[Hartwood] Hartwood Champions? Seneshcal would like to open debate

[canzonet3]

Good memory, Cunegonda

In years long past, the Arts, Sciences and Bardic used to all be rolled
into one championship - the champion of which was expected to be able to at
least be familiar with all those disciplines, often in addition to
teaching.
*(Art was defined as something decorative, and Science was generally
defined as something upon which Art was created.  By general consensus,
cooking was defined as a Science.  The other standard was:  If you hit it
with an axe and it's destroyed - it's an art; if you hit it with an axe and
it's still there/useable, it's a science.)*

In the past decade (-ish), Arts & Sciences have been separated from Bardic,
each having their own championship, with the teaching element often still
present.  This separated the performers from those doing pure study and
recreating "things".

Just recently, there has been a move among some branches to completely
change how we look at this championship.

In part, this has been in response to the growing number of people who are
choosing to do "experimental archeology" and research papers, instead of
researching and recreating objects which were or which might have been.
>From a competition standpoint, trying to compare an entry from each of
these categories is akin to the proverbial apple and orange.

So what has been proposed, and even begun in some branches, is to further
separate the A&S championship - but not along the traditional lines.
Now, there may be (as Cunegonda has said), the scholar, the crafter and the
performer.


There are some definite pros to this from a competition standpoint.
- everyone is going to have a spot where they better "fit".  Strong
researchers will not necessarily be in the same category as strong crafters.
- can actually keep people competing earlier and longer as the competition
may not require activities which are outside the entrants comfort zone.
- has the Arts and Sciences nicely balance the fighting arts:  3
representatives for each.

There are some definite cons as well.
- with three champions, having enough entries to make the competition a
competition and not an acclamation may be a challenge.
- that's 3 bodies in court, not just 1.
*(Could be addressed by sharing duties:  each takes a 4 month term.)*
- need better organisation for the competition - scholar entries will need
to be in early to allow for advance reading by adjudicators.


Dragonslaire has already completed one year and is into their second of
this model.
I have more detailed information on how they've done so in a Baronial
setting if you would like to hear more?

YiS,
- Cecille




On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Danielle Bevan <dbevan at topfloor.ca> wrote:

>
> I seem to recall a while back M. Cecille had some thoughts on how the arts
> could be broken down for competition, but I'm not sure if it applies here
> -- there was the scholar, the crafter, and the performer... I think. I
> could be wrong though! The three sporting champions are obvious, but I
> think we can play with the others. Doesn't Seagirt separate Arts and
> Sciences as two different things? (And what's that line?)
>
> ~ Danielle/Cunegonda, who really just likes the idea of champions all
> around regardless of how we define them.
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://tirrigh.org/pipermail/hartwood_tirrigh.org/attachments/20120819/df937025/attachment.htm>