Page 82 - ShowSight - May 2020
P. 82

                FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION
  Figure 1. Hayes Blake Hoyt (Mrs. Sherman Hoyt) with her Int. CH Nunsoe Duc de la Terrace of Blakeen, BIS Westminster, 1935.
prestigious awards. (See Figures 1 & 2.) In Figure 2, Jung Frau was winner of the Non-Sporting Group at Westminster in 1939, and in 1940 she was Best in Show over 4,027 entries at the prestigious Morris & Essex Kennel Club show held annually at Giralda, Mrs. Geraldine Rockefeller Dodge’s vast estate in Madison, New Jersey.
These definitions are just as important today—or perhaps even more important—as they were when Mr. Sabella’s book was pub- lished 39 years ago. Please note that even though the breed being discussed for the most part is Poodles, this information relates to every breed. The connections of form and function within the Poo- dle Standard will, I hope, provoke some thoughts and comparisons to whatever the reader’s breed might be. Please keep in mind that these definitions were written in 1966, over a half century ago, and though many things have changed, the truth in these definitions has not. The discussion of these four definitions will be continued in the next three issues, beginning, of course, with the first in this issue, “type.”
Type
In dog parlance, one of the most misused words is “type”; perhaps this is because many fanciers and even breeders interpret this word rather than define it. For instance, one breeder recently referred to type as “moving correctly”, another wrote “type is elegance”, and a Poodle breeder and judge remarked, “The blacks are always superior in type to whites,” an odd statement when one peruses Poodle show records for the last 20 years!
In order to define this word, one should go back to the origin of the Standard for any breed of purebred dog. The forerunner of a written Standard for each breed was undoubtedly a contest between similar kinds of dogs: Those which could run (Figure 3.) were raced against each other; those which could fight were pitted against other animals or each other; those which could herd (Figure 4) were given tasks in indi- vidual herding, etc. Naturally, the sort of dog which won most consis-
Figure 2. Hayes Blake Hoyt of Blakeen Kennels and her standard Poodle Ch. Blakeen Jung Frau, pictured in 1938.
tently was considered the best kind of animal to own for that particular purpose. He was the right “type” of dog.
Just as we do today, dog owners gathered with their dogs to discuss type; and quite often someone particularly familiar with the dogs’ duties as well as the dogs themselves would be called upon to decide which dog present appeared best suited to perform its appointed work. Indeed, this was the start of present day dog shows because the dog, even then, was judged on its appearance rather than its actions; in other words—which dog looked most suitable to race, to hunt, to fight, to herd?
Of course there were written descriptions of different kinds of dogs, first to help owners and breeders and, later, to assist the judges, for in time owners allowed their dogs to be judged by men not necessarily owners, breeders, or even participants in dog duties, but simply familiar with the requirements of a breed. This judge had to decide which dog most conformed to its breed description or Standard, which one was the correct type.
Today, the dog which most closely resembles its standard both in disposition and appearance is the most typical of a certain kind of dog developed for a particular purpose; it has type. From this point of view, the Bulldog’s roll is as sound as the Shepherd’s driving walk; the bent forelegs of the Pekingese (Figure 5 using a Basset example) are also as sound as the straight forelegs of the Fox Terrier (Figure 6). For without these various physical and mental conformations, each breed could not fulfill its varied services for mankind.
On the other hand, a lame dog is unsound as is a blind dog. In fact, any dog which is crippled, ill or lacking in the mental or physical attributes of its special natural powers is “unsound.” Therefore, through adverse circumstances, a typey dog could be unsound as well as typical.
But sound dogs do not necessarily possess type. One can love and admire a short-backed, glossy, thin-coated, muscled-up, broad-skulled mongrel with a good disposition and a fine, true way of moving on long, straight legs; nevertheless, such a dog could not herd sheep through
 80 | SHOWSIGHT MAGAZINE, MAY 2020
  



















































































   80   81   82   83   84