ANST - A&S - does utility count?

[Don Christian Doré]

I have noticed that those who judge and critique A&S tend to focus on 
what I think of as the "fine arts" aspect, with a portion of 
documentation thrown in.

Some areas that seem to be ignored are the cleverness of the work and 
it's utility, particularly as relates to its use in the SCA. Here are 
a couple of examples:

- A woodworker builds a nice wooden chest. The judges, on discovering 
that the chest actually hides an ice chest inside, either ignores 
that fact (judging the chest only on the quality of the woodwork) or 
discounts the piece altogether as not period.

- A woodworker builts a cart. It can haul 300 lbs and it breaks down 
for easy transport to and from events. As period carts did not need 
to be transported in that way, the design is not accurate in all 
respects, but it does give a good period look. The judges only 
comments are that the cart is very plain and could use some 
decoration.

- A fighter finds a way to make a safer weapon for SCA combat. He 
enters it as a "science" entry in an A&S competition. The judges 
debate whether it is even a valid entry.

- A gentleman enters castings in an A&S contest. His documentation 
makes it clear that he did not design the pieces, but he describes 
and documents the casting process in some detail and makes it clear 
his entry is the job of casting, not the design of the pieces. The 
judges discount his entry as having no artistic value.

My question, to the A&S folks, is do you feel the approach taken in 
the examples above is valid? Should A&S entries be judges only on 
their esthetic qualities and periodness, or should other factors be 
taken into account, such as how cleverly a piece hides mundanity in a 
period looking package, how well things like carts, lanterns and 
chairs function, and whether a piece makes life in the SCA easier or 
even safer?

If you said that we should consider aspects beyond the aesthetic  and 
periodness of an item, then consider this: If you are judging two 
chests of equal quality and periodness, but you discover that one of 
them cleverly hides a propane stove, are you willing to give that one 
more points? And if you are judging two carts, one that is nicely 
adorned but too flimsy to actually function and one that is plain but 
strong and utilitarian, could you actually see yourself giving the 
win to the plainer cart?

While I certainly have my point of view on this subject, I am curious 
as to the thoughts of those who tend to judge such things. How do you 
look at this?

Don Christian Doré
============================================================================
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.