Need Some Info!

[Chris Suppelsa]

Re: Need Some Info!

How about an article on how to do reserch?

Dave,
I love you :wink_smil

Chris Suppelsa

[easttnfed]

Re: Need Some Info!

Kevin,

The myth that CCG does not pay for feature articles is false. I receive a check from the publication each and everytime my articles run. I am not going to discuss the amount that I get paid. Lets just say that I won't go hungry or be on the streets when I do get my checks from them and working for the publication has its rewards also (that I'm not going to go into details with either)

Instead of bashing the publication about the amount that they pay or saying that they do not pay, it would be nice to receive some form of insight to what you would like to see put into the publication. I am trying to help them get more information out there to those that need it. I've known the editor and the publisher for a long time. When they asked me to start writing for them and help covering events, I jumped at the oppurtunity because I knew that not a lot of the publication's subscribers knew a lot about certain things that you or I know about.

I thought about coming and posting here for some insight about what would make the publication a little bit better than it is. If I made a mistake at doing so, then I'm sorry.

For those that did respond and give me your ideas, thank you. I am currently researching several things that you said you would like to see writen about and hopefully have them in the upcoming issues. Again, thanks go out to all that recommened something.

[Hargis, G. 5 A-1]

Re: Need Some Info!

[QUOTE=easttnfed]I thought about coming and posting here for some insight about what would make the publication a little bit better than it is. If I made a mistake at doing so, then I'm sorry.

Was it a mistake? I don't think so.
Your fellow members of the forum DID share their thoughts (as we ought).
Some of the input was what you asked for, some wasn't — but if I only spoke when I was sure EVERYONE would make no objection to my remarks, I'd be mute. (I flatter myself to think that that would be a bad thing)
I wish you well with your research and writing and look forward to reading it in the Gazette.
Putting good info in the hands of the whole "Blast from the Past" set can only be a good thing.)
I would like to read a piece on period marksmanship (range finding, sight setting, and points of aim — that sort of thing.) I'd like to see it done as a matter of historical interest and as an impression enhancer.

Glen E. Hargis
a.k.a. all sorts of folks
Rackensacker Mess
Co.A, 1st U.S. Inf. (repop)

[Kevin O'Beirne]

Re: Need Some Info!

Jeremy,

I apologize for my presumption that CCG no longer pays its writers. When I wrote for them they did not, nor had they ever paid anyone that I know of, based on my discussions with former CCG editor Nicky Hughes, his predecessor Bill Holhsuch (sp?), and former Citizen's Companion editor Susan Hughes.

My views about the current incarnation of CCG are somewhat colored of late:

http://www.authentic-campaigner.com/forum/showthread.php?p=35334#post35334

That, and the other things I've seen in CCG in the past two or three years, both in terms of the content they print and the quality of editing (articles without bylines or bylines attiibuted to someone named "Staff Reports"; articles that end mid-sentence and are not continued, and a complete lack of annotations to back up the assertions made by writers, among other things) have led me to my current views on CCG.

You asked for ideas on what to write about. The list of topics is almost limitless--just open a Civil War history book or soldier memoir and read it while asking yourself at various stages of the text, "Why don't I see [fill in the blank] in reenacting? Is that a good topic for an aritcle for reenactors?" And when you've settled on a topic to write about, research it and document it so that your findings have meaning to folks who may be skeptics.

Best of luck with CCG.

[NC5thCav]

Re: Need Some Info!

How about an article on plagarism? Just saying.

[easttnfed]

Re: Need Some Info!

Jeremy,

I apologize for my presumption that CCG no longer pays its writers. When I wrote for them they did not, nor had they ever paid anyone that I know of, based on my discussions with former CCG editor Nicky Hughes, his predecessor Bill Holhsuch (sp?), and former Citizen's Companion editor Susan Hughes.

My views about the current incarnation of CCG are somewhat colored of late:

http://www.authentic-campaigner.com/forum/showthread.php?p=35334#post35334

That, and the other things I've seen in CCG in the past two or three years, both in terms of the content they print and the quality of editing (articles without bylines or bylines attiibuted to someone named "Staff Reports"; articles that end mid-sentence and are not continued, and a complete lack of annotations to back up the assertions made by writers, among other things) have led me to my current views on CCG.

