Building a better A&S Model, Part the Third

[lumineaux]

Today I want to talk about documentation anxiety.  Some of this fear stems from the lack of clear guidance about what documentation is or should be.  Combine that with wildly inconsistent messages from the few people giving their opinions, and you've got sheer confusion.  I know that there are a lot of people who would like to see coherent, consistent documentation guidelines promulgated.  We're going to ignore the people who have apoplexy at that suggestion because they are minions of Chaos who hate all things that smack of "rules."   There are times when defining the playing field makes the play better, and this is one of them.

So, if you were asked to evaluate a work in your area of expertise, what questions would you ask the artisan?


The other source of documentation anxiety is something I don't understand: angst about the writing process itself.  Apart from the lack of standards, what is it that scares people about writing up their work?  Is it that they've been told documentation is hard so they are afraid of trying?  While writing very well is a skill, writing at all should not be a hurdle for educated people.  (I say this admitting my strong bias towards the written word.)  Help me understand, oh Peanut Gallery, the source of the anxiety so we can talk about ways to make documentation easier. 

Comments

[hlwoods.livejournal.com]

I have heard a lot of people angst about the writing. Just plain the writing. I can outline the documentation for them. (You know: the standard What did you make/How was it made in period/How did you make it/What period materials were used/What did you use?etc outline.) They can answer every one of those questions for me, verbally. And then I ask them to write it down.

Panic ensues.

I am beginning to think that the modern tweeting/facebooking society is no longer used to expressing thoughts in excessive of a sentence or two. They panic. If you can convince them to sit down with you, where you run the keyboard, then after about 30 minutes I usually hear "That was much easier than I expected!", amidst cries of wonder. But that first time ... I don't know how to get them over the hurdle en masse.

And somehow being college educated is no help whatsoever; college literacy is declining just as high school literacy is.

Edited to actually answer your question:

That being said, this is usually the outline I start them with:

Intro: What did you make, and how will you use it. How was it used in period? (Specify the specific period and location.)

Materials: What materials were used in period? Did you use the same materials, or did you use substitutions? Ex: did you dye and spin your own wool, or did you buy pre-spun and -dyed wool? Would buying the pre-made wool be period?

Method: What methods were used in period? How do we know this? (Do we know this?) What methods did you use. If they differ, why? (Examples: didn't use mercury because we now know it's a hazardous material. Didn't use brain when tanning leather due to not having same.)

Lessons Learnt (aka Conclusion): What went well? What didn't work? How would you change things up if you had more time? (What would ou do if you had the opportunity for a do-over?)

Appendix(es): For the materials and methods you describe in your main documentation, include more detail. Examples of methods: Explain how to embroider using the brickstitch, weave using 3/1 broken twill, use appropriate spacing to draw celtic knot-based illuminations. Examples of materials (which include tools): a brief discussion of the density/count of linen available then vs now, a discussion on leather vs bone vs paper cards for tablet weaving, a discussion of pigments for illumination.

As a Laurel recently pointed out to me, if I take more care with the appendices, I can reuse them for similar projects. After all, I weave (a lot). Why keep rewriting the "How to tabletweave" appendix? Or the "Tools of tabletweaving" appendix?

[lanome.livejournal.com]

Until my senior year of high school, I would leave every single paper to the last minute, panic, cry, and then somehow manage to write it. I got over that eventually (well, sometimes I still leave things to the last minute), but I could definitely see another path through life in which I did not.

I think with some things, it is easy to gather little bits of information hear and there, create something amazing, maybe even quite "period", but not really have kept track of where you picked up all those little bits. How do I know the Germans tended towards pointier Gothic hands? Well, I've looked at a lot of Gothic manuscripts, German and otherwise. But which ones? What do you mean I have to put them all down in one place? I don't remember where I found all that stuff. I was just going along, learning things, and oh, wait, now I need to collect it all and write it all down? Bummer. That's going to be hard.

