Looking Ahead to Improvement

[10TnVI]

Re: Portable First Persson- Rethinking the model

In my other, sometime derided hobby, the concept of the original post is known as a "persona"- a personality drawn from the historical ers but not a specific individual. The persona my change over time or be modified as circumstances warrent it, but the core remains the same. There are people who have been good friends for over 20 years who I could not identify by modern name, occupation, etc. I use the same technique in my CW reenacting- Pvt. Leland Hares, middle aged ,educated, city born and raised, trained in the natural sciences and geology, spent time working on the Arkansas Geologic recconassance in 1858 and the Tennessee Geologic survey(that's why I'm a unioist in the south) and then as a school teacher when the work on the survey was suspended in 1860. After Tennessee was reclaimed by the union, and with most of my students serving in the armies, I enlisted. (This allows me to fit in with almost any union unit since most accepted recruits from occupied areas).
With this background I don't need to reinvent myself every event, just tweak some specifics. With a decent background in general events, manners, and customs of the time I can "do first person". add a little pre-event research into unit specifics and I'm ready to go. Admittedly I've had thirty years practice at it :-)

[KCLoewe]

Re: Portable First Persson- Rethinking the model

Doing 1st person is one of the great pleasures of this hobby if it's done right. If it's done wrong it is horrible. Also as Mike Wilkins said its very difficult. Becuase of this not everyone is good at doing it.

One of the things I do is try in incorporate as much of my own life into my 19th century self. I do this to keep things more real and less like a script. For instance, my job doesn't transfer easily to our time period, but I do some sewing for W. W. & Co., so for my job previous to the war I say I was a clerk for that company (and they are a dry goods store - though some consider myslef good at sewing I don't consider myslef good enough to say I'm a tailor, so it's easier to be a clerk). I keep my real name (unless portraying someone specific) becuase it's a common German name. I have brothers and sisters in real life so when talking about my family I can incorporate them.

Another one of the fun things I try to do is remember my life and things that have happened to me that can traverse the time periods. One of these is a time when I was about 14 or 15 when I and two of my friends decided to look for beetles and accidently ripped open a bees nest. Simple childhood stupidity that makes for a great story around the camp fire and adds life to my 19th century self.

Also, when pulling from your real life it's easier to remember and tell people about. And it sounds real because it for the most part is. And keeping things simple will also allow it to be portable in the sense of what you are portraying. My home and former work and life can be from Detroit as easy as it can be from Mobile. I've found the easiest way to be my 19th century self is to keep things as easy as possible. And less that has to be remembered, the easier things are to talk about.

Fake lucky charms accents are not needed either. I used to portray a British soldier in another period. I learned that instead of using a horrible accent, it was far better (and easier) to use the proper words, slang and mannerisms. In doing so I actually had a person from England actually ask where in England I was from figuring I had been in this country for enough years to loose my accent. The same can be applied to our time period.

These are my thoughts, they don't have to be yours. I do hope it helps.

[Charles Heath]

Re: Portable First Persson- Rethinking the model

Gribble,

What word comes immediately after "first person?" That word seems MIA a lot lately, but it is a key concept.

For those who want to look a moment, the AC Forum used to have a how-to article in the articles section, complete with a checklist. In spite of various crashes over the years, the piece may still be there.

[LibertyHallVols]

Re: Portable First Persson- Rethinking the model

Just remember one thing about first person; more times than not, you have been with your pards for a long time. You may have known some of them all your life. You do not have to go through the whole "what did you do before the war" discussions at every event. Last weekend at a Nov 63 event we did first person all night and this topic never came up.

Here here! I agree, as does Mr. Ewing!

I consider myself a neophyte at best when it comes to first person. I've done a few first person events and I tend to keep my mouth shut. However, conversations for me, when I did open my yap, tended to center on the "here and now". I don't need to ask about what a pard did before the war.

...and I'd like to make a point on taking other names...
Nothing "busts a scenario" at a first-person imersion event for me like looking at a guy I've known for 10 years and struggling to remember what the heck his name is THIS weekend. Sometimes I have a hard enough time remembering folks real name as it is! If I have to call my buddy Dave by the name of "John" all weekend long, it is a persistent reminder that he ain't "John", he's really Dave... if you can follow that twisted sentence.

