First Person Restrictions - Why Bother?

[coastaltrash]

Re: First Person restrictions - why bother?

About the single most retarded thing I have seen in my time during the hobby is guys doing an adjunct trying to maintain first person. Franklin and Corinth directly come to mind. Forced first person sounds like piss poor acting, no matter how you slice it. Keep the conversations about modern stuff to a dull roar, and be mindful of those around you.

I was unable to attend Race to Knoxville, but can say the COLD at DRL made for some great first person. Now mind you there was plenty of jaw jacking and gear smack going on around the fires at night. Plus I had a long conversation with one of my groomsmen there about the upcoming wedding.

[DougCooper]

Re: First Person restrictions - why bother?

About the single most retarded thing I have seen in my time during the hobby is guys doing an adjunct trying to maintain first person. Franklin and Corinth directly come to mind. Forced first person sounds like piss poor acting, no matter how you slice it. Keep the conversations about modern stuff to a dull roar, and be mindful of those around you.

I take exception to that statement. At both events there were plenty of outstanding opportunities for first person, in many different venues. If that works for us, from Brown's Stand to the provost to the hospital to the skirmish and picket lines to the battles themselves, why is that "retarded?"

If a unit like the ONV, CHAPs, Lazy Jacks or the Ground Hornets can maintain first person at almost any event...from Outpost to Chickamauga NPS to Corinth, I think that makes them better living historians, not retarded. It sure is more fun and a vastly better experience.

[Old Reb]

Re: First Person restrictions - why bother?

Pat,
I am retarded or I wouldn't be dressing up and playing Civil War soldier.

[Greg Barnett]

Re: First Person restrictions - why bother?

I was in first person the whole weekend. Apparently no one even noticed!

[Thomas Alleman]

Re: First Person restrictions - why bother?

This all can be summed up in this statement: You walk the walk, now can you talk the talk. First person is part of what we should be doing, wearing the outfit is only one part that is needed to transform you into your persona of a person living in the civil war. I know we all want that magic moment where we feel we are there and I felt it at Outpost 1999. At that event there was more First person going on than I ever heard. You do not have to have a super story but just transform your real life into a 19th century one. It only adds to your impression. If you cannot do it then just shut the hell up until you can, just kiddin. I remember that there was a FARB fire set up for those who needed to talk about the modern world. I think the what we have lost in reenacting is the reenacting part we are here to try to be in the Civil War, if not why would we not go to these out of the way sites, and research and sew awesome clothing, and get the coolest gear. I know that we do not see each other and when you met knew people you want to talk about who you are but yeah keep it low and out of the way. OK it took a little more to sum it up than I reckoned. I am not angle but I got one looking out for me.

[Mutt]

Re: First Person restrictions - why bother?

After reading the continued discussion here, I feel there may be some more misunderstanding. Perhaps I didn't put enough emphasis on the actions of the participants, and instead went on too long about the converstations. Like Brian said, the actions are another story.

I totally picked up on the emphasis on actions as I had noticed varying degrees of authentic actions/activities at events over the years. Action is IMHO way easier then first person dialogue to convey and improve; it is truly the first person activities anyway that make the events for me, more so then the first person conversation. Chatter in the ranks bugs the junk out of me. Taking hits with a chuckle or just plain no attempt at making look even half decent, bugs the junk out of me. Again, this stuff is not hard to improve, nor is drill.

The most authentic moments I've had involved banter around the fire about how much better one pard's cooking was then the other. Along with random acts like one guy jumping on another to see if "the old man can take it" which led to him getting a short ride round on on the jumped's back. Simple actions that led to feel like genuine camaraderie was about, a staple amongst soldiers who potentially came from the same town.

I'll note that I wasn't at the event whose action's spawned this discussion.

Anyway, that's my input.

Best,

[Gallinipper]

Re: First Person restrictions - why bother?

A disclaimer: I was not at this event either. As such, I'm only throwing out my meager $.02, as well.....

I've read this entire thread (so far) and come to two immediate conclusions.

1) There's not a gentleman who has posted here that you can't learn from. Heed their advice and you can never go wrong- because they won't steer you wrong. Some of them I know, and some I haven't had the pleasure of meeting, but here is a LOT of knowledge represented on this particular thread.

2) All things considered, IMHO nobody has said it better than Dave Eggleston did. His comments were straightforward and right to the point. Three cheers and a tiger for you, Dave!

Best wishes on your future FIRPER endeavors, it's definitely a "win-win" for you and for the hobby!

Rich Croxton

[coastaltrash]

Re: First Person restrictions - why bother?

Doug,
Corinth and Franklin were bad even by mainsteam standards. I am not saying the efforts at Brown's stand or the picket post were worthless efforts but in the case of the provost it only makes sense when everyone is on the same page. Its obvious that a lot of the members of the NSA were not on the same page as the leadersdip dispute the intentions being the best effort to lead horses to water.
But when you're standing picket in a parking lot....

Uncle Tom,
I'm on the bus with you. Still have nothing but respect and admiration for the TGH and their efforts. Need to make a trip out again, I blinked and it has been 3 years.

[talkToTheHat]

Re: First Person restrictions - why bother?

I came into re-enactment after spending many years as a Live Action RolePlayer* and I thought I'd have little problem staying in FirPer (or In Character as I know it), yet I found myself hitting a huge brick wall or two.

Firstly is in the internal boundary, when using the same name for my impression as myself, I have to to work out whether someone is asking me or my impression a question before I can answer, and quite often there's an automatic response come out of my mouth before I've had time to consider one.( Particularly difficult is picking the correct form of 'yes')

Second is the lack of any visual indication of whether someone is visual indication of the context of a conversation. It's common for larpers to raise a hand to indicate an out of character/rules question, or wear/carry and armband/flag/deadman marker, and it quickly becomes taboo amongst groups serious about the immersion side of things to use such measures just to change the topic of conversation.

I've heard a suggestion from a friend in my regiment about being required to do something taboo like removing one's hat before breaking character, which I know would help me immensely and maybe the association between physical taboo and leaving FirPer. I suspect it may reduce appearances of authenticity from a distance but if immersion is the goal then this may aid the process.

*I know this is holy war on the other side of the fence, and that I'm a heretic for being here, If I've just struck a match in the arsenal than please throw the required bucket of water.