Limitations of Reenacting--College Research Help

[STFeryus]

Hi Everyone,

I just recently wrote a paper in my Sophomore Composition class on the various portrayals of the Civil War. I did a fairly quick survey of art, literature, film, and ultimately reenacting, discussing the various limitations of each medium. With each limitation had by each portrayal, I argued how prejudices and biases can crop up as a result if the modern researcher is not careful in viewing these portrayals.

As an attempt to extend the audience of my finished project, I would like to generate a similar discussion here. I think that being able to reflect on our hobby, on both its high and low points, allows us to learn and move forward with our own impressions. So:

What do you feel are some limitations of reenacting? Or some very positive aspects of reenacting, in light of other forms of portrayal, including art and literature?

Do you think that either those limitations or positive aspects can lead to biases or prejudices in any way? If so, how do you think they can best be overcome?


Thanks for the help! And hopefully this can produce some friendly discussion.

[Becky Morgan]

Re: Limitations of Reenacting--College Research Help

Now remember, I'm stuck at the moment being one of the dreaded keyboard campaigners because of family health issues. I can't commit to a good event far enough in advance to be reasonably sure of not letting folks down. That said:

Limitations? The obvious ones in my area are modern encroachments on historic structures. It's possible to have a good Restored Government of Virginia fight in the courthouse on the third floor of the Customs House in Wheeling, but only if you keep the windows closed so you're not looking out at modern buildings or the (disguised, and out in the hallway) elevator. It's possible to watch a unit marching across the authentically painted Suspension Bridge and even past a period building or two...but there are traffic lights and modern pavement intruding. Like it or not, a hundred and fifty years of life has intruded on what was there during the war years, and what has survived is often changed.

It could be worse, because much is missing. The original railroad isn't available in Wheeling any more, the Athenaeum is gone, and the once-vital B&O Old Main exists only as a gravel road past Rosby's Rock. You could say the same of any city that was around then. Atlanta and Charleston played enormous roles, of course, but owing to a certain arsonist a lot of material culture was lost in a short span.

Modern legal and safety issues always rear their heads, too. Even if we had a perfectly preserved village on the site of some major battle, and even were we allowed to use it, we would never have the exact precise same conditions in every respect that existed on that day...not to mention that a live-fire reenactment with civilians like me trying to grab their stuff and hightail it might produce a lot of damage to the historic fabric and even more to the human fabric involved.

So, then, is it possible to have a completely, utterly authentic reenactment? Not quite. How close can we get? How close WILL we get with the coming of ever more accurate virtual reality technology?

So why bother at all? Obviously, non-authentic people will continue to have theme events. I'll commit heresy here by saying that I have no problem with those who want to dress up and play Rhett and Scarlett, so long as they don't claim that's what life was actually like for the vast majority in 186-whatever. However, theme camping doesn't answer many of the questions I have as an amateur historian and sometime writer of historical fiction, and it doesn't educate people who may never have any American history save for what they see as spectators at a weekend event.

Getting as close as we can will answer some of the questions. When you gather enough firewood to fire a stove for breakfast, you understand why period women are often depicted as nagging the kids to bring in kindling or go get some wood, or nagging the menfolk for split wood for the shed. The volume of wood you need for even one cooking fire is surprising. Knowing that, you can understand why an army in winter quarters could devastate a landscape so that, by the spring of 1863, there were supposedly only six large trees left in Suffolk County, Virginia. (I don't have the source in front of me, but from the LofC pictures I've seen, it can't be too far off.) For another example, shoes were a critical item of supply in the army. Civilians could and did make do, because most of us, even back then, weren't on the march. In my area, it would have been perfectly acceptable for a grown woman to be barefoot about her own property, and mosty of the time she'd be sending her own or a neighbor child to the store and such. However, for a man trying to march, especially in very hot or cold weather, makeshift foot covering or none at all could mean having to fall out after a relatively short distance.

Biases or prejudices? Certainly they can happen. We cannot truly see life from an 186xx perspective. Things seem torturous to us that our ancestors seemed to take in stride as unpleasant but routine. Also, we are ourselves, with our own upbringing, our own assumptions and our own wishes to see the world in a certain way. Getting rid of the 21st century blinders is as nearly impossible as finding the perfect period setting. Think of the war years as a tapestry that has worn almost threadbare, with bits and bobs of color still clinging to the heavy base. All we can do is to do whatever we can as best we can, constantly digging for the little bits and pieces that have crumbled off and trying, always, to put them in the right place again so the tapestry is not a faded image, but a bright whole. It won't ever be complete again, of course, but every one of us can find a couple of threads in an old diary brought to light or a book dug from the depths of some almost ignored library and set something back where it belongs.

