Diversity in reenactment units

[wilber6150]

Why would an historically informed black man want to portray a Confederate, or even pretend to be a "typical" northern infantryman. The northern army was segregated, and any educated participant wouldn't want to imagine he was part of an outfit that historically wouldn't have accepted him.

Yet, we have non-white historical reenactors, and this thread is not just about black, but Asian and Hispanic people who want to be reenacotors. So by your mindset anyone of a non-white race who wants to reenact is clearly non-educated...

Re-enactor's concerns about authenticity regarding black participation is purely theoretical. It is an issue you will never face, and I'd reckon the odds of your being hit by a minie ball or suffering a saber slash to be somewhat higher than encountering a black man who wants to portray a Confederate.

Hmmmm black reenactors are figments of peoples imagination? And my gosh what do we do with a Asian or Hispanic person who wants to portray a union infantryman..

I'm a shooter, and am used to women shooting both in and out of uniform. As a shooter historical authenticity and precedent are secondary concerns. We care about accuracy rather than authenticity

So do you use modern scopes with your Springfields...?

If women want to participate in Revolutionary war re-enacting, they do so in gender appropriate roles, or they don't participate with the BAR.

Not sure where you get your info on Rev war, but its a tad out of date...First, BAR is only one of several organizations and has been waning for years, British brigade and Continental line being two of the biggest with smaller ones like the BVMA doing smaller events.. The majority of the biggest events have been put on by the BB and the CL and in those events I have seen women in the firing ranks and manning artillary...

So in summary you are saying that this whole line of thinking is moot since there are no blacks or non-whites who want to reenact and if there are they must be uneducated since they want to reenact in a unit who wouldn't wanted them 145 years ago anyway...

[Iron Jim Rackham]

My issue is black rather than "non white"participation. Asians and Hispanics are documented to have fought in the Civil War beside white soldiers. Blacks fought as segregated units. You can admit anyone you want into a re-created unit. If your goal however is authenticity the portrayal of integrated units is inaccurate.

I have no idea what your scope reference pertains to. If I'm shooting an original muzzleloading issue arm, or reproduction of one, scopes would naturally be inappropriate and prohibited from competition.

I'm well aware that the BAR is not the exclusive organization for Revolutionary War re-enactment. It is the oldest, and has maintained the highest standards of authenticity.


I'm not a re-enactor. I find it hysterical however, that a hobby presumably devoted to the authentic interpretation of history overlooks significant facts pertaining to the original composition of the armies for the simple expedient of encouraging "diversity."

Many communities have afternoon "Renaissance faires" devoted to showing kids a good time in a vague historical setting that includes everything from the dark ages to the enlightenment. Any correlation between these faires and actual history is purely accidental.

If you would like to do the same with the Civil War, you're off to an excellent start. Get some food concessions, gift shops, Civil War theme games, and it will be fun for everyone. It just won't be historically authentic. Gee, maybe you could even combine it with a Renaissance Fair and have a female US Grant jousting with a black Robert E Lee.( Hmmm, if a black Robert E. Lee carried a lance, would it be appropriate to call him Spike Lee)

It's your hobby, not mine. You can play this game however you want. Considering that re-enactors play in public, be prepared to be evaluated by the public on your performance. When I can detect a woman dressed as a soldier ( which when it occurred 143 years ago resulted in their immediate discharge) I will evaluate your performance as a game rather than consider it as an historical presentation.

Sadly even in your summation, you miss my point. My point isn't that their may not be black men who want to re-enact, simply that no historically educated black man would ever think of wanting to re-enact Confederate. Any historically informed black man would also realize that blacks served together in segregated Federal units, rather than beside white soldiers.

But do whatever makes you happy. You can combine Civil War with Cowboys and Indians or Science fiction if you like. People interested in history can always read about it.

[Rob Weaver]

This thread has become absurd, and is, I'm afraid, a shining illustration of why there are not more people of color who reenact. Loud and clear the message is "It's not your history." I'm outta here.

[wilber6150]

You just don't get it .....

[bill watson]

"Why would an historically informed black man want to portray a Confederate,"

Since 1990 I have seen historically informed black men who portray Confederates and others who portray slaves and one woman who portrayed a black house servant so she could accompany her white friend to events. But Iron Jim, if you aren't a reenactor, you wouldn't have seen that. Sorry we seem hysterically funny, but when you attempt to portray a period of history that is not only built upon a foundation now socially unacceptable, but also portrayed in a modern context where modern values are in play, it is pretty much inevitable that the conversation gets around to exactly what the history was (as opposed to the stereotypes) and exactly what needs to be done when modern context and awkward historical context come into contact.

---------------
A separate thought not directed at Iron Jim's remark: There's a name for people who enjoy pain, and setting up conditions that make "success" impossible is just another way of making sure you feel pain. Are we turning into a hobby of masochists? Following everything said by some in this thread to its logical conclusion leads me to think there are probably about four people in the country who have the right age, body type, financial income, and cultural background to be entitled to be reenactors.

