What irks me most about reenacting

[billsrebelrose]

Hi group, I'm a long lost post-er from awhile back, just now re-signing up! I've been reading the posts this week and just had to whine about something that's been bothering me since the New Market event this year...

...now, I'm all for authenticity. I worked in living history for the NPS right after I graduated college in 2004 and had to know about the period in order to work in the exhibits (I give a mean tour of the Dry Goods Store in Harpers Ferry). That said, I understand the point of trying to be as authentic as possible during an event. It's important that spectators see a good representation of the 1860s - especially in living history opportunities.

However. It bugs me more than anything when people start getting picky about authenticity. I'll cite, for example, a recent post about haversacks here in the forums. There was bickering about what should/shouldn't be in a haversack. And, so I don't seem like I'm picking about the forums, at the New Market event, a comment was made that a soldier was cooking with modern utensils - and this was after the camp had closed to spectators.

If we are going to get rid of Farb, shouldn't we be getting rid of ALL the Farb, not just what we feel like? CW soldiers didn't have port a johns. There were no women in camp either. So, shouldn't we be complaining about all the wives and girlfriends sleeping in soldiers tents (yes, myself included)? What about female soldiers - that are obviously women with no attempt to disguise it. But we won't change. We like our modern conveniences.

When it comes down to it, authenticity is number one. But I think if people are going to be particular about one aspect, they should be particular about every aspect - not just what makes them comfortable.

Okay, off my soapbox for now.

[Ephraim_Zook]

Dear Miss Heather,

Egad. Where the heck have YOU been? Authentic reenactors DO complain about women in camp, women sleeping in tents, the tents themselves, female soldiers, modern cooking implements, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.

Clearly you go to "family camping with a Civil War theme" type events, not reenactments of historic events. You have apparently forgotten that during the Civil War they didn't blow the 5 o'clock whistle so that the soldiers could stop soldiering and trot out all kinds of creature comforts for the night.

"If we are going to get rid of Farb, shouldn't we be getting rid of ALL the Farb, not just what we feel like? What a concept! Get rid of farb!! That ought to set the hobby back on its heels!!!

Maybe you won't change, but plenty of reenactors have. Still going to the wrong events?

And Yep -- I've been to events where there are no portajohns, either.

[hanktrent]

If we are going to get rid of Farb, shouldn't we be getting rid of ALL the Farb, not just what we feel like? CW soldiers didn't have port a johns. There were no women in camp either. So, shouldn't we be complaining about all the wives and girlfriends sleeping in soldiers tents (yes, myself included)? What about female soldiers - that are obviously women with no attempt to disguise it.

Okay, I was following you until the "myself included" part. That old thing about being part of the solution, or part of the problem, comes to mind.

But if you're serious, you really need to head over to the Authentic Campaigner forum, or look at the guidelines for (or actually attend) more accurate events. Not only have people complained about porta johns and women in camp or disguised as soldiers, they've done something about them. If those things bug you, there are events where those things aren't there. Sanitary waste disposal can be a legal problem at some events, but at sites where period methods are allowed, they're used.

I've got my own pet peeves about selective authenticity as well, but you might as well go to the more authentic events first, and then see what's next to complain about. And yes, there are opportunities for women to be included. If you're seriously interested, email me or my wife Linda at lindatrent@zoomnet.net .

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[billsrebelrose]

What a concept! Get rid of farb!! That ought to set the hobby back on its heels!!!

This is a hobby. This is not a profession. Yes, I guess that I go to "family style" events where apparently nobody cares about authenticity. I also thought that this was a section of the forum where people could vent and not be condemned for it.

There was no need to be rude to me in your post, Mr. Zook. I wasn't trying to start a fight, I was irritated that I had to watch a young man get screamed at because he cooked with foil (after the spectators had left) by a gentleman that sat beside his tent all day smoking modern cigarettes. I was under the impression I could vent here, but apparently I was wrong. Apparently this section is only for "hardcore" reenactors such as yourself that don't take the time to explain things to people to correct farb or inaccuracies.

Mr. Trent, on the other hand, I thank for explaining "authentic campaigns". I didn't know about them and thank for his input.

This is the kind of thing that is driving lots of reenactors I know to quit the hobby. Reenacting should be enjoyable, not political. I'm for authenticity, but when it boils down to "there is no way that ____ would have used/said/worn _____ and you are stupid for assuming they did" it isn't fun.

