Can we agree that although we want to promote poetry and encourage and empower others to write and participate. But THE NPS is a Competition. wrapped in a festival. The final stage should be about showing your very best work. It may be the only time a first time visitor sees or hears what we do.
Yes! Ideally, I'd like NPS to be a capital-F Festival wrapping on a small-c competition creamy center.
But, yes, I think we are essentially in agreement.
But here is my competition philosophy: if you have a "best" poem you want to share on Finals stage, then you save that poem for Finals stage. That is how competition works. If you want a showcase of "best" poems... Well, maybe we should scrap Finals and create a show of the sixteen best poems we saw at NPS.
if we can agree that possibly some of the best work COULD be used in prelim bouts that have limited visibility, is it not our duty to show the world why we think that these 4 teams are OUR very best....and shouldn't our very best be able to show what they feel is their very best work.
What you are saying here is a return to the idea that Finals is somehow worse without these "best" poems. I thought everyone was already in agreement that we cannot quantify how much better or worse a show Finals is with the no-repeat rule in place. I still don't see how the four Finals teams can guarantee a "better" show for an audience who has never seen them, and I think this is unprovable. I don't think a first-time visitor to the event has any inkling of what a "better" or "worse" show is.
This is like saying Game 7 of the 1983 NBA Championship was a lousy game because everyone was tired from the previous six. Maybe we should have let the Lakers and Celtics rest up for a week before playing it. I'm sure that would have been a much better game technically, right?
Buy removing the no-repeat rule we are not saying you have to re-peat a poem but you have a option. ...But Nothing says that you Have to re-peat anything...and I am sure some of you wont on a principle issue. But Finals should be about A teams best work against other teams best work.
It's true: you don't HAVE to repeat a poem. But some teams will. And that means that you are permitting teams with only 12 poems to become MY national champions. I want the team I point to as champions to have more poems than that!
Again I thought allowing only 2 possible repeats in finals was a good middle ground. That way you MUST have 2 new poems and MAY repeat 2 poems used in prelims
John, it is a good middle ground. I personally believe we should require no-repeat, but I concede that our community wants it otherwise --I am arguing in the hopes of bringing folks who haven't thought hard about it over to my thinking, not trying to drum up support for another sad run at the no-repeat rule.
Yours is a reasonable compromise between two kinds of purists. It doesn't satisfy me, but I see it as a vast improvement over our current situation.