Library of Congress Bicentennial Celebration Presentation - Page 20

Of equal consequence in this cloning was a change in contest judges. The Living Bird required a high level of judging skills in keeping with the higher values set on the entries. When it was found that the switch to taxidermists, biologists, and wildlife artists wasn't fulfilling all hopes (their deliberations were scholarly but lengthy, they had few skills at "critiques" - those one on one post-judging evaluations demanded by the losers - and, in the words of one famous Midwestern judge / carver, "We tried those guys for a while, but they tended to pick the 'wrong' birds"), it was concluded that the only judges suitable to rate the works of champion carvers were other champion carvers. With such inescapable logic formed in committee, and seconded by the champions themselves, the new freeze-dried artform was locked into place. These and other artform matters were being discussed in editorials and Letters in the main trade journals, Wildfowl Carving & Collecting, and The Ward Foundation News, and now the P.F.D.A. had their own newsletter to reflect these same concerns.

The divergence of interests between carvers and collectors, already noted, was now matched by diverging views among decoy carvers.   Those who favored the realistic and delicate "Floating decoratives," now had a tank and judges to themselves.   Among the carvers favoring "Traditional Hunting Decoys," however, there were two camps with opposed views on tradition.  Here was the legacy of Bellport '23 observed to the maximum: Which gunning decoys were "traditional," and which "ain't practical"?   If the handsome prize winning decoys of "Shang" Wheeler had drawn ire for being impractical in 1923, as reported by an eye witness, then how could these modern decoys with their fine paint work and "likeness to species" be defended?

Without hope of resolution, this matter was exercised in several issues of the newsletter, and it didn't help matters when the collectors weighed in with on-the-side-of-the-angels arguments, quoting the late revered Joel Barber (who never hefted a shotgun, so far as is known), who once wrote in his usual obscure, poetic style, "The market gunner ... is the father of decoys... (and) They made not ducks at all, but... a symbolism that portrays waterfowl... Folk Art." Here, in the view of collectors, was the simple resolution for the modern decoy carvers who had lost their way. They could redeem themselves by lowering their ambitions to the level of folk artists. In other words, they couldn't be Andrew Wyeth, or even Norman Rockwell, but they could be Grandma Moses.

The workable solution to the foregoing problem was to get all the judges to get up from the tanks, and march back to make their final judgments at about 30 feet - an unenforceable makeshift that mostly served to quiet things down. We have barely touched upon the continuing wrangles throughout the artform, but with any luck, these will continue to appear in journals and newsletters far into the 21st century. It can now be seen that those little get togethers, dismissed so cavalierly by that critic, had never been about taking turns handing out blue ribbons, but had been spirited battles-royal among artists and carvers who were certain they knew best what was best for everyone else - and here is another legacy to add to the growing list: The battle tested virtue of artists standing up to give back better than they're getting.

<< PREV  |  NEXT >>