ANST - A&S - does utility count?

[Gunnora Hallakarva]

Don Christian Doré asked:
<examples snipped>
>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?

Back a long time ago, A&S competitions used to regularly have a category
for "Best Camoflauge of Mundanity".  The last one I recall was Vlad's
clever disguise of his plaster cast on a broken arm using willow branches
and rabbit skins.

The documentation makes a huge amount of difference in an extry such as the
ones you described.  If the artisan clearly exmplains that his intent was
to make a widget that hides his propane stove, and has adapted the design
of several medieval thingamabobs in creating his widget, and explains and
justifies the design decisions, then the judges take this into account.

If, however, they are presenting the piece as simply "a medieval chair" or
"a Renaissance table" with no explanation of why the propane stove or ice
chest is incorporated within the design, then they are almost certainly not
going to do as well -- if such an entry has design modifications and
compromises made to accomodate the modernity, then they detract from the
recreation of "the medieval chair" or what have you.

The A&S fields are not really set up to reward cleverness for its own sake.
 And I dont think it really should be, unless we reinstitute the category
of "Best Disguise of Mundanity".  But proper documentation that explains
the design compromises made to create a hybrid item that is a modern
whatever disguised medievally allows the judges to judge the medieval
portions and not to subtract for any adaptations that had to be made.

>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? 

I'd have to see the documentation before giving a hard-and-fast answer.

> 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?

Absolutely.  The flimsy design is not a good example of a cart if it won't
work.  The only way I could see the more ornate example winning would be if
it were described as a votive offering to the gods (the same idea as
Oriental "paper sacrifices")  and even then I'd want to see documentation
saying that this culture deliberately spent this much effort and
embellishment on a non-functional flimsy item in period.




Wæs Þu Hæl (Waes Thu Hael)

::GUNNORA::

Gunnora Hallakarva
Baroness to the Court of Ansteorra
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Ek eigi visa þik hversu oðlask Lofstirrlauf-Kruna heldr hversu na Hersis-Aðal
(Ek eigi thik hversu odhlask Lofstirrlauf-Kruna heldr hversu na Hersis-Adhal)

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