Success vs Influence
Semantics in the Dog World
By Amanda Kelly
Originally published in Dogs In Review magazine (U.S.A.) in 2005. All rights reserved. This text may not be reproduced without the express, written consent of the author.
There is no doubt that the dog world has its own peculiar lingo. The laymen, for example, isn’t likely to equate baiting with standing, tack boxes with grooming gear or stewards with those helpful people who help us in and out of the ring. To them, briskets are for barbecuing, flews are found in the chimney and a haw is the latter half of a donkey’s call.
But, while a dictionary of words foreign to everyday language could easily be written for our sport, to be complete it would need to look very closely at words you and I likely assume to be universal.
As a professional communicator it is my job to contemplate words, their meanings and their use. More specifically, I am often tasked with finding just the right combination to get across a given meaning as clearly and succinctly as possible. Perhaps then it is not surprising that I am so intrigued by the way dog people communicate (or don’t, as the case may be).
Many such problems are quite obvious. For instance, the petty antics and irritatingly self-centered focus of some fanciers can make communication difficult on any level. Technology too offers communication hurdles as the popularity of Internet email lists begins to supercede more traditional channels such as newsletters, telephone conversations or <gasp!> face-to-face contact.
And yet, communication problems often have deeper roots. Much like two movie reviewers at a premiere who scant days later seem to have been watching a completely different film, we find ourselves having conversations with one another that in the end yield little shared meaning. Central to this problem is the differing meanings we assign words – even those embodying the most fundamental concepts in our sport.
With that in mind, I set off on a quest to discover the meaning of two of the most commonly used concepts in the dog world – success and influence. At once both the backbone and premise of our entire sport.
Whether we refer to them directly or allow their meanings to underwrite our thoughts and actions, these two concepts permeate almost every aspect of the conformation world. Despite this we give little conscious thought to their specific meanings. So-and-so is an influential breeder, we say, or whodjumacallit has been very successful in her breed. We aspire to be successful and influential and yet, as I found out, what that means is not entirely clear.
Taking the Test
Take the Success v Influence poll for your breed by answering the following questions:
1) Who do you feel are the most influential breeders in your breed today?
2) Explain how you personally defined “influential” in the question above.
3) Why did you select each individual?
4) Who do you feel are the most successful breeders in your breed today?
5) Explain how you personally defined “influential” in the question above.
6) Why did you select each individual?
7) If you chose different breeders for the influential list than for the successful list, please explain your reasons below. How do you feel influence and success are related, if at all?
8) What breeders do you personally feel produce the best/highest quality dogs today?
9) How did you define “best/highest quality” in the question above?
10) Why did you select each individual?
The Experiment
Through a series of online surveys I asked breeders and exhibitors in four breeds (Brittany Spaniels, Bullmastiffs, Manchester Terriers and Keeshonds) to identify their top three contenders in each category. I then asked them to explain the criteria upon which they made their judgments by providing a definition for the terms.
Anonymity was an important factor given that personality conflicts and loyalty may prevent us from objectively evaluating all breeders in a public forum. Though these dynamics can never be completely eliminated, in this case they were lessened by the provision of a forum administered in most cases by an objective third party – I know little of any of these breeds aside from my own, and even then, without any identifying information the responses submitted were innocuous.
The identification of specific, real breeders was also absolutely necessary. It is easy to pull theoretic meanings out of the air, in the process creating idealized breeders who meet our personal criteria by virtue of the fact that they do not exist and therefore have no flaws. When we have to apply our theories to the real world though, we are forced to look critically at those we deem successful/influential and then reconcile the good with the bad.
I was surprised at how many respondents remarked that they had never given so much thought to analyzing the records and actions of the players in their breed – making this a useful exercise in and of itself. Periodically evaluating the landscape of your breed is an important part of getting to or staying at the top of your game.
The Results
Responses to the survey were varied, though it must be recognized that the sample size was somewhat small (approximately 70, split relatively evenly amongst the four breeds). In the end there was little consensus regarding what each term meant and one person’s definition could be radically different from the next.
