Visions, Passions and Purposes.

From the archives of The Canine Chronicle, January, 2012

By Dr. Gareth Morgan-Jones

There has, in recent times, been concern expressed about the direction which the sport of pedigreed dogs is currently taking, with a seemingly shifting emphasis and focus occurring away from the pursuit of meaningful breeding practices. A rather oddly rhetorical, and in some ways slightly nonsensical, question has been asked as to the relative and respective importance of judging versus breeding. As if the two could be divorced from one another, as if there was no connection between them.  Don’t the two belong together; are they not intricately intertwined? You cannot, after all, have the one without the other and the breeding part surely has to come first. This is the anchor, which keeps the ship from drifting and ultimately ending up on the rocks. There are, of course, various layers and levels to this but the evaluation of stock going forward cannot meaningfully occur in the absence of purposeful and successful breeding. If the latter falters the whole sport will inevitably come apart, for its very essence, the development, perfection and preservation of breeds, is betrayed. Our dogs will seriously suffer as a consequence. Long-term vision, abiding passion and responsible purpose are the ingredients, which glue things together. If these elements are not in place the foundation is eroded. One does, of course, readily get the distinct feeling nowadays that many of the newcomers to the sport are approaching it much too superficially, with the aim of obtaining instant gratification taking precedence over making a long-term, in-depth commitment to the welfare and well-being of our breeds. Substantive participation has to be ongoing and progressive; the cart cannot summarily be placed before the horse. Before anyone nurtures an aspiration to judge there are quite clearly significant dues to pay and stars to be earned. Success as a breeder of consequence should, ideally, be a prerequisite but, regrettably, it is not always that way. In an essay of mine published in this magazine a couple of months ago I related a remark made by an exhibitor to the effect that a particular judge was just a fancier and not a breeder. What should one make of someone saying of another ‘oh, she’s never bred a decent dog in her life’?

As I have written previously, on at least one occasion, to an astute observer of our sport and the somewhat complex culture which surrounds it, an aspect which always engages interest is the quite notable differences which exist in the way various individuals approach it, view it, and participate in it. Even its very purpose can be looked upon somewhat differently. With the passage of time things have certainly changed a good deal in this regard and even the ethos, as well as guiding beliefs, have drifted. The emphasis and focus, quite remarkably perhaps, in fact now vary a great deal. Changing values is something that we have to constantly confront. When asked what is the purpose of the conformation dog show most people will, out of pure habit, readily produce a pat response which goes something as follows: well to evaluate the respective merits of breeding stock, of course. This answer can sometimes now, in a very real sense, unfortunately have an aura of glibness to it although, in reality, it accurately states what our sport is supposed to be all about. Yes, it has indeed come to this! Are you following me here? This exactly suits the need for justification and don’t we always nowadays feel a need to transparently justify everything? But how contrived does this seem at this moment in time? Is this type statement merely pandering to the ostensible and plausible rather than reflecting what is true and real in totality? In other words, are dog shows still being held purely with their original purpose in mind or have they drifted in other directions, at least to some degree? This question of the comparative importance of breeding versus judging crops up in the context of a changed firmament, of a different culture if you will. It can be argued that most of the zigs in this are offset by the zags but there is still surely a cause for considerable concern.

With the recognition that the sport has now evolved, developed, and changed well beyond the state that it was in even a few decades ago comes the desirability of dealing with this in a rational, realistic way. But the underlying foundation in the form of successive generations of committed, passionate, visionary breeders must somehow be safeguarded. This is one of the main reasons why it is highly prudent and very wise for the AKC to continue allowing individuals to still breed and exhibit dogs whilst conducting a concurrent judging career. Such people are the salt of the earth that is our sport. The less stratification there is within the sport the better things will be. There should be no conflicts of interest in this context if ethical and moral standards continue to be maintained. There are such values as trust and honor out there. Erosion of the bedrock of anything is never a very good thing to have happen. When mutually exclusive and polarized interests separate one faction from another there can be problems. There is the always-existing danger of elements within the sport drifting apart. Many individuals now curtail their participation to specific areas whereas others are still active within a much broader context. The reasons for the divergence in interests are various. They can be rather complex and sophisticated or they can be rather simplistic or mercenary. Gaining personal satisfaction is, let us be perfectly honest, the central requirement for sustained participation. Indulging one’s passion is a powerful motive. When this involves the breeding of good dogs, which truly exemplify their breed standards, an invaluable contribution to the well-being of the sport is made. A most admirable purpose is thereby fulfilled!  Some individuals are, of course, more easily satisfied than others; some are more demanding of themselves, while others are less so. Most decisions with regard to how and to what extent a person participates are based on background, experiences, resources and sensitivities, of one sort or another. Added to this there are the matters of inspiration and motivation. These can vary from a genuine and passionate interest in the lore and history of the pedigreed dog and the sport involving it to a more superficial approach where the satisfaction of one’s ego plays a prominent part.

