A recent thread on a new movie was recently posted, the plot of which pokes fun at the reenacting hobby(ies). We can blame it on Hollyweird. We can blame it on farbs.
But, I'm wondering if should we be blaming ourselves.
Question 1:
Do "we" (as in "Us", not "Them" or all of us-n-them together) do enough interpretation for the public?
(Quantity, regardless of quality)
Question 2:
Are we doing things that are new, different, and/or interesting in our efforts to interpret for the public? Not "new/different/interesting" from OUR point of view, but from the point of view of THE PUBLIC. When we manage to get an audience, are we holding their interest?
(Quality, not quantity)
Question 3:
What are some new and innovative ideas for interpretation? Anybody doing something new/different this year? Anybody have an idea in your head for something new, but you've never had the chance to try it at an event?
I may be all-wet... but my premise is that blaming "Hollywood", "Hollywierd", "The Media", or anyone else is a cop out and we are just bellyaching.
Things are funny when they ring-true. If the public finds it funny, then could it be true. Could we work harder to provide a counter-point to the unspoken argument in many of these films that we are all just overgrown children and racist baffoons?
(In the words of Mike Myers as "Linda Richmond") Discuss.
I'm curious about folks take on questions 1 and 2. And, I'm curious what we can come up with on Question 3. I don't mean this to beat anyone down. Rather, if films like this are going to drive introspection, I'd like to see healthy introspection and something good come out of it.
But, I'm wondering if should we be blaming ourselves.
Question 1:
Do "we" (as in "Us", not "Them" or all of us-n-them together) do enough interpretation for the public?
(Quantity, regardless of quality)
Question 2:
Are we doing things that are new, different, and/or interesting in our efforts to interpret for the public? Not "new/different/interesting" from OUR point of view, but from the point of view of THE PUBLIC. When we manage to get an audience, are we holding their interest?
(Quality, not quantity)
Question 3:
What are some new and innovative ideas for interpretation? Anybody doing something new/different this year? Anybody have an idea in your head for something new, but you've never had the chance to try it at an event?
I may be all-wet... but my premise is that blaming "Hollywood", "Hollywierd", "The Media", or anyone else is a cop out and we are just bellyaching.
Things are funny when they ring-true. If the public finds it funny, then could it be true. Could we work harder to provide a counter-point to the unspoken argument in many of these films that we are all just overgrown children and racist baffoons?
(In the words of Mike Myers as "Linda Richmond") Discuss.
I'm curious about folks take on questions 1 and 2. And, I'm curious what we can come up with on Question 3. I don't mean this to beat anyone down. Rather, if films like this are going to drive introspection, I'd like to see healthy introspection and something good come out of it.
Comment