Since I started showing I have heard repeatedly that we need more judges. We need more qualified judges. And yet there are now things from NAMHSA that might severely limit who can judge.
This year, I was nominated to judge at Breyerfest Open. It is cool to be nominated and was cool to be chosen as one of the performance judges. I was sent a lot of material shortly before the show. I am a rule follower, and I like to be informed, so I read through all the information, and watched the video Michelle sent, so I would know what to expect from a show I had never even attended and so I would know any Breyerfest-specific rules. I did notice the packet said that showers could not use any tack, dolls, or props made by the judge. What? I have been judging for close to 20 years and I have NEVER heard this before. So, I emailed Michelle to ask about it. She asked if I thought I could be unbiased about entries that had my dolls in them and I said of course, I have been doing it for years. It seemed like everything would be fine and things would go on as they had at every show I have judged at. But I was wrong.
Shortly after I started emailing with Michelle, I received an email from NAMHSA that upset me. It was condescending at times and accusatory at others. Here is a bit of that email, which started with a copy of the rule in question.
A person may not show and judge in the same division at a NAN qualifying show. A division is defined as one or more grouped classes such as "OF Breyer Plastic", "Custom Glazed", or "OF Performance". A judge may not judge any model that he/she has worked/collaborated on. A judge may not judge any model which he/she owns or has owned within the last six months. A judge may not judge models owned by relatives of the judge, as defined in subsection (f) above. A judge may not judge any models owned by any individual who co-owns one or more models with that judge.
I understand there might be confusion on if a performance item such as a doll counts as a model, so I wanted to reach out and clarify that yes, all performance items are included in performance judging and thus may not be created by the judge.
I also noticed that it was mentioned you had previously judged entries with your dolls at other shows. At the moment we're choosing not to make any inquiries and post-show invalidations to NAN qualifier status, provided this was an honest misunderstanding and doesn't continue to occur in the future.
I really don't like to be talked down to. I wasn’t sure if I was overreacting, or reading it with a tone that wasn’t there, so I asked several people, many who are not involved in the hobby, and everyone agreed that yes, it was condescending and/or accusatory.
I asked a friend who had been a part of NAMHSA for a very long time (though not in a long time) if this had always been the interpretation of the rule, and she said she had never seen that rule interpreted that way.
I was told, before the show, that the good news is that dolls are not required to show in performance. I am aware of that, but I am also a doll maker. Why would I want to hurt my customers in that way? Or my business. I have made, quite literally, thousands of dolls for the hobby. Quite a few people I know only have dolls that I made. Now I was finding out that they couldn’t use them? At least not in anything I am judging. At Breyerfest Open, that meant the English divisions. At a local show, that would mean all of performance. And if this had always been the rule, that meant that all the hosts of all the shows I judged performance at had willfully ignored the rule. I don’t believe that for a second.
I have studied special education law (and the law is the law) and if something isn't spelled out as a rule, or part of the rule, it’s not a rule. I was told that this was a common interpretation of the rule for decades, but almost everyone I spoke to had never heard it interpreted in this way. And really, if it’s not spelled out how can people be penalized for not following it?
I have a lot of issues with this rule that supposedly includes tack, dolls, and all props as “models.” It would mean if the judge made something as simple as a flowerpot you could not show under them. At least not with that flowerpot. That sounds utterly ridiculous to me. If you think I am reaching and being ridiculous on purpose, you're right. The way the rule was "explained" to me it includes ALL props; dolls, tack and props. Which means even the smallest thing in your entry can't be created by the judge. Which means if I even made a small prop (which, I do make plenty of things other than just dolls) either the shower can't use them, or I can't judge the entry. And I have done a lot in this hobby, including prepping models for painters. Which pretty much excludes me from judging ANYTHING, other than OF halter, at any time. I am not qualified to judge OF halter.
As a judge, I judge what is on the table. I start with safety, move on to correctness, and then the cleanliness of the entry. And if those things don't make sense, come to my judging clinic at Breyerfest and I will explain it all in detail. When Breyer advertises my clinic they call me a judging expert. That means I have been doing this a long time. The reason I have been judging a long time is because people like how I judge. I have never once cared if the doll in an entry was made by me. I care about whether or not a doll is used correctly, if a doll is used at all. But as a doll maker, I also care very much about my customers. If they are not allowed to use dolls I made, they might choose not to show. Or they might choose not to buy any more dolls I made. Doll making is not a side-hustle for me, it’s how I pay my bills.
This whole situation upset me for a lot of reasons, and I was very unlikely to just let it go. First, I really don't like being talked down to, as I said. Secondly, this really does hurt my customers if I judge. Which means pretty much that I can never judge again. That hurts our already minuscule judging pool.
I was talking to a source inside the board (yes, I know that sounds very cloak and dagger, but I did do my research) and they said that this has to do with the new workmanship performance division which went into effect May 1st of this year. This new division identifies tack makers, doll makers, setup makers, people who paint the animals in a scene, as artists (all of us already knew we were artists) and it makes us no longer eligible to judge in performance where anything we made is used. I understand not judging your own work when the entry is about the specific work, such as judging breed with a model you sculpted. Or judging a doll class when you made some of the dolls. It makes no sense to exclude someone from judging a performance entry because they painted a pole used in the scene. And before you tell me that it doesn’t matter if the judge painted the pole, according to the rule it includes ALL props.