How are we honoring the memory of CW soldiers this way? Maybe that's not important to some; maybe the fact that they have the correct blend of jean-cloth or have the perfect number of stitches around a button hole is much more of a priority.

Well, I'm glad to hear Mr. Zook that your events are much more authentic and fun and important and full-filling than my oh so wrong family events. I'm glad that you can fully immerse yourself in the 1860s and live the hard life a soldier. But at the end of the day, we're both packing up and getting into our cars and driving home. Regardless of how you look at it, we're both just playing dress up.

[skamikaze]

if you want to get real technical, nobody over six foot should be allowed on the feild, or over 150 lbs... and there should be a lot less teeth

[MStuart]

This is a hobby. I also thought that this was a section of the forum where people could vent and not be condemned for it.

Holy Mother of God!!!!!!!!!! (Depends on what you're venting about)

Mark

[Sgt_Pepper]

Holy Mother of God!!!!!!!!!!

Watch your language. Oaths are the worst form of profanity, as far as I'm concerned.

(Depends on what you're venting about)

Mark

Please explain what you mean by "Depends on what you're venting about".

[MStuart]

While my post was meant somewhat tongue in cheek, it does have somewhat of a double edge. Being somewhat of a "veteran" here, and being a mainstreamer to boot, there's a whole slew of things that one can post that gets the competitive juices flowing (and by competitive, I mean the "competition" between the different sides of the hobby, i.e. mainstreamer vs. campaigner). One of them was Miss Heather's "none of us are truly authentic" post. That's been done here several times over the years with basically the same replies as Mr. Myzie's, some even more confrontational. That's where the epitaph came from. A sort of "uh oh" here we go again".

"Going to the wrong events?" is the standard question to mainstreamers these days when authenticity issues and questions arise. IMHO it's condescending and elitist to a degree and is nothing more than stating that "Your events stink, mine don't". Had Miss Heather complained that "too many folks used modern utensils and what's wrong with them" I doubt she'd have received the reply she did, or taken it to be a rebuke. Hence, "depends on what you're venting about" .

Mark Maybe I shoulda said "Criminy!"

[Pvt_Idaho]

[QUOTE=hanktrent] Not only have people complained about porta johns and women in camp or disguised as soldiers, they've done something about them. If those things bug you, there are events where those things aren't there...

I've got my own pet peeves about selective authenticity as well, but you might as well go to the more authentic events first, and then see what's next to complain about. And yes, there are opportunities for women to be included.

--Places for women? In the kitchen, Hon, with the young-ins. Or is it at home taking care of the kids so you and your pards can play?

--Try being a woman who plays a soldier (one with an impression that got "him" pushed out of a ladies room recently) and go try to play in the sandbox with some so-called "authentics". You'll feel really included really quick. HA! HA! HA! I just died laughing.


Audrey Scanlan

[hanktrent]

--Places for women? In the kitchen, Hon, with the young-ins.

Well duh, of course that's the most typical place for a woman in the 1860s. If you think that role is somehow less interesting, or less important to the nation, than what soldiers were doing in the 1860s, that's your sexism showing, not mine.

Ever been handed a fully furnished, functional period house to run for two days, along with an extended family? The more that folks are willing to give to events (in attitude and commitment), the more events will give to them.

There's a whole nuther world of authentic reenacting out there for both women and civilian men, if you look for it. It really is as close to gender neutral as one can get, given historic limitations, and it's definitely gender neutral in the planning and research stages, with the input of women and men respected equally.

Last year at an event I put on, we needed reenactors to portray the staff of a country inn, and most were male, including me as the head cook. Next year, at a similar event put on by my wife, the participants will trade off, and the staff will be mostly female, including the head cook. Equally accurate, equally demanding, equally important to the event.

If female reenactors want physical challenges equivalent to male campaigners, I tried to put on a well-documented middle-class civilian camping trip for both men and women, but couldn't find enough women ready for even five or ten miles of period backpacking, in combination with the authenticity standards (no hidden modern items, no modern talk). I think it's going to happen with just me and my wife and a male friend, but it was a good example of a physically demanding, well documented, gender-neutral situation, just not something enough women wanted to take advantage of.

And I'm not even going to talk about the idea I had for a two-day 20-mile event that included swimming a river--with equal roles for men and women. But if female reenactors want respect and accuracy equal to male reenactors at events, it's happening right now, and if they want both accuracy and campaign-like endurance, the potential is there as well.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net