This I agree with. I teach primary age children and have certainly had pupils in my class that have produced work that could be called sublime when one thinks of the level to which they are supposed to be working. Do I mean that I would compare their work favourably with someone of first class degree standard if I saw them side by side and had no idea who produced what? Of course not but you always have in mind what the person you're marking would be expected to produce given the circumstances and comment accordingly. Thus, a piece of work significantly in excess of what one would expect for a pupil of that age or a similar standard skating routine from someone on DOI can be called sublime because, given expectations, it is.

Language isn't an exact science imo (although it seems some may disagree) and I think any words like sublime/phenomenal/incredible/outstanding can certainly have a relative meaning depending on when and why someone is saying it. There are many definitions for sublime - supreme, outstanding, inspiring awe - all of which I could forgive someone for thinking about Hayley's performance on Sunday. I didn't actually, it was very good and easily the best on the night but sublime? No.

Exactly. If what Hayley did is sublime, what language is left for something better?

Also, "sublime" doesn't have the relative-to-levels meaning some are trying to give it. The Alps are sublime. A small hill isn't sublime even when it's the highest thing around.

As someone who studies literature I found the use of the word sublime to be a little frustrating. Jason should really read something from the Romantic era of literature if he wants to fully understand what sublime means.

Because that's how language works. There isn't one set of meanings for the Olympics and a different set for DOI.


"Excellent" and "perfect score" work the way you suggest. "Sublime" doesn't.

I don't think Jason meant "sublime for this level" either, btw.


Nonsense. "Intelligent" and "stupid" don't work like that. A child could easily be more intelligent than someone at university level, and no one is saying or suggesting otherwise.

In any case, not using a word does not bombard anyone with anything.

BTW, I still think the most over-marked last weekend was Sharron.

So, are we discussing Jason's judging ability here, or yet using it as ANOTHER completely ridiculous excuse to criticize Hayley?!? Because if it is.......just don't get me started!!

Whilst I'm not sure it really matters what words Jason uses to describe performances, given that half the words used by the judges on these sort of shows are made up on the spot....
For the sake of accuracy...
Websters dictionary definition of sublime
2.inspiring awe or admiration through grandeur, beauty, etc.
I think if Jason felt awed by the beauty of what Hayley produced in the context of the amateurs performing on DoI, then I think the word sublime could be said to be used correctly.
Of course he may be somewhat easily awed (that's not to say I didn't think Hayley gave a lovely performance, I think she did), but still, if he was awed, then sublime is a reasonable word to use.

It's about Jason's use of excessive praise that leaves him nowhere to go when something better comes along.

And Emily

Up to a point I agree with you, however it is easy enough to reconcile yourself to it if you accept that he is commenting on how good something is given the expectations which are reasonable at that stage of the show. In later weeks expectations should be higher so a similar comment would indicate improvement because a performance would have to be better to get the same reaction.
In the end, it makes absolutely no difference what comments are made or how big the gap between 1st and 2nd is, the only thing that matters is the position on the leader board, since that determines how many actual points are scored and hence is the only thing which influences the result.

For the first point, I'd be interested to know how you apply that reasoning given the range of meanings for the word sublime.

For the second, obviously anyone can infer meaning as they wish. However, I believe that Jason used the word sublime meaning that Hayley had exceeded his expectations and produced a performance which was, in his view, outstanding given the limitations of what any celeb can produce on such a programme. I don't think it's an unreasonable use of the word either although I don't agree with his interpretation of Hayley's performance as I've already said.

The supposed range of meanings is largely an artefact of the way some dictionaries try to account for ways in which the word has been used (some of them questionable, or metaphorical). Some dictionaries give only one meaning.


I don't think that -- "exceeded his expectations and produced a performance which was, in his view, outstanding given the limitations of what any celeb can produce on such a programme" -- is a reasonable paraphrase for a use of "sublime".

If he was "awed" by the beauty of said performance then it is.

Anyway....does it really matter?
Jason could just as well have said he was "confabulated" by the performance for all the relevance it would have. Jason is there as a pantomime villain, anything else is irrelevant.

Only if it were reasonable for him to be awed.

The word doesn't mean inspiring awe in some random person no matter how idiosyncratic their response. Unfortunately, there's a tendency for words to be weakened. "Awesome", for example, is supposed to mean "inspiring awe" but has weakened to the point where it's used to mean little more than "very good". "Sublime" hasn't (so far) undergone much weakening.


It shouldn't matter so much. I am surprised that so much effort is being devoted to fighting a straightforward point that shouldn't have caused any trouble, that point being: 'If she's already "sublime", what's left for when she gets better?'

I notice that no one has even suggested any language he could use for when she gets better.

Here are some words or suggestions:

Superlative
Peerless -
Perfect or Perfick
Exquisite
Extraordinary
dazzling
tour de force

But these words should be used for something so extraordinary it literally takes your breath away. Otherwise it would be debasing the word and using out of context or meaning which is, of course, what Jason did.

Hayley is quite good - she is very good indeed for an amateur. Not sublime in the true sense of the word. I stood in awe when I watched the Chinese Pairs Skaters earlier this week. Now they really are absolutely breathtaking and I gasped in amazement at their flawless performance.

I suppose people are also surprised (well at least I am) that you should seem quite so bothered by the use of the word in the first place. I agree that words have become weakened over time; everything now is "awesome" and "incredible" - minor reality show personalities are now "stars". In this day and age I'm quite sure that people will claim to be "awe-inspired" by a performance such as Hayley's on a show such as DOI. Whether others think it's reasonable for them to be so is a matter of opinion but if they truly feel that way then the word isn't particularly out of place. It is a shame that people seem to bandy superlatives around with gay abandon nowadays but that's the time we live in and the word sublime is obviously as susceptible to it as anything else.

However, I also still think that it is possible to refer to something as sublime at a certain level even if there are examples of it that are far superior at another level; I've had pieces of writing from 10 and 11 year olds that I could certainly call sublime for their age - I'm astonished that they produce such quality even though it's not on a par with writing from certain published authors. Mind you, I don't think Hayley's performance was in that class. Even for her level, it wasn't "awe-inspiring" in my view. Jason may think differently however and (whether we suspect him of exaggeration or not) maybe he was "awe-inspired" by her performance on Sunday.

I think you guys should leave this alone now....LOL !! He thought the performance was 'sublime'.....and it was....end of

No it wasn't . But it is possible that he thought it was .

No a set up in an integral part of a lift. Doing a lift off steps (complicated footwork ) is harder and would get credited. Getting into position to be lifted is not footwork.

Yes, it does. Sublime is not a quantifiable word, as much as you're trying to insist that it is.

I could quite easily look out of my window, sigh in happiness, and say that the view from here is sublime. And I can't see the Alps. Nobody could prove me wrong because it's not quantifiable. It's a subjective word, relative only to the things around it.




I love how you completely disregarded the part where I called one of my pupils sublime.

Originally Posted by Veri View Post
BTW, I still think the most over-marked last weekend was Sharron.


..and Gary.


I think Karen overmarked Gary (5.0) because she fancies him and Jason undermarked him (3.0) because he doesn't.
It lacks credibility whatever their reasons.

The problem I see is that whilst the marking is erratic, lots of people get undermarked (as well as overmarked) at times....but not Hayley. That's the trouble. I would criticise the marking in general, but I can see why some are particularly objecting to her marks. They are always top end.

I just watched the Olympic Ice Dancing, and a slip seems to put you at the bottom of the table. No way does someone fall on their backside and win a medal no matter what people might say on here.

But the difference between the "top" and "bottom" people in the Olympics is actually relatively small, so a small deduction in points can be devastating. In comparison, the difference between the competitors in Dancing on Ice is a lot bigger.

Nope, bottom down at 23, and the top is 41-43+

It was made very clear, a slip decimated their score.

Thanks icedragon.

I mean the difference in ability.

Also remember that DOI contestants can't get 41-43+ anyway.