The rules governing performance workmanship now seem to include ALL of performance, not just performance workmanship. MOST performance entries are a collaborative art project with pieces from a variety of different artists. I know 2 people who make all (or most of) the things they use in performance. I know hundreds of performance showers who use a variety of things made by a variety of people. I had a friend who was a talented performance shower that would say her tradable skill was the ability to write a check. I also heard from my NAMHSA board insider that the vote on this new division was close and there have already been concerns about it.
I have concerns.
As a judge, I judge what is on the table. I care about the entry as a whole, starting with the safety of the entry and moving on from there. During my judging clinic people asked if an entry with a doll has an edge over an entry without a doll. My answer was, it depends what is on the table, and it depends on how the doll is used. A riderless entry that is so perfectly positioned to look like it has an invisible rider is going to do far better than an entry with a sloppy doll. And that is how everyone should be judging. You should judge an entry by how good it is in relation to the other entries on the table. And that IS how I judge, and how I have always judged. I have judged classes where every doll on the table was one I made. I have judged classes where every doll but one was one I made. And guess when I noticed if I made the dolls or not? After I judged each entry on its own merit, not on if I made any of the things that were being used.
I love performance showing and I love judging performance. I love miniatures and seeing the creative entries people create. I love the model horse hobby and don’t want to see it hamstringing itself because a few people are afraid of bias that has been proven, more than once, that it is extremely rare if it is even happening at all. If we want our hobby to continue we need find ways to get more qualified people to judge, not find ways to keep them from judging. If this rule doesn’t change, I will sadly never judge again.
17 comments:
Thank you for speaking out about this and not letting it fly under the radar. I’m so sorry this is how they handled it. You deserve better.
My opinion is that if a judge cannot be unbiased enough to ascertain that a prop they made is being used incorrectly, that person shouldn’t be judging. I’m sad to see NAN going this direction.
I have to wonder if they somehow expect to be “double judging” performance entries and the tack workmanship division. Which is absurd and unwieldy. They are entirely separate things and should not be double judged.
This interpretation and how they’ve handled it is going to discourage a lot of people from performance showing and even more from judging at all.
A doll is not a model. We have never defined, in this hobby, dolls or tack or props as models.
I was excited about a performance workmanship section but if this is a consequence of that, then I'm disheartened, and would be inclined to end it. The item maker is not judged in performance in any substantial or significant way. For example, if you were to show a saddle in workmanship on a blank resin that the judge had made, I think this is also not a problem. It is fundamentally different from an artist judging a horse that they made, and I say this as an artist and tackmaker and performance shower.
Performance is about putting the items together correctly and there are many possible errors. As the maker of an item, I'm unlikely to be excited about pinning a piece because my anonymous bridle was used unless it was used really well and better than the other items in the class. We already hurt for performance judges and this potentially limits the pool to a point where the division is unworkable.
For many items we use, we have so little provenance that it is unworkable as a practical matter. The entrant might not even know I made the bridle she is using. Heck, I might not be sure.
The comment that "dolls are not required" seems like it must be written by someone who isn't showing performance at a high level. They are not, and you can show without them yes, but so many entries these days, especially for classes like games, revolve around a thoughtfully used doll. I certainly would not want to go to a show like Breyerfest Live or NAN without the doll I used to qualify.
If an individual judge is showing bias about items they created, it probably shows up in other aspects of their judging and can and should be dealt with in terms of that individual only.
I'm not the person you spoke to but as a founding NAMHSA member I can say that this literally never came up in the time when I was on the board nor was it ever assumed to be true.
I dont understand how show hosts can expect a maker to remember ever single set or prop they have ever made. For example you have made thousands of dolls and depending on how they are taken care of they change with time. I can understand the year restriction but to NEVER allow judges to judge their own work is ridiculous
In performance I don’t think keeping people from judging a prop they have made makes sense at all. It’s a prop, that isn’t what we should be judging.
Just, wow. Been in the hobby since 1988. Been here for the conception and implementation of NAMHSA, and have never heard that rule interpreted that way. If they are changing the rule to go along with the new performance workmanship division, then it has absolutely nothing to do with PAST shows and placings, and that should NEVER have been brought up to you in that manner, and feels like an intimidation tactic. Am I reading that wrong?
Also, I find it interesting that the picture you chose here is an entry of mine, and in fact, the doll is not yours! 😊 Was that on purpose? I think it was because you look good doing your job!.
lol, I chose this photo because it’s one of the few pictures I have of me judging!
I can bet I understand where this is coming from. Entrants that lose the class will find any way to get the winner disqualified so then they are the winner.
I personally find it no different than custom artists not judging their own work. Even if that horse was in a performance class they are judging. It's part of the entire set up. I would think the doll and some of the other pieces are just as big in the entry. I can fully understand other entrants not wanting a judge judging their own work. People put so much time, work, homework, and money into this hobby. You dont want to walk away with unfairness lingering in the back of your mind.