It's even worse for me with garb. How do I know they used linen? I don't know - doesn't everyone know that linen was available, and that people made their underwear out of it? (Maybe they didn't. I've never actually tried to do any real research on this.) But maybe I've made the most stunning undershirt ever (I wish - I really need more, nice period underwear), with all period materials and techniques, but I've lost track of how I figured it all out?

It's one thing if you're researching something with the intent to enter the product of that research into some sort of competition; then you would make sure to keep track of all your sources along the way, etc, etc. It's another thing entirely if you're like, "Hey, this thing I made actually came out awesome! Maybe I should show it off/use it in this competition/whatever." For me, that's when it's trouble time.

[alysten.livejournal.com]

I keep track of all of the fiddly bits. But that is my squirrel mentality, saving bits for a later date. I usually end up sending someone else the fiddly bits because I think it will help them with their project. Share the knowledge, spread the wealth.

[subdivisions.livejournal.com]

Oh yeah, totally this too!

For me, sometimes I just "know" gestalt things based on the fact that I've looked at 80,000 pictures of whatever it is. Sure, I *could* document my gestalt knowledge, if I went back and collected data from all the 20 books I checked out of the university library last year and scanned all 80,000 pictures to prove it, etc etc.

But then I would be WAY beyond the 3 page limit and I wouldn't have even gotten around to talking about what exact brand name of needle I used for my blackwork and what store I bought it at and what TV program I was watching when I did said blackwork.

In all seriousness, I do have issues figuring out how to document "Based on my 10 years of doing C&I, I believe that this style typically contains X Y Z elements. No, I don't have a book reference handy to provide a quote. I just know."

In my mundane field, that problem is solved by doing an experiment to support the hypotheses you produced after accumulating 10 years of gestalt knowledge.

[artisticphoenix.livejournal.com]

This.

When I am "researching", I'm trolling through things, looking at many pictures and getting bits here and bits there. Then I proceed to project. So pulling together all my stuff is less important than making the project! And then finding it again. Grumble.

[subdivisions.livejournal.com]

I am an academic by trade. I spend most of my mundane day writing, and I mostly write "documentation" (of social science research). So theoretically A&S documentation should not be an issue for me at all.

And yet it is. I have had the distinct impression on multiple occasions that whatever the judges are looking for is not what I think is important about any project. (This is a phenomenon I have noticed over several different types of competitions over several years, so it's not just a coincidence). I think there is some kind of serious disconnect between what an academic thinks is important to say and what a random (likely non-academic) person who happens to be judging an A&S competition thinks is important to say. They always write notes on my documentation that say things like, "you should have explained what kind of needle you used"? Really? I wrote 3 detailed paragraphs discussing how I developed a new design based on a period source and the difficulties I encountered in scaling down certain elements of the design based on thread count differences between period and modern linens, which you did not comment on at all, and the only thing you really think is important about this project is what kind of needle I used and you marked off points because I didn't tell you? Aarrgh! *tears hair out* The academic equivalent of this behavior in my field would be: I submit a paper to a journal and my peer-reviewer doesn't give a crap about any of the statistical tests but thinks its critically important to know that I wrote the paper using a Dell PC.

Also, it is clear to me sometimes that the judges do not know as much about the topic as I do, or that they are not paying good enough attention to either the documentation or the project before they judge. I had a judge at last year's Ice Dragon write that I made a good decision in machine-sewing non-visible seams (the entire garment was hand-sewn).

I get more frustrated by this kind of thing than by any of the criticism I ever receive. The best feedback I ever got from an A&S judge was from a Laurel with a reputation for being blunt and sometimes a bit harsh. She sat me down and told me why she thought one of my hypotheses was wrong and needed more research in a particular area. Not only was she right, I really appreciated the fact that she clearly understood the topic AND my entry. I would rather get "blunt and helpful" than "nice and not helpful".

