1893 30¢ Columbian On 1928 Zep Cover

essayky,

Travel time accounts for the delay in responding. I did miss some of the nuance in your earlier posting. And, as it so happens, I did review the APS judging manual before I went to the show. The sense I got -- and a hurried first read hardly qualifies me to start judging, though in time I might try the exercise of trying to anticipate how judges will evaluate exhibits -- was that in any category the use of philatelic material would be judged on whether it contributes or adds value to the exhibition. In certain categories that would be harder to than in others, but as John Becker observed, the APS judging manual only uses the word "contrived" three times, describing circumstances where there may be no choice but to use such material.

Awards had not been made before I left. I am sure that they will eventually be posted to the TEXPEX web site and when they do I will review them in light of my own neophyte experience perusing the exhibits.

I have profited from this exchange, and appreciate the time you put into it.

Somebody noticed besides me. I don't like "updated" online dictionaries either. ...This is why I stick with my own traditional book/paper 1960's/1970's dictionaries.


-IBFS

Going to the judging manual is a good impulse, and I applaud you for that. I completed the APS training and certification process, including the requisite apprenticeship for judging at national level shows, many years ago. I had served as a judge on a few juries but had to let it go when career requirements demanded a larger chunk of my time. I haven't gotten back to it, but have kept a membership in the AAPE all the while, to this day. For me, research and exhibiting are the highest and purest forms of philatelic pursuit, but that is just my personal experience and opinion.

From your comment I also see that you are still bothered by the use of a word which makes you see red. I think one of the reasons you and I don't see eye to eye on that is because I tend to use the word verbally and seldom have occasion to apply it as an adjective. May I suggest that you would do well to do the same? Creating an exhibit is all about contriving to tell a story through the presentation of objects. A successful exhibit is an elaborate contrivance, and challenges one's creative muscles. When one contrives to find balance among the four evaluative criteria in exhibiting, it is most rewarding to have the effort recognized. When one makes friends with the verb, I find that even the colloquial sense of the adjective has less bite, inasmuch as it still points to a creative aspect of an object's presentation.

Perhaps you have harbored a suspicion that I look down on philatelically inspired covers. Nothing could be further from the truth. My collecting field has little room for philatelically inspired material, that is true. But to me a philatelically contrived cover can be as satisfying as a good pun - and I do love elegant word play. I recall that back in the 70s there was an older collector who wrote for Linn's by the name of Ken Wood, who would prepare very classy FDCs of many kinds, and some incorporated dollar value Columbians which had been unused until cancelled on his creations. The selection of the particular stamps was keyed to the nature of the theme or event behind the new issue and he held back nothing. That was gutsy, and his creations were contrived in the best sense of the word, though there were many who shook their heads convinced he was nuts. Creative innovation and daring-do has that effect on some people.

But just as creative solutions are admirable, contriving a cover made to order because you can't figure out how to plug a hole otherwise might be a cop out. Knowing how to tell when a contrived cover is a good solution, maybe the only solution, and when it is an end-run around a roadblock, that requires considerable experience and no small amount of research on the part of the judges. But just as there is a pecking order of importance to stamps in general (see the manual on that matter, and the FIP rules) so it must be appreciated that the philatelic significance of types of usage is not all on an even plane. And please do not suppose that such stratification is all about bias and prejudice until you have a much deeper appreciation of what the work of philatelic judging requires and entails. In competitive exhibiting choices have to be made at every level of the game.

essayk,

If I hang around people who contrive verbal uses of contrive often enough, perhaps that will rub off on me.

As you love language, note that the correct metaphorical noun is "derring do," not "daring-do." It's just nitpicking, I am aware. Unless it was an intentional contrivance...

My naivety really gives me freedom to follow my muse, controlled by my limited purse of course.

With the Zep cover, like I mentioned, I needed that particular flight. To find it with that unique (probably one of a kind) franking including the special delivery, was great fun..., Of course It's even more fun to find out it's addressed to the co-founder of the oldest stamp auction house in Germany. This stuff is right up my alley. And if I can find more provenance having to do with the addressee, more the better!

But of course, my accumulation does not lead to exhibiting, or my grand children becoming rich off the sales of my collection.

I will say this though, I do know enough not to spend hundreds of dollars on a late use 30 center as if it was FDC or an 1892 expo card. Much of that awareness, I owe to this great web site, and the great collectors and experts willing to share their time and expertise.