![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
[SCA] A quick thought on a deep subject
Mar. 17th, 2009 09:17 pmThat raising bar...
You frequently hear folks talk about a raising bar, many of them lamenting it. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, of course the bar is going to be raised, and it should. As the body of accomplished work grows larger and larger, the same amount of effort is going to raise every artisan higher than the one before. We're all standing on the shoulders of our predecessors.
But that's not what I really want to talk about.
I was submitting an award rec tonight, and I noticed something in the descriptions for peerages.
Laurel: "Given to those subjects who have demonstrated exceptional skills in one or more arts and sciences over many years."
Read it again. demonstrated exceptional skills...over many years.
Sometimes I wonder if we're not sometimes *lowering* the bar for laurels. (Obviously, experiences will be different from kingdom to kingdom.) I hear people talk about that point that somebody reaches when they're doing laurel quality work, and now they're ready. Sure, it often takes some time to reach those people, since the polling takes time, and then once they're polled it takes some time to arrange everything. But we frequently talk about hitting people at the "right time".
By this description (and of course, there's the real description at corporate that I could go look up if I wasn't trying to just shoot this out way faster than one should shoot something like this out because I'm trying to keep myself on task sewing for this weekend but anyway aren't you glad I'm a fast typer, maybe not?)
*ahem*
By this description, once somebody is demonstrating the exceptional skills of laurel quality work, shouldn't they be doing it for several years? Is there a "right time"? Really?
By the way, this has absolutely NOTHING to do with anybody who has been laureled, recently or not, or is on any watch list, or is a spiffy awesome artisan who is working at a level of excellence, etc. This is strictly a random thought that I had after seeing this description, and thinking back to philosophical laurel-type discussions. I might even be wondering, by this description, that *I* don't necessarily belong in the Laurel category yet. Have I been working at a particular level for many years? Rhetorical question, that.
So, is there a point that people reach? Are we thinking about it as somebody who reaches a particular level, and then they receive the accolade? Or should a laurel be somebody who has been doing laurel level work, and has been a peer for a few years but has yet to be recognized?
Thoughts?
You frequently hear folks talk about a raising bar, many of them lamenting it. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, of course the bar is going to be raised, and it should. As the body of accomplished work grows larger and larger, the same amount of effort is going to raise every artisan higher than the one before. We're all standing on the shoulders of our predecessors.
But that's not what I really want to talk about.
I was submitting an award rec tonight, and I noticed something in the descriptions for peerages.
Laurel: "Given to those subjects who have demonstrated exceptional skills in one or more arts and sciences over many years."
Read it again. demonstrated exceptional skills...over many years.
Sometimes I wonder if we're not sometimes *lowering* the bar for laurels. (Obviously, experiences will be different from kingdom to kingdom.) I hear people talk about that point that somebody reaches when they're doing laurel quality work, and now they're ready. Sure, it often takes some time to reach those people, since the polling takes time, and then once they're polled it takes some time to arrange everything. But we frequently talk about hitting people at the "right time".
By this description (and of course, there's the real description at corporate that I could go look up if I wasn't trying to just shoot this out way faster than one should shoot something like this out because I'm trying to keep myself on task sewing for this weekend but anyway aren't you glad I'm a fast typer, maybe not?)
*ahem*
By this description, once somebody is demonstrating the exceptional skills of laurel quality work, shouldn't they be doing it for several years? Is there a "right time"? Really?
By the way, this has absolutely NOTHING to do with anybody who has been laureled, recently or not, or is on any watch list, or is a spiffy awesome artisan who is working at a level of excellence, etc. This is strictly a random thought that I had after seeing this description, and thinking back to philosophical laurel-type discussions. I might even be wondering, by this description, that *I* don't necessarily belong in the Laurel category yet. Have I been working at a particular level for many years? Rhetorical question, that.
So, is there a point that people reach? Are we thinking about it as somebody who reaches a particular level, and then they receive the accolade? Or should a laurel be somebody who has been doing laurel level work, and has been a peer for a few years but has yet to be recognized?
Thoughts?