Let’s take influence as an example. While one respondent defined an influential breeder as one who has “made a huge impact on the breed by [establishing] breed type and whose dogs continue to produce that breed type through their offspring,” another said it is someone who “breeds ethically, screens for health problems and informs their puppy buyers if a health problem crops up…always breeding to improve the breed.” Still another defined an influential breeder as someone whose “good public relations/advertising, either nationally or otherwise, has swayed the populace to believe that these kennels are indeed the only ones worth looking at” while a fourth said “these breeders are movers and shakers. Their dogs are out there winning, placing and representing the breed to the dog community. Their influence is sometimes for the good and sometimes for the bad.” And the diversity of meaning continued with respondents pointing to factors like financial resources, high volume breeding and mentoring as further criteria in defining an influential breeder.
Surely, you say, there had to be more consensus on what makes a successful breeder. Nope. One breeder said “success is tied here to the "winning" that is done – to how many dogs they have that are making a mark in the show or performance ring.” Another said that his/her nominees for most successful, “consistently breed dogs that meet the standard. They do not campaign dogs with handlers that do not display the quality we should expect. It is all done for their love and commitment to the breed.” Meanwhile, a third respondent defined success as “producing consistently healthy, long lived, good tempered dogs that can do anything.” One person even went so far as to say that a successful breeder is one who “[has] been able to make a healthy living from pup/dog sales”!
Some pointed to success in the show ring, others to success in the whelping box and still others to prestige, influence on other breeders and production of happy, healthy puppies.
Even show success was not as straightforward as one would think as people wrestled with whether it should be measured by the number of champions produced or the quality of the wins. This dilemma prompted one respondent to ask “How can you measure success? By the amount of champions produced or by the number of puppies?” Is a successful breeder one who produces many mediocre champions or one who produces a small number of quality dogs? Though in theory the answer may seem obvious, in practice we constantly see people finishing large numbers of unworthy dogs ostensibly in order to earn hall of fame, stud dog and brood bitch awards. Does that mean that they have been successful or merely persistent?
To complicate things further I asked participants to ponder their choices with relation to who they might characterize as the breeders producing the best/highest quality dogs. Most seemed to conclude that those who are winning are not necessarily those who produce the best dogs – hardly a surprising idea, but certainly one requiring more thought. Does the best dog, as is sometimes suggested, really NEVER win?
The Conclusion
When all was said and done, I had almost as many different definitions of these two words as I did total responses.
So what, you say?
From a linguistic perspective this is hardly significant, as to be effective a concept has to possess a certain amount of vagueness and ambiguity. In that vein, I would argue that the diversity of responses I received speaks to the incredible range of thoughts and opinions that makes our sport so dynamic.
Yet, from a practical point of view the subtleties of meaning or areas where emphasis is placed can have a profound impact on not only how we communicate but how we act. This is where the true philosophical value of such an exercise lays. If we agree that success/influence are the ultimate goals of most show-goers, we must in turn be concerned with how those concepts are defined because the actions they produce profoundly affect the paths our breed will take.
From the underpinnings of meaning that drive our language to the simple act of conversation, it is clear that what we say and what we mean are unilaterally tied to how we understand one another and our sport.
So, before your next doggie conversation take a second and ponder the survey questions. Think about what success, influence and quality mean in your breed and in your mind. Now ask your friends to do the same and compare answers – I bet you’ll find that in some cases, though you’ve been speaking the same words, you may as well have been speaking a different language. Either way, you’re guaranteed an interesting conversation.
___________________________
Amanda Kelly is an award-winning dog writer from Halifax, Nova Scotia. Along with her mother, Wendy, Amanda breeds top-winning Toy Manchester Terriers under the Fwaggle prefix. She is currently Editor of Canine Review, Canada's oldest independent dog magazine.
____________________________
Taking the Test
Take the Success v Influence poll for your breed by answering the following questions:
1) Who do you feel are the most influential breeders in your breed today?
2) Explain how you personally defined “influential” in the question above.
3) Why did you select each individual?
4) Who do you feel are the most successful breeders in your breed today?
5) Explain how you personally defined “influential” in the question above.
6) Why did you select each individual?
7) If you chose different breeders for the influential list than for the successful list, please explain your reasons below. How do you feel influence and success are related, if at all?
8) What breeders do you personally feel produce the best/highest quality dogs today?
9) How did you define “best/highest quality” in the question above?