Beyond that, my natural "Chaotic Goodness" makes me chafe at the thought of having to justify my work to any so-called authority figure. But we probably can't do much about that problem on a more general SCA level. ;-)

[lanome.livejournal.com]

The best feedback I ever got from an A&S judge was from a Laurel with a reputation for being blunt and sometimes a bit harsh. She sat me down and told me why she thought one of my hypotheses was wrong and needed more research in a particular area. Not only was she right, I really appreciated the fact that she clearly understood the topic AND my entry. I would rather get "blunt and helpful" than "nice and not helpful".

So much so this!

[lumineaux.livejournal.com]

Does your innate Chaotic Good-ness rebel at the thought of having guidelines and standards for what documentation should look like? Or does that fall on the side of acceptable rules-making?

(This is a serious question and not intended to be snarky)

[subdivisions.livejournal.com]

Oh, and the other thing that really annoys me is when the competition rules ask for, say, a 3 page maximum.

And then you get complaints from the judges that you didn't include, say, a detailed dress diary.

How, pray tell, should I fit a detailed dress diary into 3 pages along with all the other things that have to be present in documentation?

[hlwoods.livejournal.com]

[jumping up and down ....]

I know this one! I know this one! Appendices!

:)

[woodwindy.livejournal.com]

What I'm finding among some of my locals who've expressed angst is that they don't have any sense of what to expect the judges to be looking for, so they're really flailing around blindly trying to figure out WTF to put on the piece of paper to keep the persecuting forces of darkness from ripping their lungs out and cackling triumphantly. :( Also, there seems to be a distressing amount of attempted retro-documenting going on, which never ends well.

And yes, I'm currently planning how to coach people on that front. I hate to put myself up as any kind of expert, since my area of artsy experience is not one judged by the same standards as most competitions, but at least I've gone through multiple rounds of watching other people judge...

ETA: In my actual area:
- What source(s) did this piece of music come from? (bonus points for having looked at the historical music as well as any modern transcription/arrangement)
- If it's original, what historical form is it based on?
- If it's historical, are you familiar with its context/genre? Is it representative of its time and place, or anomalous?
- What stylistic/instrumental choices did you make in performing this piece, and why?

[lanome.livejournal.com]

P.S. While we're on the subject, the most irksome feedback I've ever gotten (and I've only entered two A&S competitions ever, so I don't have a broad range of bad feedback to choose from), was on this little embroidered pouch I made (http://kellswood.com/ygraine/eva/gallery-detail.php?itemid=30). It was completely based on secondary and tertiary sources, but whatever. Anyway, my main source mentioned that the top of the pouch would be finished with a linen ribbon. I did not have a linen ribbon, and didn't have time to acquire one. So I figured my options were non-linen ribbon or linen-non ribbon. I went with non-ribbon and used the selvedge from some green linen I had. I then wrote all this done very nicely in my documentation, explaining why I'd done what I'd done.

The feedback: "Using the selvedge was not a good substitute for a linen ribbon."

That was it. No suggestion about what would have been better, or *why* it wasn't a good substitute, or what on earth I could have done to do better. And I was sitting with my entry all day so whoever it was definitely could have discussed it with me, but never did.

So, I'm pretty tough, and I mostly ignore this person, and maybe if I'm feeling super awesome, go research other finishing methods, but what is someone really supposed to do in that case? I almost feel like if I'd left out this bit about my decision/substitution process and just written, "Finished with linen," with *less* information, this person would not have even thought to comment. That is the sort of thing that makes people anxious; second guessing what is *just* the right amount of information, and what will just lead to points being taken off or whatever. Blech.

[subdivisions.livejournal.com]

I also feel that being too honest about what exactly was wrong with a project got me docked points at an A&S competition last year. I had the feeling given the comments that if I hadn't pointed it out the judges probably wouldn't have noticed. :-(

[sillyviking.livejournal.com]

"Writing-up things" is, in my opinion, part of the process. For me, as one who "conducts research" writing is that part where I tell all what I think about a subject. The writing maybe documentation for a project, such as the shield I'm making, or the writing may be the project, such as the second draft of the work on swords I'm writing.

I hate writing; trying to find the right words and then putting them in a sentence takes time and thought. For instance, in project I currently call The Obsession, I'm trying to decide if I should include a final remark on Irish Archaeology. I feel I should, but I can't figure out exactly what to write.