With the passage of time and the gaining of experience most individuals reach a state of equilibrium where some measure of satisfaction, whatever its exact nature, is obtained. Oftentimes this means dealing with opposing or conflicting influences and resolving in one’s own mind how, where, and what level, one feels the most comfortable. A critical element in all of this is how we view the condition of the all-breed dog show today and how it is, or is not, fulfilling its original purpose; ostensibly, at least, still the critical evaluation of the respective merits of breeding stock. There are clearly some who firmly believe that it has become, to some degree at least, devalued in this regard; that it has moved beyond its original purpose and become in part something else. That it has become, to some extent, a different type of entity, a different type of game, if you will. Sports do involve games, do they not? I’m not necessarily being purposefully and deliberately facetious here! Hence this latest thing about which is most important; breeding or judging? It is argued that one is being more than a little disingenuous when taking the position that nothing has really changed. There is certainly an element of truth to this; it is surely not merely and purely a fanciful notion. By devaluation is meant a lessening of its importance and significance. Has, indeed, its stature and status as the primary venue where pedigreed dogs are comparatively evaluated within their own breeds been compromised? It has long been said that within the all-breed dog shows the value and meaningfulness of judging decisions decreases exponentially above the level of Breed competition. If this indeed is the case, and there does not appear to be any compelling reason to seriously doubt such an assertion, how come so much is made of wins at the higher levels of competition? Is there indeed a kind of disconnect here? Does the all-breed show now constitute, in some measure at least, a very different sort of primary activity, with a different kind of ethos, for that which was traditional? Has its quintessence been eroded? We’ve certainly come a long way from that which was originally envisaged and intended all those many years ago in the old country. So what of it?

One of the most obvious outcomes of the dichotomy of purpose now existing within the firmament of the conformation dog show is the advent of what one might perhaps refer to as subcultures within the sport, each with its proponents and participants and, of course, inevitably, serial detractors. Isn’t this how a whole lot of human activity eventually ends up? Although not, by any means, mutually exclusive, there has evidently been some considerable polarization occurring. As I have written about previously, a number of times, there are seemingly many of our more serious breeders who have now become increasingly disillusioned with what has happened to the all-breed dog show and even question its place as a suitable and proper venue to critically evaluate and compare breeding stock. Such individuals have now gravitated toward exhibiting largely, if not exclusively, at Specialties. You know the thing about the breeder-judges being the only ones who can really sort out the wheat from the chaff. Ironically they are oftentimes the very people who are making the most significant contributions as breeders of consequence. Their absence from all-breed events has undoubtedly contributed to the devaluation process since some of our better dogs are rarely, if ever, seen there. This is not to say that there are no great dogs exhibited at all-breed events! On the contrary, but they are there primarily for a different purpose. Competing against members of their own breed is usually just a lowly starting point on the road to scaling the heights of canine glory in the larger arena. There are, as alluded to above, a number of different reasons and purposes which account for the division of interests within the sport. What gives satisfaction and pleasure to some people may arouse little interest in others. We each have our own passions, visions and values.

Quite clearly, for better or for worse, depending upon your point of view, the central purpose of the all-breed dog show is now, as suggested above, being looked at in this country somewhat differently by various participants. We have to be realistic about this. No use burrowing our heads in the proverbial sand. There is really no denying this fact, much as some individuals might wish for it to be otherwise. There is no question that there are conflicting purposes now in play and this changing of emphasis undoubtedly results in altered focus and priorities. Perhaps this is where the question about the relative importance of breeding and judging enters into the equation and contaminates our thinking. As the all-breed event has evolved during the course of the past few decades the emphasis has certainly shifted, in part because what induces individuals to engage in the sport varies so considerably. The benefits and rewards to be gained, in terms of ego-nurturing satisfaction, may be different in kind and thereby the motivation. Then there is the nature and level of possible achievement. All-breed ratings may be of very little interest to some people whereas for others they may be of enormous importance and may even become what they largely live for. Odd how the numbers game can take a hold and even become addictive. There is a kind of sickness in all of this say some but others couldn’t care less. In the land of the free and the home of the brave anything goes, right? But this is surely ways away from the depth, nature and intensity of the satisfaction which is felt by the successful breeder who gains the admiration and respect if his or her peers for having made significant contributions to the ongoing well-being of the entity with which he or she is involved. That which takes dedication, vision and passion to achieve, that whose purpose is altruistic in a real sense, is recognized for what it is. These two worlds are miles apart. So which do you, my reader, believe to be the important: breeding or judging? Or are they both of equal, complementing significance?

Gareth Morgan-Jones holds a Doctor of Philosophy degree from the University of Nottingham, England, and a Doctor of Science degree from his alma mater, the University of Wales. Recently retired, he carries the title of Distinguished University Professor Emeritus at Auburn University, where he was a member of the faculty for thirty-eight years. He is approved by the AKC to judge Best in Show, the Hound and Toy Groups, six Sporting breeds, and Pembroke Welsh Corgis. He can be reached at morgangj@charter.net.

Short URL: http://caninechronicle.com/?p=2195

Posted by admin on May 3 2020. Filed under Current Articles, Dog Show History, Editorial, Featured. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry