Whats the difference?

[BigDuke634]

I've seen some of you talking about " mainstream " reenacting and "authentic" reenacting. What's the difference?

[Pennsylvania Reserves]

One is better than the other...according to some. Not sure which tho.

[bob 125th nysvi]

no no no ..................

There are some question which should never be asked because they can not be answered (although some knowledgable windbag will try).

That's the real reason the CW was fought.

It wasn't over the Union, or slavery or states rights it was over who was a more authentic representation of a CW soldier, the USA or the CSA.

Remember, I'm still bringing those 'them' tags to the next event.

[MStuart]

I've seen some of you talking about " mainstream " reenacting and "authentic" reenacting. What's the difference?

If this isn't flame bait, or the next "us vs. them", then I've been in a cave for the last 10 years.

Mark

[BigDuke634]

I swear I'm not baiting anyone. I would just really like to know. The only stupid question is the one unasked.

[Pennsylvania Reserves]

It's like being in high school all over again...and trying to separate the preppy kids from the jocks, and the dorks from the popular...the only way to fit in with "that crowd" is to change the way you dress and the music you listen to.

thats how i look at it...

[Milliron]

I've seen some of you talking about " mainstream " reenacting and "authentic" reenacting. What's the difference?

OK, I'll close my eyes and bite.

"Mainstream" reenactors tend not to be as preoccupied with material culture of the WBTS, although they may be quite knowledgeable in other respects.

"Authentics" are more preoccupied with material culture, and may or may not be as well versed in other aspects of the War. Authentic reenacting seeks to remove as much modern intrusion as possible to replicate as closely as possible the actual day-to-day life of a Civil War soldier. That is the focus. Mainstream reenactors are less concerned about this aspect but often seem to enjoy educating the public about the war itself as well as soldier life, as well as experiencing the life of a soldier themselves, up to a point.

In many ways it is a "first person" versus "third person" approach to living history. That is probably the simplest way I can explain it.

[Anders]

Mainstream implies what the majority of participants are doing or how they are doing it.

It does not specify levels of farb.

Authentic is open to debate- what is authentic to one is farb to another.

IMHO- there are as many definations as reenactors, and none is more correct than the other.

So- in ending-

There are different events with different stated goals and regulations. Judge each on its own merit and resist the urge to try to slap a convient lable on every event. Not all pegs fit in the same hole.

Pards,

[flattop32355]

I've seen some of you talking about " mainstream " reenacting and "authentic" reenacting. What's the difference?

If you take 100 reenactors and ask them that question, you'll get at least 101 different answers.

My definition, in a nutshell, is that mainstream reenacting is willing to sacrifice some aspects of "authenticity" for the sake of comfort, economics, safety, etc, for at least part of the time during a weekend. This is especially true of, but not necessarily limited to, the time after the spectators have gone.

Authentic reenacting seeks to sacrifice "authenticity" only for safety reasons as needed, working to do things as close to the original as is believed possible to do, and to do it for the entire time of the reenactment.

Since the devil is in the details, everyone has their own standards and definitions of these, and other, terms and catch phrases in the hobby.

[Pvt Schnapps]

"Authentic" reenactors are far better than mainstream reenactors.

Problem is, I read somewhere that there are only twelve truly authentic reenactors in all of North America, and none of them agree on who the other eleven are.

However, they all agree that I am not one of them.

A "mainstream" reenactor, on the other hand, is the guy who just bought your old stuff on e-bay. Nice fellow, but really...

Clear now?

[terry sorchy]

My best advise is to go to a mainstream event, then go to a C/P/H event. You can even go as a spectator. Then you make up your mind.
Terry Sorchy
Please Gentlemen do not infer that Authentic or what ever you want to call them, reenactors do not talk to the public or know as much about the war or the era, or the soldiers lives, or the drill, or camp and military activities as mainstreamers. That is very offensive and in most cases very untrue.

[tompritchett]

My definition, in a nutshell, is that mainstream reenacting is willing to sacrifice some aspects of "authenticity" for the sake of comfort, economics, safety, etc, for at least part of the time during a weekend. This is especially true of, but not necessarily limited to, the time after the spectators have gone.

Authentic reenacting seeks to sacrifice "authenticity" only for safety reasons as needed, working to do things as close to the original as is believed possible to do, and to do it for the entire time of the reenactment.

I could not have said it any better myself.

[BigDuke634]

Well, I got the answer that I was looking for. I really didn't mean to stir the pot. But thanks for all the good feedback guys.