I find this really hard too. That is why I generally stick to judging halter or novice classes. I think prop and tack makers are stuck with that option.
I just quickly read thru this and I still show performance, but not nearly as much as I did. We need good performance judges because it is a very detailed ring to judge and you need to be knowledgeable in so many aspects. For example, the color of driving reins. Or a standing vs a running martingale and what classes it is used in.
Anyway, my first thought was I have no idea who made some of the props I use. I’ve been collecting items/tack/dolls/props for decades and I honestly can’t tell you who made things that aren’t the model and tack. I just never kept track. And I know some artists recognize their work, but would some artist recognize poles they painted? How do I show if I have no idea who made all my stuff? It’s fine if I buy it from now on, but what about my decades old stuff? Or stuff my friend gave me years ago? I have a lot of tack/dolls/props.
I know it’s a tad off subject but I’m sure others have questions like this too.
And while I understand the rule, I mean we deal with that in AR and customs already, I am sure YOU can be unbiased. But I am not as confident everyone can be. I’ve seen biased judging and I know it already exists. And please don’t tell me it doesn’t exist. I’m not sure the best way to prevent it though. Right now, I just won’t show under certain judges.
I do agree that it sounds condescending and that alone would upset me. We can’t push away the few judges we have in this hobby.
I didn’t say bias doesn’t exist at all, I said it’s rare.
This is wild, and just when I was wanting to get back into showing..
For halter or workmanship classes I understand the rule absolutely has a place, but for it to apply to props seems unnecessary.
I feel like as a community if there is a biased judge it is respectfully brought to attention and the people in authority whether it be show hosts or NAMHSA correct the issue. From my experience it is VERY rare and any performance judge I have encountered seems to have the same approach to performance as you do.
Just more reasons to make me continue to not care about NAMHSA
I'm not a shower, whatsoever, & this rule interpretation still immediately raises itself up as a logistical nightmare, among other things. Tell me, what happens the first time a judge at one of the large NAN-qualifying shows or even NAN itself recognizes a jump standard they made, or a doll's hat, or a traffic cone, etc.? And being an honest judge they go up to the show runner(s) to say "I must recuse myself, I 3D printed that traffic cone in so-and-so's entry."? What if this happens & a major show suddenly has 0-1 judges for a class/division? This seems poorly thought out from so many angles & as a previous commenter said, makes performance showing pretty much untenable.
I was aware of that rule, both in the Breyerfest rules and the NAMHSA version. I agree completely that "model" has never meant "tack/props" in the entirety of the history of the hobby, and if NAMHSA chose not to create a defined term within their written rules to specify that "model" is inclusive of tack or props, no reasonable person would ever read it that way.
Within the Breyerfest rules, which *do* talk about tack and props, I had always read it as the burden being on the shower (on me) to not bring tack/props/dolls made by the judge, not on the judge to have an encyclopedic knowledge of every prop or whatever they've ever made and to DQ entries on the table. We as showers are notified of who is judging which divisions in advance, so I always thought it was OUR responsibility to adhere to that rule and self-enforce, more or less, by leaving anything the judge made at home or not show it in their division. I hadn't realized NAMHSA or Breyer were expecting JUDGES to be the enforcement mechanism on that. I could understand it for horses, but if I were a person who'd made hundreds or thousands of props over the course of a career, I don't think I or anyone in a similar situation could say for certain whether a prop was "mine" or not. And as others have pointed out, this is a nightmare for anybody who's ever run a 3D printing business for the hobby.
On a practical level, there are not enough judges, and especially not enough performance judges, in this hobby to be quibbling about this.
I don’t know if they EXPECT the judges to DQ entries with stuff they have made, that was part of my original inquiry. But as a rule follower I would feel I have to if this is going to be the actual interpretation of the rule. But if it is, it should be clear
Im sorry this happened to you, but I think you speaking out was the best thing anyone could have done with it. Your intuition was not wrong, and a massive change to a broad sweeping rule is something everyone effected should hjave the opportunity to talk about. I think creating the conversation and the events that followed may very well have been the best case scenario in all this. And personally, I came for the judging conversation, but I'm staying for your blog! I love that this hobby welcomes genuine and kind people and calls out anyone behaving otherwise.
I’m new to showing (just over a year!) and the last show I was at had the new performance workmanship classes and the way it was done was that individual items were judged so the judge would be looking at just a saddle, or a tack set, or a doll, or the backdrop. Not all of the things together. That would be crazy because what if the tack was well made but the backdrop and other props weren’t? I feel like they need to flush out this new division and make it less complicated and also make sure it’s separated from regular performance division judging because this is not the same thing as double judging breed and the success of customized artwork or breed and collectibility-categories that are sometimes double judged at shows I’ve been to. It’s also insane to say that you can’t have an item or doll that was made by the judge for normal performance classes because of the investment that goes into these classes doesn’t make it easy to just switch over to another doll or prop when the ones you have are made by the conflicting judge. If there is such a concern about unfair competition and judging, there should be show stewards to shadow and make sure that the judging is fair and help support the people to better understand why they didn’t place better if they are confused and don’t understand where they could improve.
Post a Comment