This is why I believe so strongly in revision. Revision is not a matter of simple proofreading, but asking if the work is coherent enough. Written English is not a pile of words thrown together at the last minute.

Given all this, what I want to see in documentation is the following:

1. Why did you undertake this project?
2. Where and when is the projects origins? What makes it "medieval" or "rensaissance"?
3. How did you make it?
4. What did you think of the results?
5. What did you learn?

We spent a lot time with 2 & 3, but not a lot time with 1, 4, & 5. I think we've missed something there when we exclude answering those questions.

[lumineaux.livejournal.com]

What is your opinion on documentation created by collaboration between the person who did the art or craft and someone who is better able to express concepts in writing?

On documentation through verbal presentations with bibliographies and notes?

In short, on various ways to make doing documentation less intimidating and anxiety-producing for people, in order to encourage them to share their work and research?

[alysten.livejournal.com]

Today I want to talk about documentation anxiety.
Sometimes this anxiety stems from having problems when you see requirements of x% of the score comes from proper spelling, grammar and punctuation. When you cannot tell the difference between fro, for, from, form or manager, manger, manage, mange, simply having the writing requirement is enough to cause panic. We have many aspects of the SCA that are "educated" that not being able to spell simple words causes ridicule and assumptions of stupidity. It reminds me of grade school all over again. I am fortunate that I have people to help proofread and make suggestions without belittlement. But even I get worried that I will overuse them with the amount of projects I work on and research. There needs to be an option for oral presentations. Se need to be not be prejudicial if some one asks to be able to do one in conjunction with what may be presented written.

So, if you were asked to evaluate a work in your area of expertise, what questions would you ask the artisan?
Depends. If I were evaluating something cooked, I would want to know about sanitation and safety considerations. I probably would not eat anything protein, rice or dairy based without knowing how it was handled, transported, etc. I would want to feel, smell and taste it. Even if I cannot eat eggs or egg based dishes, I can know a lot about how something is cooked by what it smells like and feels like. Texture is pretty important. I would want to know why they chose a specific ingredient (cheese selection comes to mind), are they using whole spices they've ground or store bought. I want to know if there was any experimentation done prior to producing what I am eating. Did they use a redaction found online? Did they agree with it, modify it or choose not to do any of the instructions? Are they building parts like stock or buying broth or using a modern method for production. I want to see if there were any epic failures. Basically, show me the process not just the finished food. I want to see if you have learned anything through the process.

[lumineaux.livejournal.com]

So you'd be a vote in favor of collaborative documentation, yes?

[hlwoods.livejournal.com]

I got lost in the threads. I would like to posit something many people are alluding to. Sort of. And that's the matter of retro-documenting vs documenting. I'm going to use myself as an example. Two entries (the first my novice, the second not).

Entry one: tablet weaving my own pattern sort of mimicking the brocaded look from the Birka finds without brocading. Woven on an inkle loom, using cotton, and abused playing cards for tablets. (I reiterate: novice project.) Didn't even start considering entering until I had woven 10+ feet of 2 5/8" trim. Obviously, I couldn't actually document that the pattern was period, or that the loom was (inkle looms are 19th century), or the cards. On the other hand, by explaining the choices I had made (and silk is expensive for a student), I clawed back some of the points. Still, documentation was weak since, ultimately, I hadn't done any research prior to starting.

Entry two: started project by starting a project file; grabbed every relevant picture from online and pasted into the file, including link. Also included other links. Started outlining the documentation well before I warped the silk onto the box loom. (Ransoms were paid; I had better tools.) Actually finished everything except the conclusion before cutting the trim off the loom.

what I noticed is that writing the documentation in the second case was almost trivial; I was updating it as I was doing the research, so I didn't have to find links later. I suspect that it is this behaviour that we need to encourage, rather than fusticating over specific outlines/fonts/margins. Admittedly, this behaviour does require the intent to cmopete before the item is started, let alone finished. :)

