ANST - A&S Judging Suggestions

[Carl John Hess]

> >How about having entrants submit their documentation 2-3 weeks prior to
the
> >competition with photos of their submission? Or recipes for
food/beverages?
> 
> I can definitely see requiring advance submission of research papers, but
> documentation? No. Shouldn't be necessary. Documentation is ideally short
> but concise, maybe a page or so, plus bibliography/references/pictures. 
> 
> >This would take a considerable amount of pressure off the judges on the
day
> >of the competition, because 80% of their work is already done.
> 
> I can't speak for other Laurels/judges, but the lion's share of work for
me
> in judging is the actual consideration of the entry itself along with the
> thought and care I feel necessary in order to give a decently considered
> score and commentary. Documentation merely speeds up that particular
> process for me by giving me an idea of how much time and knowlege the
> entrant has invested in her/his entry.

So what you are saying, if I may as I wish to cause no offense to you, my
lady, is that the only way to judge someone's entry is to actually have it
in front of you.  The research paper and documentation are nice, but don't
significantly contribute to your judgment of the submission.

I have to disagree with you here.  If the research paper and the process
documentation don't have as much impact, or even less impact, than the
submission itself, then are we staying true to "period recreation" of arts
and sciences or are we merely exhibiting craft fair entries with some
gobledy-gook on paper to back up whatever we threw into the competition? 
The judges themselves have admitted they don't know everything about every
art & science practiced in "period."  I took this to mean that
documentation in support of one's submission could conceivably be as
important, if not more important, than the submission itself.  That
documentation proves not only that you have done your homework, but that
you are prepared to be judged by whomever happens to take on your project.

And if what I said about documentation and research is true, even in the
smallest sense, then you must judge the documentation of the project before
judging the project itself.  The actual craftsmanship that went into the
project is what will separate the winner from the finalists.  The
submitter's skill with his or her hands is the crowning achievement to the
effort he or she put into the project -- the documentation is the
foundation upon which that achievement was made.  In my opinion, of course.

The problem, as I interpreted it, was that entries were getting ignored,
and no comments were being made.  This was said to have occurred because
there were too few judges, and too many submissions.  My suggestions,
however inane they may appear, are the result of those assumptions, and the
assumption that suggestions for improvements were wanted.

> >This also might open way to separate the top 10% of all submissions, so
> >that when competition day comes around there will be fewer entries to
> >judge, and therefore less time to be spent judging.
> 
> But I don't want to "weed" people out of the process prior to the event.
I
> want to encourage as many folk to involve themselves in artistic pursuits
> and to display their work as possible. If 90% of the original group of
> perspective competitors/displayers are eliminated before the majority of
us
> get to see their work, then we do a grave disservice to not only them but
> to the rest of us who might gain from seeing all levels and manner of
work.
> Better to try to design A&S events more efficiently and creatively so as
to
> maximize everyone's experience.

You have to choose a winner, don't you?  To do that, you must "weed out"
the less-worthy entries.

On the tourney field, this process of "weeding out" the less worthy (in
terms of skill, of course) has worked rather well for selecting kings,
princes and champions.  You start with a set number of entries, play them
off against each other until there are only a handful left, and then select
a winner from the finalists.  This sort of thing is done from elementary
school essay contests up through the Olympics.  It does not prevent the
"losing" (for lack of a better word) entries from being displayed, it just
prevents them from bogging down the competition, and taking precious time
away from the overworked judges.

I'm not saying you shouldn't display all of the submissions at the contest.
 You *should* display them, along with the judges notes on the submission,
if the participant wishes.  Perhaps an "honorable mention" award would be
appropriate for some of the entries that didn't make the finals.  This
would serve as encouragement to return to competition, and the critique
received on the entry would serve to help that person improve their next
entry.

I *also* want to encourage folks to participate in these competitions.  It
can only serve to raise our standards as a club, and build a better
environment for that elusive "suspension of disbelief" we all try to
achieve when we attend an SCA event.  I think that one way to encourage
participation in Arts & Sciences is to offer more meaningful critique of a
person's submission.  I think that through this, judging would be
considered more objective, and more participatory, and therefore make it
"worth one's while" to enter such contests in future.  And through this
meaningful critique, one can improve upon his or her skills in both
research and craftsmanship, to perhaps win the next A & S competition.

Are we having fun yet?  :)

~Scipio

No fancy slogans or titles -- just an over-educated Roman from
Constatinople

cjhess at uai-unger.com


============================================================================

To be removed from the Ansteorra mailing list, please send a message to
Majordomo at Ansteorra.ORG with the message body of "unsubscribe ansteorra".