In a nut...
We should take advantage of the fact that, for the most part, we all know each other. In many cases, we've also met each others' wives, kids, and visited each others' homes. Why fabricate something that is already there and available?

[Cfarrell]

Re: Portable First Persson- Rethinking the model

Here is a link to an artilce found in our "reserach articles"...for those of you who would like to visit it.... http://www.columbiarifles.org/Articles/Attitude.html


I agree with John...I hate having to remember new names to people who I've known for years when it took me several years just to remember their real names in the first place!!!

I'm normally one of the fellers who doesn't stray too deeply into first person in regards to an individuals past. Normally we portray men that have been together for months if not years...who grew up together and lived a few miles from each other...why would I be asking one of my pards how many kids he has? I should already know that by now...

I think the best way to keep first person going all weekend is to remember the "here and now" theory! I'm here on canteen detail - I'm having to carry thirty canteens up the hill with no help...complain about that.

Regards,

[Charles Heath]

Re: Portable First Persson- Rethinking the model

Wick, what you are struggling with is the difference between "portrayal" and "representation."

[Hank Trent]

Re: Portable First Persson- Rethinking the model

What word comes immediately after "first person?" That word seems MIA a lot lately, but it is a key concept.

Ah, that's an interesting topic. Because I don't believe that word should necessarily be there.

First Person Interpretation (hope I'm guessing the word Charles means) implies certain things. It's been written about in great detail, but just to bring up some of the points:

The person interpreting has an audience which he's attempting to intrigue in some way (hate to use the classic term "provoke" because it's too easily misunderstood to mean only "anger"). He needs to make what he says understandable enough that they at least won't walk away in boredom and will be enticed to listen.

He probably has a few main points to get across, like "soldiers at this time and place were becoming disgruntled with their commander," so he'll default to cover that conversation topic first unless an audience member specifically wants to know about something else. He needs to "read" the audience and make sure he's meeting their needs, and not boring, unnecessarily offending, confusing, or otherwise making the experience a poor one for them.

He also needs to make sure he can be heard and understood--all those usual public speaking rules--and doesn't leave the audience feeling really physically threatened, angry, insulted, etc. (as opposed to the real-but-obviously-fake emotions audiences enjoy at plays, Halloween haunted houses, etc.) If an audience member can't figure out how to word a question in a way that would be understandable, he needs to help them using his modern knowledge: "I take a bath in the kitchen. Are you asking about the privy?"

Note that not one of those things has to do with historical accuracy, yet all are intrinsic to good first person interpretation.

I submit that there are two kinds of "first person" in the c/p/h side of the hobby. There's the above, which is useful as a teaching tool with modern spectators. In fact no other kind of first person really should be done directly to them, because all those goals of interpretation are necessary to give them a good experience.

Then there's, for lack of a better term, "accurately portraying somebody." On the surface, it appears very similar to first person interpretation. But none of the above things are involved.

No one in the 1860s worried if what they said was relevant or understandable or interesting to people 140 years in the future. They had no "interpretative goal" other than their actual reasons for saying what they said. Sometimes they upset people, sometimes they threatened people, sometimes they bored people, either on purpose or not, and they certainly didn't worry about what would offend or bore someone 140 years in the future. Sometimes they mumbled, sometimes they were sullen, sometimes they couldn't express themselves clearly, sometimes they didn't want to have anything to do with you. If they were friendly, it lasted only until you offended them. If you couldn't convey what you meant in terms they understood, they had no idea what you meant.

That kind of "first person" without the "interpretation" requires the other people to be equally knowledgable and clued in to what's going on, but it also allows for more accuracy than the limitations that make first person interpretation good. It's more like real life, because we're not thinking about "interpretating" to anyone when we talk to people in our modern lives, so it's easier to do it in a way that's natural and realistic.

First person interpretation requires a bit of skill to integrate public speaking abilities and teaching methods with a presentation that gives the illusion of being natural and spontaneous.

