at the sudden light. She writes
pug at pug.net           |  beautiful poems. When ever shall we meet again?"