From the editor's cauldron

Where do we draw the line?

Paraphrasing an old saying, "You can't please all of the people all of the time." I'm referring to the embers that have rekindled into the flames of: "Bulletin judging is too harsh. The rules need to be changed."

There are a variety of arguments for change, as there are a variety of those not to change. One of the arguments is that the smaller chapters don't get officer articles, events write-ups and the like. I have news for you: The bigger chapters have the same problem. It's not the chapter size that makes a difference; it's the dedication and commitment of the officers and chapter members that make a bulletin what it is.

Case in point: Grant Carson, editor of the Big D Bulletin, took second place in the IBC, scoring 1,819 points behind the 1,906 points of the first place winner, Sylvester Buszta. Grant is in a chapter with only 30 members. I would consider that a small chapter.

There are those who want the bulletin Content category scored as a total view of what's published, and not a prescribed set of values. I have a problem with that viewpoint. If guidelines are not a part of evaluating and critiquing, then the system goes from objective to subjective. That has the potential of allowing favoritism as opposed to total worth.

From fall of 1998 to spring of 1999 I took writing classes at a community college. What helped me most was the critiquing from the professor and the students. Had the comments (judging) been, "That's really a good story, I liked it-I think you should turn it into a novel," I would have gotten nowhere. What gave me the motivation to improve were the comments and critiquing of, "Your character development needs to be stronger and this is how you might improve it ...." "The phrasing in the second sentence of the third paragraph on page five is hackneyed. The readers will think you're using a 19th Century style. The idea belongs there-revise it and bring it back to the class next week."

Perhaps the Content category, for instance, could use some changes. I understand that many editors have space considerations because of their budgets and cannot run more than eight pages. If there are several articles of chapter importance and they fill those pages, then maybe the editor should edit the articles down in order to fit in the extras, such as "The songs we sing." Perhaps the scoring should reduce the number of the extras in the three issues being judged. This would level the field somewhat. I do not believe that the Content category should be turned upside down just to simplify matters.

The categories for quartet and chorus contests were modified. Did that change the quality of singing? No! The singing excellence continues.

Let's continue our bulletin excellence-with careful modification.