10) Why did you select each individual?
Originally published in Dogs In Review magazine (U.S.A.) in 2005. All rights reserved. This text may not be reproduced without the express, written consent of the author.
There is no doubt that the dog world has its own peculiar lingo. The laymen, for example, isn’t likely to equate baiting with standing, tack boxes with grooming gear or stewards with those helpful people who help us in and out of the ring. To them, briskets are for barbecuing, flews are found in the chimney and a haw is the latter half of a donkey’s call.
But, while a dictionary of words foreign to everyday language could easily be written for our sport, to be complete it would need to look very closely at words you and I likely assume to be universal.
As a professional communicator it is my job to contemplate words, their meanings and their use. More specifically, I am often tasked with finding just the right combination to get across a given meaning as clearly and succinctly as possible. Perhaps then it is not surprising that I am so intrigued by the way dog people communicate (or don’t, as the case may be).
Many such problems are quite obvious. For instance, the petty antics and irritatingly self-centered focus of some fanciers can make communication difficult on any level. Technology too offers communication hurdles as the popularity of Internet email lists begins to supercede more traditional channels such as newsletters, telephone conversations or <gasp!> face-to-face contact.
And yet, communication problems often have deeper roots. Much like two movie reviewers at a premiere who scant days later seem to have been watching a completely different film, we find ourselves having conversations with one another that in the end yield little shared meaning. Central to this problem is the differing meanings we assign words – even those embodying the most fundamental concepts in our sport.
With that in mind, I set off on a quest to discover the meaning of two of the most commonly used concepts in the dog world – success and influence. At once both the backbone and premise of our entire sport.
Whether we refer to them directly or allow their meanings to underwrite our thoughts and actions, these two concepts permeate almost every aspect of the conformation world. Despite this we give little conscious thought to their specific meanings. So-and-so is an influential breeder, we say, or whodjumacallit has been very successful in her breed. We aspire to be successful and influential and yet, as I found out, what that means is not entirely clear.
Taking the Test
Take the Success v Influence poll for your breed by answering the following questions:
1) Who do you feel are the most influential breeders in your breed today?
2) Explain how you personally defined “influential” in the question above.
3) Why did you select each individual?
4) Who do you feel are the most successful breeders in your breed today?
5) Explain how you personally defined “influential” in the question above.
6) Why did you select each individual?
7) If you chose different breeders for the influential list than for the successful list, please explain your reasons below. How do you feel influence and success are related, if at all?
8) What breeders do you personally feel produce the best/highest quality dogs today?
9) How did you define “best/highest quality” in the question above?
10) Why did you select each individual?
The Experiment
Through a series of online surveys I asked breeders and exhibitors in four breeds (Brittany Spaniels, Bullmastiffs, Manchester Terriers and Keeshonds) to identify their top three contenders in each category. I then asked them to explain the criteria upon which they made their judgments by providing a definition for the terms.
Anonymity was an important factor given that personality conflicts and loyalty may prevent us from objectively evaluating all breeders in a public forum. Though these dynamics can never be completely eliminated, in this case they were lessened by the provision of a forum administered in most cases by an objective third party – I know little of any of these breeds aside from my own, and even then, without any identifying information the responses submitted were innocuous.
The identification of specific, real breeders was also absolutely necessary. It is easy to pull theoretic meanings out of the air, in the process creating idealized breeders who meet our personal criteria by virtue of the fact that they do not exist and therefore have no flaws. When we have to apply our theories to the real world though, we are forced to look critically at those we deem successful/influential and then reconcile the good with the bad.
I was surprised at how many respondents remarked that they had never given so much thought to analyzing the records and actions of the players in their breed – making this a useful exercise in and of itself. Periodically evaluating the landscape of your breed is an important part of getting to or staying at the top of your game.
The Results
Responses to the survey were varied, though it must be recognized that the sample size was somewhat small (approximately 70, split relatively evenly amongst the four breeds). In the end there was little consensus regarding what each term meant and one person’s definition could be radically different from the next.
