Jerry,
I believe you have the correct perspective. It's best to not go for
the awards, but to simply put your offerings on display for everyone
to enjoy and hopefully even learn something more about bikes. As we
look we should also be learning more about bikes in general and every
marque represented on the floor. Sometimes if a person spends a lot
of effort on presentation of the bike (for example supplying
information, displaying, jerseys, numbers, etc.) then it's fair to
assume they are hopeing to improve the chances of the
machine "winning" a prize. That person may feel somewhat disappointed
if the bike doesn't do as well as they might have expexted. But
that's part of the deal. The more involved display type things stand
a greater chance of disappointment. I find it best for me to just put
the thing in line and head off and have a good time. Whatever happens
from there is what happens. Even when there are some "suprizes" or
even some "monkey business", if in the end it really doesn't matter
to you and in your own heart you know what you have, the ultimate
outcomes are easy to accept, regardless of what they are. Sometimes
there may be some short term shock, but it all falls into place
before long.
Like Jerry says, go for the fun and to be with your friends. I
personally don't put much effort into displaying a bike or even
preparing for it. Whatever I have is what I put up. For me it's more
fun that way and and not having expected anything, I always come away
happy. The most difficult part is not expecting anything; especially
if in the back of your mind you feel you have a nice piece. If it
took a lot of effort to come up with the piece and make it as
interesting and correct as possible, then a slight amount of
disappointment may creep in if someone else has a nicer peice, a more
rare piece, or a more involved display. Things go the way they do. If
you can get to the space of really going there for the fun and not
get too involved in the judging part, you will always be happy in the
end. It works for me.
I'm happy, I had a really good time, and I'm not sure what the issues
are, but I'll leave those for others to address. Whatever they come
up with will work for me; because untimately I don't care that much.
I have a good time regardless.
Brian Baylis
La Mesa, CA
I think the competition only becomes a problem if one allows it to.
For me, the key is not to take it too seriously. I've only ever won
one prize, last year at Larz, and that was quite enjoyable and
frankly unexpected. But I never come to an event with the primary
purpose of trying to win a prize. I enter bikes more because I think
someone might find them interesting. A few years ago, there was not
a single French bike entered in the show at Cirque. So the following
year, I took it upon myself to bring about half a dozen French bikes
to Cirque, just so they would be represented. I didn't really expect
to win a prize, and I did not, as someone else brought a Rene Herse
demountable. But attendees new to the hobby at least knew that
classic French bikes existed, which was the point.
There are some people who are obsessive about having every detail
of a bike correct, and who take competing deadly seriously. But even
that is OK to a point, since this drives them to produce some
magnificant restorations that we all can enjoy looking at. We just
need to try to get them to chill a bit, and learn to tolerate them
when they are sometimes unable to do so.
Regards,
Jerry Moos Big Spring, TX
Peter Naiman <hetchinspete1@yahoo.com> wrote: Charles; I'm with Tom Sanders and yourself on this one. First I go
to Cirque, not to be in competition with my fellow CR members and
Friends, but to see my Friends, enjoy their company, do some riding
and see there latest acquisitions. For me the bikes are secondary, or
less important than seeing Friends. If a show strictly becomes a
competition, please count me out, but no matter where Cirque is to
held next I don't see this happening.
As for the judging, at Larz Anderson we've tried all types from
popular choice, to voting as was done this year by a panel of judges
etc, and no matter how it has been done in prior years, someone was
unhappy with the manner and results. We've about 12 categories at
Larz, and each category is given a prize for both restored and
unrestored as well, so at Larz I find the separation works. Like
yourself, I do not think a restored bike should be put up against
something that is unrestored in original condition, as original is
always preferred. But again, what I do at Larz shouldn't dictate how
other shows are run, as each is unique. Larz is organized according
to the preferences of both Maurice Bresnahan and myself.
Lastly, when I go to a show, I accept the format of the show, the
voting procedure and everything else that goes along in the content
of the show. If I think something might be done in a better manner, I
might suggest changes to the organizer but in general I accept things
as they are. I'm thankful to the organizers of all of these events
because of the amount of work they put in. In general no one makes
any money on events, whether it be Cirque, Chucks event - Velo in
California, Larz etc. We put on the shows as a labor of love for our
hobby and for our Friends within the hobby, not for monetary gain.
I've talked about this subject for years & about Larz in particular.
It really bugs me when at the show, rather than attendees spending
the day enjoying themselves, talking with old Friends they rarely
see, a choice few spend the time sniping at others, complaining about
the judging process etc. Damn it, go to have fun and enjoy the
company !! Life's to short to go around bitching and moaning all of
the time. My enjoyment or high for the day is when someone comes up
after all is said and done to thank me for putting on the event.
Maybe that might sound to idealistic to some, but those are my
thoughts.
Peter Naiman Glendale, WI
"c. andrews" wrote: One point made by another poster struck a chord with me: restorations and originals should not be competing against each other in any kind of show. They're completely different animals, imho, and should be considered as such. An original, to my way of feeling, is inherently more interesting, and more significant, than a restoration, no matter how accomplished.
The most powerful thing a restoration can do is evoke the original. If a restoration is so good that it can fool me into believing I'm looking at an original, then it's achieved as much as a restoration can achieve --besides the always-laudable goal of making the owner happy. But it's still not as interesting as an original.
Better-than-new (or different-than-new anyway) restorations may make an owner happy, but they have very little to do with an original bike. The better-than-new restoration can be very interesting, especially if it's imaginative in some way... but most of the time this kind of restoration has a tabula-raza quality that isn't very compelling. Beautiful modern paint, reproduction graphics buried in layers of clear-coat are just that. Somehow these pieces seldom coalesce into something more. A little like a physically beautiful person who doesn't have much to say. Not because they won't, but because they can't.
A restoration that's seen a lot of good use is different...now the bike once again has a story to tell. But, it's still a restoration, and not what came from the maker's shop..or from his original painter anyway.
History, however modest, is written in every original bike, whether pristine or well-used. The hand of the maker, or his proxies, are everywhere in an original. They are gone, except in pale spirit, in a restoration, most of the time anyway. For me, anyway, a restoration is *never* as pleasing as an original. It can't be, almost by definition.
Think about the Rotrax pair at the Cirque. Aside from the fact that *no-one* does that kind of pin-striping in that fashion these days (as far as I know), these bikes would just not be anywhere near as hypnotic if they were restorations.
There are always exceptions to this stuff. I'm making some general points. And my bias is clear enough: original is better. Period. A data point worth exactly what you paid for it. Although original might make you happier, in the end. And original is almost always cheaper, a not-inconsequential point considering the cost of a good restoration.
My plugged nickle.
Charles "learned all this the hard way" Andrews SoCal
"The deeper I go in considering the vanities of popular reasoning, the lighter and more foolish I find them."
--Galileo Galilei
"There is no society in recorded history that ever suffered because its people became too reasonable. "
-- Sam Harris