Judging

Anner stated:-

"The idea that the opinions of the uninitiated have some special
authority
over those of the sophisticated and discriminating is not credible. This
is
romanitic primitivism. My observation earlier that the unsophisticated
were
often able to enjoy more things because they have fewer preconceptions
was
not an endorsement of a naive approach to the subject over that of a
learned
one, but a suggestion that in the process of refining our personal taste
we
risk closing ourselves off to experience. The appreciation of the naive
may
be broad, and that is good, but the appreciation of the connoisseur is
deep,
and that is also good. I seek to balance these."

One can agree or disagree with Anner but she entirely missed the point
that I was making.  I suggested the use of representatives of the great
unwashed as a test of the above concept rather than as an advocate of
it!  This point was contained in the last sentence where I suggested
that, if there is a difference in the judging results between the public
and the trained judges, one should very carefully examine these
differences and determine the reason for them.  In so doing, one would
determine where judges' training made any difference and, if it did,
where those differences were.  From there, one could begin to develop a
training programme for judges that would improve judging within AIS.

Ian, who is arguing for more credible connoisseurs, rather than romantic
primativists
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index