[mariedeblois.livejournal.com]

My experience has been that overall, folks doing A&S in the SCA fall into two camps. I call them "craftspeople" and "academics". Craftspeople are more likely to: be "ooo shiny" folks; be terrified of documentation because they are Artists not stuffy academics; be terrified of documentation because they are post-documenting; care more about the outcome than the process, the research or materials; hate academics for being mean; hate rules; say "if they'd had it they would've used it"; be terrified of documentation because they don't "do" Order and aren't good with boring words (even if they can tell a fabulous story); and so on. You can probably guess what academics are more likely to be. :)

I don't see anything inherently wrong with either one (some craftspeople do *astonishing* period work; some craftspeople are *fantastic* at inspirational teaching about the topic), but they mix about as well as oil and vinegar. Unfortunately, A&S competitions do just that and don't add any emulsifier. :( [1]

Pushing hard to make things more academic-friendly without a lot of education for craftspeople on how academics aren't scary and it's cool to be academic seems likely to have resistance. Alternately, craftspeople need some kind of other outlet for showing off.

Ok, really answering the questions you actually asked in a separate post. :)


[1] I have no citations for my terrible food-related metaphor here. I Am Not A Chef. Your Mileage May Vary. Do Not Taunt Happy Fun Ball.

[mariedeblois.livejournal.com]

Hopefully not too surprisingly, I'm primarily an academic (a lazy one sometimes, and an occasional retro-documenter, but at least I understand the inherent problem). I do have some sympathy, though, for my craftspeople friends who have ended up in tears after an A&S competition because of the way academics judged their work.

[lanome.livejournal.com]

Hm.

I see what you mean, but I'm actually not sure I agree.

I consider myself to be a craftsperson - my main focus is on making something cool (let's use specifics, usually a "scroll"), that someone will love, that fits with my sense of period-style.

However, I do not hate rules. In fact, I am often mocked for loving rules a bit too much. I do not hate documenting. Sometimes documenting is hard, especially if I am post-documenting (see above), but that does not mean that I hate it.

You could say I'm the exception, but I'm not sure we have enough data for that.

[mariedeblois.livejournal.com]

My area of expertise when I was more active A&S-wise was clothing (specifically, Tudor-era women's clothes). Questions I would ask:

* What culture and time period is this item intended to represent?
* What kind of context does it come from - high-class, lower-class, best clothes, daily clothes, wedding clothes, summer clothes, winter clothes?
* Is this an entire outfit? If not (almost always), what other parts of this outfit would you need to complete it? (If they don't mention accessories like jewelery, fans, headwear, ask about those too.)
* What kinds of materials (fabrics, threads, trim, beads, buttons, etc.) would they have used? What kinds did you use? If they aren't the same, why did you make those choices? (I'm generally willing not to penalize people for modern materials if they know what would be better and have a decent reason why they didn't.)
* Is it machine-sewn, handsewn, or a combination of those two? If machine-sewing is involved, which parts, and why did you choose to do it that way? (I will totally give mad props to anyone who completely handsews something, but machine-sewing seams that are then hand-finished so that the machine sewing is hidden is a not-anathema compromise to me.) If hand-sewing is involved, what kinds of stitches did you use, and why did you use them? Do you know what kind of stitches were used in the intended time period/culture of this item? (These can be really concise answers; it does not need diagrams and illustrations.)
* Where or how did you develop the pattern for this item? If you patterned it yourself, what did you base that pattern on, and what choices did you make in doing it? If you used someone else's pattern, why do you think their pattern is representative of period practice? (I will give mad props to anyone who mentions period fabric widths and that this was a factor for their pattern or placement of pieces.)
* How well does it fit? Is that a modern fit or a period fit? Do you have a good range of movement while wearing it? (and if not, is that appropriate for this outfit?) How does it hold up to Real Life? That is, can you go to the privy, do you need modern undergarments (like a bra) to wear it, can you go up and down stairs with something in your hands, is it washable, etc.?
* What did you learn by working on this item?


I'll probably think of more questions later. :)