You asked for ideas on what to write about. The list of topics is almost limitless--just open a Civil War history book or soldier memoir and read it while asking yourself at various stages of the text, "Why don't I see [fill in the blank] in reenacting? Is that a good topic for an aritcle for reenactors?" And when you've settled on a topic to write about, research it and document it so that your findings have meaning to folks who may be skeptics.

Best of luck with CCG.

Apology excepted. The CCG is starting to correct several of those mistakes that you mentioned in your response. I think most of the problems were coming from folks that got in too big of a hurry on going over the articles. I noticed that also. They are starting to get better at telling readers that articles are continued on so and so page also instead of running them into another article's continued piece on the next page. It'll take time, but I'm sure eventually they will get the minor details straightened out.

One thing they are doing with articles is leaving out the resource information. The reason behind this makes a little sense. Since they are trying to get as many good articles to fit into the publication and are trying to preserve space for those articles, they are having writers to leave out the resources that are longer than a couple of lines. The readers can send an email to the publication asking about where the information was gathered from and then can email the writer of that article to get the bibliography of his or her research. Occassionally I will include several documented sources for mine that include just around two or three books. This way it does show that I have used different sources and not just one. The rest, like I said before, can be obtained by emailing me if the reader wants. I also state somewhere in some of my articles where I got the information without having to include a bibliography.

The articles that I currently have in mind on writing about include:

Civil War sutlers
Army wagons (types and how used)
Rock Island Prison (from a letter of a 64th NC member)
Berdan's Sharpshooters
Civil War wheelwrights compared to today's wheelwrights
Shelton Laurel area of NC during the war
military Farriers
military Supply acquisition of horses and mules
painted cloth accoutrements

more may pop up as I continue to look through books or other information. keep the ideas coming as I am making notes on each and everyone of them that I am given. It may take a while for some to appear, but I'd rather them to take longer to research and be accurate than them to seem like I don't know what I'm talking about.

[Kevin O'Beirne]

Re: Need Some Info!

Jeremy,

CCG's view on printing annotations or even reference lists is terribly misguided, and that's all I'll say about it.

Regarding your planned sutler article, I suspect CCG would publish it, despite the fact that they published a very good one on the same topic just about 2 or 3 years ago by then-editor Nicky Hughes. I wonder if CCG has any idea what they have published themselves, let alone what their competition has published in the past six months.

[easttnfed]

Re: Need Some Info!

Jeremy,

CCG's view on printing annotations or even reference lists is terribly misguided, and that's all I'll say about it.

Regarding your planned sutler article, I suspect CCG would publish it, despite the fact that they published a very good one on the same topic just about 2 or 3 years ago by then-editor Nicky Hughes. I wonder if CCG has any idea what they have published themselves, let alone what their competition has published in the past six months.

I'm sure they have some knowledge about some of the articles that were published. I on the other hand do not. I'm glad that you told me about the sutler article Mr. Hughes put out before I got too into the subject. Thanks for that heads up. I know that several of the older publications are there in their archives and would just be a matter of someone like myself sitting down and going through those making notes about the articles that were published. I use to not get the publication before, so I don't have back issues to go through myself. The only time that I ever even looked at one was if I was over at a friend's house and looked through his while I set on his sofa. I'll contact the editor and see if I can not come and go through the back issues since the publication is only about 15 miles from where I live. Again, thanks for the heads up.

[Ross L. Lamoreaux]

Re: Need Some Info!

Not to be sarcastic or a cinic here, but its a big mistake to not list and print any and all resources when writing and publishing articles. The excuse that it is to save space just doesn't wash. As a scholar for way too many years, I've seen the value of showing the sources as it 1.) backs up your material and 2.) gives one another opportunity to do further research on the subject matter. My personal view is that if you cut out the articles about mainstream events that never occured during the real war and devoted energy and space to commemorations or living histories for actual battles or skirmishes, the reader and scholar would be much better served. I won't belittle CCG here on this forum, but I say "reader beware" and do your own research if sources are not listed or at least mentioned in the article. Civil War Historian does all of that and more, and I derive the most benefit from that periodical for the above mentioned reasons.

[Charles Heath]

Re: Need Some Info!

I'm sure they have some knowledge about some of the articles that were published. I on the other hand do not. I'm glad that you told me about the sutler article Mr. Hughes put out before I got too into the subject.

