Valuing those who adjudicate.

I was helping a friend organize a lesson plan about "valuing people" today.

I looked through and read great portions of C.S. Lewis, I painstakingly copied them down, and then I thought of things that made me feel personally valued by others.

Then something else occurred to me. How I feel de-valued by others. One of the best examples of this I could think of was being de-valued in my work as a Human Video adjudicator.

I have put a lot of work into being someone worthy of being a National-level drama adjudicator. I have judged in not one but three National competitions. Not only that, but I have judged spoken drama, mime, dance, and a variety of other performing arts categories. I have everything necessary for a Master's degree in Theatre (I am finishing my thesis). I have years of drama ministry experience. I have started drama programs, run drama workshops; I have been on touring drama teams, been in plays, worked behind the scenes, and performed in a multiplicity of venues.

Without being conceited or trying to make others feel inferior, I want to state that adjudicators are chosen for a reason. It is for precisely this reason that it irritates me when those who are adjudicated (not necessarily by me, but in general) complain about the evaluations of their performances.

I have often heard artists, parents, and even pastors complain that a judge is biased. I would dearly like to say: "Of course. Aren't we all to some degree or another?" Why are judges expected to suddenly transcend their humanity and attain the divine? That is not their purpose. They are there because they are human; in fact I would say that Judges have to be biased." Their purpose is to show you an opinion that you have not thought of before. Take their comments, not as "gospel truth" but as a starting point for a learning process. Do not take them personally but thoughtfully and prayerfully consider them.

This is not to say that I think we ought to prefer one group over another for bigoted, superficial and/or narrow-minded reasons. On the contrary, they should be open to new and exciting ideas. It is fallacious, however to assume that a judge ought not to be biased. They should be biased: toward the truth. If there is no easy line between black and white, all the more reason they should adhere to the standards that are time-tested and well-worn (as in theatre). Some comments come from preference, but that preference (9 times out of 10) is born out of their education. If their comments seem to you dogmatic, that is because they (in part) are and must be. The opinion of an adjudicator should be well-informed by their education and experience. This pre-disposes them to dislike things that they have seen done poorly repeatedly.

What does this mean for the performer, participant, or artist? It means that you must make sure if you do something, you do it right. Inform yourself of dramatic theory and practice as much as you possibly can. Give yourself every opportunity to succeed. If you, then find yourself at a loss with adjudicators comments, you at least have a base to start from. Take the comments to your High School drama teacher and ask what they mean. Seek out a professional who can guide you. And, (I mean this with all kindness and with great sincerity) lashing out in anger does nothing for your ignorance.

It is far more beneficial to look past the initial reaction (of assuming that the judges are obtuse and categorically wrong) and look to the possibility that they just might be right. When we are too close to a thing, it is often our misfortune not to see it. "Can't see the forest for the trees," is a phrase that springs immediately to mind. A lot of what we sometimes consider "universal" and "obvious" can turn out to be a lot harder to interpret than we might think.

When I put a great deal of work into something, it would be easy for me to say to a critic, " You are wrong! I will do it my own way!" But where does that get me if I am working toward a goal, and the "critic" is an expert in my field? I have been told personally by my academic advisor that the things I have turned in are unacceptable, but at no time have I de-valued him by saying that he is wrong. He is an "expert." It is his job to know what does and does not belong in a Graduate Thesis. My insisting he is wrong is not only not helping my ignorance, but it is harmful to my progress. I can never learn if my heart is unwilling to accept correction.

Or, for another example; the meaning of your piece is lost on a judge. Does this mean that you still deserve full marks? Why should it? The goal of theatre at the most fundamental level is communication. A sender sends a message, the receiver receives it and sends feedback. If the sender sends a confusing message, should they dishonestly send incorrect feedback? NO! This only encourages the unwanted behavior.

Sadly, that kind of misinterpretation happens in theatre all the time. It is an art form that is based for the most part on audience interpretation. The only way of circumventing that kind of "misreading of the text," is to take a look at what it was specifically about the performance that lead to the misinterpretation and try to thwart that kind of interpretation during the next performance.

What happens in the judging process can sometimes be a much keener test of storytelling ability because it allows us to see if the message we are sending is really getting across to those who are not familiar with our message. It is a sterile environment in which to test our abilities. Apart from well-meaning fellow church members- does my performance pass the test?

I know it is frustrating to read adjudicators comments. I was a Fine Arts Participant myself. I was involved in a number of competitions, not all of them with the same affiliations I was finally able to be an adjudicator myself, I looked back to those comments. What did I find? I have found that nearly everyone of the judges comments that I didn't agree with (that seemed obtuse at the time) were entirely correct. After I gained a greater understanding of theatre, and how it works in the secular as well as the church setting, I finally understood what they meant.

We have, as adjudicators (especially in Human Video) so little time and space for proper instruction. It is the hope of every adjudicator I know that you will not simply read and disregard the comments that we make, but research them. Do as the Berean Christians did and test them to see if, indeed, they are true.

I have never met one single adjudicator who's goal it was to hurt those they are adjudicating. We do it for this reason: to educate, to inspire, to raise the performer's awareness. We desire earnestly to, "tell the truth, in love."

It is not an issue of un-biblically favoring one over another, but rather the very biblical issue of correction.

Prov 1:20-33
Wisdom calls aloud in the street. She utters her voice in the public squares. She calls at the head of noisy places. At the entrance of the city gates, she utters her words: "How long, you simple ones, will you love simplicity? How long will mockers delight themselves in mockery, And fools hate knowledge? Turn at my reproof. Behold, I will pour out my spirit on you. I will make known my words to you. Because I have called, and you have refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no one has paid attention; But you have ignored all my counsel, And wanted none of my reproof; I also will laugh at your disaster. I will mock when calamity overtakes you; When calamity overtakes you like a storm, When your disaster comes on like a whirlwind; When distress and anguish come on you. Then will they call on me, but I will not answer. They will seek me diligently, but they will not find me; Because they hated knowledge, And didn't choose the fear of God. They wanted none of my counsel. They despised all my reproof. Therefore they will eat of the fruit of their own way, And be filled with their own schemes. For the backsliding of the simple will kill them. The careless ease of fools will destroy them. But whoever listens to me will dwell securely, And will be at ease, without fear of harm."

"The wise are not necessarily those with perfect behavior, but rather they respond properly to correction[read: critique]. Others mock at correction and hate the very knowledge which would save them. They despise correction and will not listen to rebuke. They live carelessly and their end is calamity."

And notice the similarity with Hebrews and Revelation
Hebrews 12:6 For whom the Lord loves, he chastens, And scourges every son whom he receives."
Revelation 3:19 As many as I love, I reprove and chasten. Be zealous therefore, and repent.

While I do not suggest that rebuking and critiquing are fundamentally the same thing, I do think there is a great deal of overlap in the definition.

It is my dream that young people get not simply a few hastily scribbled comments, but actual time with qualified ministry professionals to enhance their craft. Unfortunately, many smaller districts do not have the resources or the connections to provide such training on their own. I know of only a few who travel around doing specific Fine Arts training, and it is something that I would very much like to do myself. I am much more satisfied helping people on a personal level than leaving just a few words to them, squeezed into a tiny box. To instead get to spend hours with them teaching them the theory behind the comments would be infinitely more rewarding.