Let’s take influence as an example. While one respondent defined an influential breeder as one who has “made a huge impact on the breed by [establishing] breed type and whose dogs continue to produce that breed type through their offspring,” another said it is someone who “breeds ethically, screens for health problems and informs their puppy buyers if a health problem crops up…always breeding to improve the breed.” Still another defined an influential breeder as someone whose “good public relations/advertising, either nationally or otherwise, has swayed the populace to believe that these kennels are indeed the only ones worth looking at” while a fourth said “these breeders are movers and shakers. Their dogs are out there winning, placing and representing the breed to the dog community. Their influence is sometimes for the good and sometimes for the bad.” And the diversity of meaning continued with respondents pointing to factors like financial resources, high volume breeding and mentoring as further criteria in defining an influential breeder.
Surely, you say, there had to be more consensus on what makes a successful breeder. Nope. One breeder said “success is tied here to the "winning" that is done – to how many dogs they have that are making a mark in the show or performance ring.” Another said that his/her nominees for most successful, “consistently breed dogs that meet the standard. They do not campaign dogs with handlers that do not display the quality we should expect. It is all done for their love and commitment to the breed.” Meanwhile, a third respondent defined success as “producing consistently healthy, long lived, good tempered dogs that can do anything.” One person even went so far as to say that a successful breeder is one who “[has] been able to make a healthy living from pup/dog sales”!
Some pointed to success in the show ring, others to success in the whelping box and still others to prestige, influence on other breeders and production of happy, healthy puppies.
Even show success was not as straightforward as one would think as people wrestled with whether it should be measured by the number of champions produced or the quality of the wins. This dilemma prompted one respondent to ask “How can you measure success? By the amount of champions produced or by the number of puppies?” Is a successful breeder one who produces many mediocre champions or one who produces a small number of quality dogs? Though in theory the answer may seem obvious, in practice we constantly see people finishing large numbers of unworthy dogs ostensibly in order to earn hall of fame, stud dog and brood bitch awards. Does that mean that they have been successful or merely persistent?
To complicate things further I asked participants to ponder their choices with relation to who they might characterize as the breeders producing the best/highest quality dogs. Most seemed to conclude that those who are winning are not necessarily those who produce the best dogs – hardly a surprising idea, but certainly one requiring more thought. Does the best dog, as is sometimes suggested, really NEVER win?
The Conclusion
When all was said and done, I had almost as many different definitions of these two words as I did total responses.
So what, you say?
From a linguistic perspective this is hardly significant, as to be effective a concept has to possess a certain amount of vagueness and ambiguity. In that vein, I would argue that the diversity of responses I received speaks to the incredible range of thoughts and opinions that makes our sport so dynamic.
Yet, from a practical point of view the subtleties of meaning or areas where emphasis is placed can have a profound impact on not only how we communicate but how we act. This is where the true philosophical value of such an exercise lays. If we agree that success/influence are the ultimate goals of most show-goers, we must in turn be concerned with how those concepts are defined because the actions they produce profoundly affect the paths our breed will take.
From the underpinnings of meaning that drive our language to the simple act of conversation, it is clear that what we say and what we mean are unilaterally tied to how we understand one another and our sport.
So, before your next doggie conversation take a second and ponder the survey questions. Think about what success, influence and quality mean in your breed and in your mind. Now ask your friends to do the same and compare answers – I bet you’ll find that in some cases, though you’ve been speaking the same words, you may as well have been speaking a different language. Either way, you’re guaranteed an interesting conversation.
___________________________
Amanda Kelly is an award-winning dog writer from Halifax, Nova Scotia. Along with her mother, Wendy, Amanda breeds top-winning Toy Manchester Terriers under the Fwaggle prefix. She is currently Editor of Canine Review, Canada's oldest independent dog magazine.
____________________________
Taking the Test
Take the Success v Influence poll for your breed by answering the following questions:
1) Who do you feel are the most influential breeders in your breed today?
2) Explain how you personally defined “influential” in the question above.
3) Why did you select each individual?
4) Who do you feel are the most successful breeders in your breed today?
5) Explain how you personally defined “influential” in the question above.
6) Why did you select each individual?
7) If you chose different breeders for the influential list than for the successful list, please explain your reasons below. How do you feel influence and success are related, if at all?
8) What breeders do you personally feel produce the best/highest quality dogs today?
9) How did you define “best/highest quality” in the question above?
10) Why did you select each individual?