Jeremy,

A good number of articles are listed by issue on the CCG website for a number of years, and the one you want for the sutler article is June-July 2002 with Shane Seley's image from the WIG's Shiloh 2002 NPS LH on the cover. I enjoyed bringing that article to life not once, but twice this year, and the second time we even conned Ley Watson into being Mr. W.W. Chase.

[easttnfed]

Re: Need Some Info!

"My personal view is that if you cut out the articles about mainstream events that never occured during the real war and devoted energy and space to commemorations or living histories for actual battles or skirmishes, the reader and scholar would be much better served."


The CCG would not be the CCG if they cut out the articles on mainstream events. If the publication was to cut those out and focus more on the living histories and commemorations, they would loose most of their reading audience. The CWH is the magazine for the living histories and commemorations. That publication (correct me if I'm wrong) was started with just that in mind and was to be geared towards the c/p/h community.

The CCG has covered commemorations before. They also try to send folks out to cover living histories, but most of the time folks don't want to cover those such events. They would be more than happy to get folks from the campaigning community to help in getting articles in that cover living histories if someone would just take the time and write on them and include pictures that go along with the article.

Mr. Heath,

I did take the time to look at the article put out on the sutlers and noticed that my article was going to be totally different from that of Mr. Hughes'. I also got to sit down and look through many past issues and get a good idea on what articles were already done so I would not possibly write one in similar context to those already written.

[easttnfed]

Re: Need Some Info!

Guys:

I thank all of you for your contribution of ideas about what would make great subject matter for articles in the CCG. The debate about what can make the publication better can go on for ever. Even if it did improve the way most of you wish it would someone else will still not be pleased with something. So all I'm saying now is, since this post was about topics that would make great articles, lets put all the CCG complaints, bashing, they need tos aside and help me out with getting ideas. I'm not just stopping at one idea here. I love to have plenty more come in, but talking about what the CCG does wrong is just not helping me out a bit. I can not fix what needs to be fixed. I'm just a writer/photographer and not the editor or publisher.

Thank you!

[Kevin O'Beirne]

Re: Need Some Info!

The CCG would not be the CCG if they cut out the articles on mainstream events.

I think he was actualy referring to "the battle of something local" type events, which CCG never used to cover, but that seem to comprise the vast majority of their event reports since the current editor took over. In the past CCG largely concentrated on larger events for its post-event articles.

If the publication was to cut those out and focus more on the living histories and commemorations, they would loose most of their reading audience. The CWH is the magazine for the living histories and commemorations. That publication (correct me if I'm wrong) was started with just that in mind and was to be geared towards the c/p/h community.

That is incorrect, and I believe the fact that CWH circulates at least 13,000 copies of each isssue they publish (subscriptions plus newsstand sales) shows that. CWH is a magazine for Civil War history enthusiasts and reenactors in general, not just the "campaigner" end of things. That CWH publishes informative, annotated articles should not indicate it's geared only toward "campaigners". That it covers different types of events and not "the batle of something local" is merely recognition of the fact that they understand the typical reader isn't interested in "the battle of something local" and instead wants history-themed reports of good, innovative events instead of just "the same old event reports".

The CCG has covered commemorations before. They also try to send folks out to cover living histories, but most of the time folks don't want to cover those such events.

That's an interesting statement.

They would be more than happy to get folks from the campaigning community to help in getting articles in that cover living histories if someone would just take the time and write on them and include pictures that go along with the article.

I think that CCG's current editor/publisher team's treatment of writers is what has cause most of their former writers to migrate to a competing publication.

[ElizabethClark]

Re: Need Some Info!

I've not seen bashing to this point--I've seen legitimate concerns shared, along with multiple ideas for various articles.

Writers CAN, in fact, do a lot to "fix" a publication, particularly if the publication has difficulties with some of the editing aspects: writers can "write tight" and self-edit their piece (or have it edited by a colleague with a knack for it), and submit articles as near to perfect as possible. They can double-check all their facts, and include source information in the meat of the article, lessening the impact of missing citations and bibliographies. They can read their own work with a dispassionate eye, to determine if someone unfamiliar with the topic would understand it--or be able to figure out where the event happened.

[Anna Worden Bauersmith]

Re: Need Some Info!

They can double-check all their facts, and include source information in the meat of the article, lessening the impact of missing citations and bibliographies.

What are your thoughts on annotated bibliographies? In an article I finished last month I tried this method instead of a formal bibligraphy. I haven't decided if I will repeat this in the future. I can see it's advantages.

Anna Worden