[rebpvt1864]

Re: Limitations of Reenacting--College Research Help

In my opinion i'd like to see more male civilians. Maby it's the events I go to that I don't see a lot of them but when I do they are pretty shabby and not well researched. Especially if the event is in a town setting and there is only the one old man civilian with a straw hat vest and a camera...

[csuniforms]

Re: Limitations of Reenacting--College Research Help

What a question!? The only limitations I see are time and money. Time to do all that you want to do, and money to pay for that impression and trip expense.

For me the ultimate was always the National Park living history events. They have them at Shiloh, Fort Donelson and Chicamauga to name some. Here you will see the best of the best in terms of impressions.

What I still see and while I can understand the reasons for wanting to participate, is the guys doing Civil War in their 60's and 70's. Guys in their 60's and 70's were not there on the field unless you were in Joe Brown's Georgia Militia, Martin Green's Missouri State Guard, or that Iowa Regiment the Greybeards! But God Bless them they are out there doing want they want to do and I would never say stop if that is what makes it a fun weekend for you and yours.

I just had made a GAR uniform (GAR stands for Grand Army of Reenactors) and wear that or my civilian stuff-- I would have to lose 50 pounds and dye my hair black to fit in with you "whipper-snappers".

CSuniforms
Tom Arliskas

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Limitations of Reenacting--College Research Help

Hallo!

I'll play...

In the spirit of the questions, IMHO-

"What do you feel are some limitations of reenacting? Or some very positive aspects of reenacting, in light of other forms of portrayal, including art and literature?"

"Reenacting" is limited by:

1. What is doable (it is hard to be a crewman ON the U.S.S. Monitor or C.S.S. Virginia, or in a say 75,000 man army in the field)
2. What is desireable (actual shot and shell, wounds and death, sickness, illness, etc. are not)
3. What is affordable in terms of disposable Pasttime/Hobby income, time, and effort at ANY age (a consideration NUG heavily tilted toward "middle aged" lads rather than the archetypical or prototypical age and weight/height demographics of actual CW soldiers)
4. What is known about Life in the Past
5. What portions and fragments of what is known or believed about Life In the Past we choose to simulate or emulate as part of our Mental Pictures of what we see ourselves doing and where we see ourselves fitting in
6. How much time, energy, and money we have, and chose, to spend on a Pastime or Hobby
7. What works for us and those we associate with
8. The lack of a governing organization or association with enforceable and enforced rules. membership requirements, and standards for clothing, gear, impressions, acitvities, and events

"Positive aspects..."

1. Although spread out on a Sliding Scale of Imperfection, and Past Imperfect, "reenacting" can stimualte awareness, appreciation, formal and informal socio-historical, historical, archeological, and material culture explorations if not studies into the Past. It can open the doors to "preserving" elements of the Past and History in a time and climate where those things are falling by the wayside.

2. At varying levels and degrees, "reenacting" is a form of recreation, shared family activity, or social pastime.

3. "Reenacting" can also lead to efforts at the presevation of battlefields, sites, and CW material culture where much is under-appreciated of not threatened by commercial, social, and political assault.

"Art and literature..."

A harder one.
Who has ownership of history is an ongoing argument. NUG, our society and culture gives ownership of "history" to the academics, to authors, and to
Hollywood and TV. "Reenactors" on the other hand, take personal claim or ownership not only of history itself, but moreso in their varied if not at times creative (and wrong) way(s) of not only portraying it for themselves but interpreting and presenting it as "public education."

"Do you think that either those limitations or positive aspects can lead to biases or prejudices in any way? If so, how do you think they can best be overcome?"

