FEPA News

FEPA NEWS 45 36 FEPA Exhibiting Finally, it is very important that the title of the exhibit is consistent with what is shown in the exhibit and the explanations in the introduction page. Use only very little space in the introduction page (if any) to discuss earlier or later issues not shown in the exhibit. Objective and Scope When doing something it is always good to be conscious about what you are aiming to achieve. This also applies to the presentation of a stamp collection, even if it is just to present the stamps of a given country/period and share the collection whilst competing for the highest possible medal. It is also very important to explain the scope of the collection. An explicit and sound reasoning for the chosen period/issue must be provided. There should be a defendable logic to the start and the end point. Typically, a natural cut-off point is a new design, new currency or new regime. In a traditional exhibit the cut-off should be based on a philatelic reason (such as a change of printer or watermark) and not on postal history logic (e.g. a postal reform or change of postal rates). One should always be prudent with leaving something out of a given period or issue. If the high/difficult values of a series are not part of the exhibit, the spectator (jury) will immediately suspect that these have been left out because the collection is weak with regard to these stamps. If there is no good argument for excluding the stamps, points will be dropped for ‘treatment’ – and probably also for ‘rarity’. Again, if something has been left out the decision should be justified. Context and General Information relevant to the subject It is useful to provide some background information to place the stamps exhibited in a social historic context. Were the stamps issued by a rich society with a highly developed infrastructure or was it rather the opposite - perhaps a society recovering from war? Were the stamps printed by professionals or was the setting much more rudimentary or experimental? The spectator’s mind set should be aligned with the reality of the material shown to appreciate the general rarity. ‘Setting the scene’ in words can be supplemented by numbers such as the number of inhabitants or volume of mail that can be compared with effect to similar data from more widely known countries. Similarly, various specifics relevant to understanding of the area shown can be pointed out, e.g.: • Some countries/issues offer a lot of proof material whilst it is almost unknown from others. • Quality is relative. ‘Full margins’ represents much higher quality when it is a collection of Thurn und Taxis as opposed to a collection of early Austria. • The stamps of, for example, most British Caribbean possessions were printed in significantly smaller quantities than stamps of Great Britain during the same period. Literature references The official line is that “ A list of the most important literature references ” must be included in the introduction page. I am a bit at odds on this one. Why does the jury want to see such a list? The off-the-shelf answer is that it is to indicate that the exhibitor has consulted the most relevant writings on the subject shown. But frankly, this should be evident from the treatment in the display. If the literature provides guidance to distinguish different printings and this aspect is not covered in the collection there is obviously a shortcoming in the treatment. A literature list is not needed to reach this conclusion.