Or has the recent good time had by most at At High Tide instead taught us that the definition of success needs to change from context to context? I'd say dropping an obvious black man, an Asian or anything else into view in the ranks, something that would raise questions in an observer's mind , would be much more of a problem in a movie, where the questions can't be answered, than it is at an event we put on that is intended at least in part for public consumption. We can at least use the anomaly as a springboard for discussion. Unless the director of a movie does the same, the viewing public is left with an unexplained seeming incongruity, and at a level they can grasp. (Most of them won't find a cloth canteen strap in 1861 incongruous and upsetting and detrimental to the movie, like we do. A black man waving a Confederate flag, you bet.)

The other thought is this: There's been some discussion about lineage. And about heritage, and what that maybe entitles you to. Let me confuse the issue further, just to show there are no simple answers. What if a black man had a white Confederate ancestor? Where does he line up? Who does he fall in with? Came across this in North Carolina at a cemetery monument rededication for a Confederate. Of the 100+ family descendants who turned up for the ceremony and barbecue, nine or so were black. None of them were reenactors, but what if they wanted to be? Where do they go?

[flattop32355]

None of them were reenactors, but what if they wanted to be? Where do they go?

The obvious answer, Bill, is "42".

Beyond that, how accurate to the historical period do they want to be? What are their goals? Where do they live? What roles are they willing or desire to accept? Many, many other questions.

In the end, it comes down to the individual, and those individuals with whom they will be interacting.

Each of us has to answer the tough questions for ourselves. Sometimes the answer may vary according to the "authenticity level" of the event, or the personal standards and goals one is seeking to achieve at a given event, or some other criteria.

There are events where amalgamating into a mixed race company would not concern me in the least, and others where I would find it a silly thing to try to do. There are cases where the historical record is less important than modern sensibilities, and those cases where the historical record trumps all.

Some people cannot live with that; I can.

[Rob Weaver]

There are events where amalgamating into a mixed race company would not concern me in the least, and others where I would find it a silly thing to try to do. There are cases where the historical record is less important than modern sensibilities, and those cases where the historical record trumps all.

Some people cannot live with that; I can.

I swore I was going to swear off this thread, really I did, then someone had to go and say something I can agree with. If a museum were hiring interpreters, or hiring a unit for a particular impression, take, for instance, F Co of the 7th Wisconsin, then I can indeed see where particulars such as ethnicity would indeed impact the choice of personnel. I would expect this hypothetical museum also to care deeply about the material culture hung on the man and to train carefully the actors for the role they are going to be playing. This example, however, is a long way from the volunteer setting which the majority of us do our living history and reenacting in. Involving volunteers on a gratis basis (even more of one where the volunteers provide their own equipment, training and amenities) mitigates the circumstances a good bit in the other direction.

[flattop32355]

I swore I was going to swear off this thread, really I did, then someone had to go and say something I can agree with.

Don't ya just hate it when that happens?

[tompritchett]

Why would an historically informed black man want to portray a Confederate, or even pretend to be a "typical" northern infantryman.

I find your comment very interesting because there were indeed a small number of black freedmen that fought for the Confederacy. Forrest had them. And guess what - not all slave owners were white. Yes, some freedmen in some states (e.g., Louisiana) were allowed to own slaves and did so. The reason that I find this particularly interesting is that I have potential member (he has attended one reenactment with us) who is indeed black.

For that matter, how many informed black men do you encounter pretending to be WW2 combat infantrymen.

Maybe one that was wanting to honor the black soldiers that fought in the 555th Parachute Infantry Regiment or the 92nd Infantry Division. And although you specifically mentioned infantry, there was also the 761st Tank Battalion an all black tank battalion (this was the unit to which Jackie Robinson was assigned as an Armor officer prior to being released from the Army).

Re-enactor's concerns about authenticity regarding black participation is purely theoretical. It is an issue you will never face, and I'd reckon the odds of your being hit by a minie ball or suffering a saber slash to be somewhat higher than encountering a black man who wants to portray a Confederate.

Well I guess I have been indeed shot by both minie balls and been slashed by sabers, because, in addition to the individual that is interested in my unit, I saw several black confederate reenactors in ranks in the ANV camp this past weekend at Gettysburg. But then when does first hand knowledge and experience and ever trump someone else's theoretical model?

[ole soldier]

"The all-Black, 332nd Fighter Group consisted originally of four fighter squadrons, the 99th, the 100th, the 301st and the 302nd.
From 1940-1946, some 1,000 Black pilots were trained at Tuskegee.
The Airmen’s success during World War II – not losing a single bomber to enemy fire in more than 200 combat missions – is a record unmatched by any other fighter group. "


http://www.tuskegee.edu/Global/story.asp?S=1127695

Not infantry either, but you know....