It is a natural conflict.
When folks are spread out all over a spectrum, at various points of History-Heavy versus History-Light pursuits, all across a Sliding Scale of Imperfection there are biases and prejudices, if not politcs, strife, and conflict.
Simplistically put, so-called "Farbs" and "Mainstreamers" can dislike "Hardcores" or "Authentics" as being offensive, insulting, "Authenticity Police," "Stich Nazi's" and "Button Pissers." Simplistically put, so-called "Hardcores" or "Authentics" can dislike "Farbs and Mainstreamers" as being costumed "Powder Burners," "Rambo's," or "Yahoo's."
NUG, most folks do not like to hear, let alone be told that what they "do" is inferior, flawed, bad, wrong, a lie, or misleading the Public.

Best be overcome?

IMHO still, that implies a certain arrogance and intolerance that what some people chose to do for their Mental Pictures or Hobby is inferior, flawed, bad, wrong, a lie, etc., and needs changed, eliminated, or "overcome."

For me personally, I would like to see everyone be able to step out of a time machine between 1861-1865 and not be seen, perceived, or taken as anything different from those around them in physical appearance, speech, mannerisms, actions, etc.
But on the Sliding Scale of Imperfection, folks pick and choose their Mental Pictures, and what works for them, and at times that is like trying to mix oil and water, if not spark and powder keg.

And...

Birds of a feather, flock together
And so do pigs and swine.
Rats and mice will have their way
And so will I have mine.

Others' philosophies, heresies, and mileage will vary...

Curt

[guad42]

Re: Limitations of Reenacting--College Research Help

Art and Literature - A harder one.
Who has ownership of history is an ongoing argument. NUG, our society and culture gives ownership of "history" to the academics, to authors, and to
Hollywood and TV. "Reenactors" on the other hand, take personal claim or ownership not only of history itself, but moreso in their varied if not at times creative (and wrong) way(s) of not only portraying it for themselves but interpreting and presenting it as "public education."

Curt and Other,

This was a very good posting, and I was very pleased to read it. I've been away from this site for a few months, subject to the challenges of life, work, and a new baby on his way. As such, I have been a bad campaigner and a poor friend to those in my unit for some time. But that's another story.

I'd like to say something though about the above quoted portion of Curt's post. One of the great elements of good reenacting (I'm saying this as a bad reenactor) is that there is a constant interest by the "hardcore", "campaigner", etc. to strive towards greater and greater quality and perfection. He/she will spend more money and time, to the vexation of relatives, working on an impression(s) than some historians will spend on a well written book.

Books, films, shows, documentaries, on any historical topic are a hard sell to the general public. Surprising as that may seem. These mediums are subject to the times, the interest, and the marketability. Movies especially...often over the top PC fanciful storylines that don't take much from actual history. But more and more, books and documentaries fall subject to this. By trying to make everything fresh, new, and somehow more appealing to those who wouldn't normally care, these mediums sometimes suffer as a result. And I'm not just talking about names and dates, but content.

Campaigners however don't have to sell a script or pitch a product, they're not subject to the pressures of the publishing world. Good reenactors can still show you what it was like...sometimes.

-Sam Dolan

[Hank Trent]

Re: Limitations of Reenacting--College Research Help

Campaigners however don't have to sell a script or pitch a product, they're not subject to the pressures of the publishing world. Good reenactors can still show you what it was like...sometimes.

I dunno. It's my impression that there's still a lot of the same "selling" going on. Organizers have to convince participants to come and to stay. An event that sounds too boring, too difficult, too dangerous, too farby, too expensive, too uncomfortable, or whatever, won't attract enough participants to even get off the ground.

So there's a natural pressure to shape events to fit what reenactors want, in the same way there's a natural pressure to shape a movie or book to fit what the book-buying or movie-attending public wants. I've tried to suggest events, or recruit people for roles at events, and some things are very hard or impossible to "sell," to the point that the idea simply needs abandoned.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@gmail.com

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Limitations of Reenacting--College Research Help

Hallo!

I realize this is an editing job, but...

"Campaigners however don't have to sell a script or pitch a product,"

but I agree with Herr Hank here.

Were it not so, I would not feel that I been, boy and man, a snake-oil pitchman and salesman peddling a certain "history-heavy" product line since 1974.

And all of our efforts over the past few decades would have the Time Machine Model being universally adopted everywhere and "campaigner," "progressive," "hardcore" (what have you) events turning out 10,000 or 15,000 C/P/H lads at a crack.

;) :) :)

Others' mileage will vary...

Curt
Huckster Mess

(IMHO, one of the classic hybrids of Hollywood and Hollyweird was the 2001blockheadbuster "Pearl Harbor.")