Plain old "first person" or as I'd rather call it, "accuracy" :) is what could happen after spectator hours at public events, and all the time at non-spectator events.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[ElizabethClark]

Re: Portable First Persson- Rethinking the model

Hank, excellent comments!

For several years, the citizen side of things has used pre-event communication to establish first-person interaction between participants. This has allowed participants from all over the country to "meet" long before the event, share back-information as appropriate, and set up the event scenario to allow it to run smoothly; no one is thrown into things last minute. Because those impressions might be in development for six months, a year, or more, using "event names" is far less a problem. (I would imagine that military fellows could do something similar by participating in forward-moving events, where they follow the exploits of particular sets of troops for a year or so...)

Many impressions on the citizen side are "conglomerate" characters... they may have a start with actual historical people (census data, letters, etc), but the details are fleshed out through wide-ranging study of society mid-century. While the initial research takes time and effort, the longer one works on producing good conglomerate impressions, the more of a knowledge base one acquires, and the easier it is to make new impressions!

I'm actually rather surprised that military groups haven't followed these processes: pre-event communication and conglomerate personas.

For those who don't see first-person as an effective interpretive tool with spectators, re-read Hank's post. Interpretation to the public is a Different Creature than sustained first-person interaction with other reenactors. I've found first-person interpretation to be extremely effective with the public, so long as those factors Hank mentions are kept strongly in mind, and used well. It does take practice to "read" the spectator crowd, and a LOT of wide background knowledge to meet the needs of a wide variety of people. If I'm portraying a social reformist, I'd better be well-versed in both chattel and wage slavery issues, not just abolition--if only to explain why abolition of chattel slavery is the most important to me. With that information background, I could also reasonably develop an interpretive impression that finds the Northern factory wage-slavery system more abhorrent than chattel slavery in the South, and argues the *benefits* of chattel slavery over wage slavery--certainly a thought-provoking interpretive stance for many spectators!

I know I've whacked this dead horse a LOT on the forum--but any military man who only knows military stuff is a Very Flat Interpretive Tool. They cannot interact realistically with other hobbyists, nor very deeply with spectators. That wider cultural background and understanding of the period lends a great flexibility to ANY hobbyist. It allows for better interpretive impressions, as well as more ease in hobby interactions.

[Utley]

Re: Portable First Persson- Rethinking the model

One of the most important aspects to achieving a successful and believeable first person interpretation is to feel comfortable in the role, and have background knowledge of the person and role you are attempting to interpret. Having the best gear, uniform knowledge, and who led what division doesn't help much in the big scheme of things when it comes to first person. Having a knowledge and having actually EXPERIENCED aspects of your character's daily life will help immensely and help you not feel awkward in your roll. For example, a large percentage of the men that fought in the Civil War were at one time or another farmers. Furthermore, nearly ALL of them would have used horse drawn wagons or horses themselves to get around, whether they lived in the city or in the country. As most of us would be portraying farming folk, it is important to consider how many of the "authentics" in the ranks know how to milk a cow by hand, harness a horse, drive a wagon, plow behind a team of horses, etc?? Even if you don't do cavalry, are you fairly comfortable working around horses and other common 19th century farm animals? If we are portraying a shop keeper, how many of us know how the goods were displayed, packed, arrived to our store, etc? Aside from "cheesy" political talk, what were our true motivations or fears that caused our character to enlist? What did the family think about it? This is something we can draw on from our own personal experiences often times, and transform those experiences into CW first person ammunition.

Physical fitness is also another consideration that is really important. No, we can't all look like veteran campaigners, but the best equipment and best impression on an unrealistic frame doesn't come across as good first person. I'm not saying we can all be the skinny little guy (I'm 6'2 and a sz 46 coat), but we need to at least be in shape for our size. That is where dedication to a persona goes far beyond having alot of money to spend on the "cool" gear that is around. Dedication to exercise and eating habits will carry us far into our chosen personas. This issue is cussed and discussed in the 18th century living history world, but also applies to us. There were some larger frame fellas during that time, but we can only imagine how they would have gotten into shape or not made it through the hard campaigns.

Having a background knowlege, MORE THAN FROM A BOOK, and having a "to the core" approach at authentically doing a persona will help everyone have the confidence to authentically pursue their chosen interest. If you don't have the background knowledge and would like to step up to the plate and get some of it, look for living history sites and museums in your area and talk to them about volunteering. Yes, they might not wear the coolest, most authentic civilian clothes available or care much about their clothing, etc., but the hands on material culture experiences you will gain there will promote your knowledge and make you a more authentically minded and "grounded" person. Volunteer, not to pose, but to get dirty and work, sweat, and live some of the 19th century life. Not to be replaced by hands-on, but pick up journals of merchants, farmers, etc., that strictly deal with the civilian side of things to learn more about the daily life of the folks you are portraying. More and more you will see that they were people just like us, didn't live in a black and white bubble, and went through alot of the daily activities and trials and problems that we all do. This will get you more "connected" with your persona.

[Pat.Lewis]

Re: Portable First Persson- Rethinking the model

...the more of a knowledge base one acquires, and the easier it is to make new impressions!

I know I've whacked this dead horse a LOT on the forum--but any military man who only knows military stuff is a Very Flat Interpretive Tool. They cannot interact realistically with other hobbyists, nor very deeply with spectators. That wider cultural background and understanding of the period lends a great flexibility to ANY hobbyist. It allows for better interpretive impressions, as well as more ease in hobby interactions.

One of the most important aspects to achieving a successful and believeable first person interpretation is to feel comfortable in the role, and have background knowledge of the person and role you are attempting to interpret.
Having a background knowlege, MORE THAN FROM A BOOK, and having a "to the core" approach at authentically doing a persona will help everyone have the confidence to authentically pursue their chosen interest. ...pick up journals of merchants, farmers, etc., that strictly deal with the civilian side of things to learn more about the daily life of the folks you are portraying. More and more you will see that they were people just like us, didn't live in a black and white bubble, and went through alot of the daily activities and trials and problems that we all do. This will get you more "connected" with your persona.

There have been a number of quoteworthy posts in this thread, and I cannot agree with them more. I chose only the two most recent to pull from. I would ask that we take a moment to reflect on the use of the resources at our finger tips in light of the above. For example, we have a fantastic thread here in the Civilian Discussion containing a fabulous civilian diary from West Tennessee. My forum stats say that this thread - one whose information I consider to be top notch and begs a generous discussion - has been viewed 245 times. Compare this to a number of threads in the Military Authenticity Discussion on various aspects of "kit" that are now hitting 600+, 1600+, 5000, 6000, 7000, 8000+ views and more.

Now, this is not to say in any way that these material culture threads are unimportant or not useful, but I can't help but wonder how much my knowledge of the Civil War world will be enhanced by a discussion of Pattern Y of Widget X compared to the benefit of a similarly debated thread involving a primary source. One final quote - one of the few replies of yet to the diary thread - to sum up.

Finally, a return to DOCUMENTABLE sources of the period! They have been absent too long on all sections of our forum.

[Kevin O'Beirne]

Re: Looking Ahead to Improvement

Could you expand on this? I'm not sure if I know just what you mean. What did you see in the past that you're not seeing now?

At SOME past events:

* Historical essays written specifically for the scenario and portrayal.
* Dissemination of background data such as 1860 census info applicable to the portrayal(s).
* Scenarios that are based on documented history (i.e., "Open a history book, read it, do what it says.")

More recently, I've observed trends in some quarters that are sort of, "Want to know what is being portrayed? Research it yourself." Maybe not that blunt, but when the historical documentation for an event is about 500 words on a webpage, that's not much to go on when one's hoping for first-person info.

Maybe it's just me with these views. I got into reenacting in the first place because I was interested in how it could help me better-understand the history I was reading in the books. I became disenchanted with my old "mainstream" group when I finally realized that what I was reading was nearly totally disconnected with what was being done in the field. I tend to take that "open a history book, read it, and then do what it says" literally. Many others have a similar view, and I am curious if others may also believe that dissemination of historical documentation on an event-by-event basis may be suffering in recent years.

These comments are not specific to any one event, or two events, nor to any group running them or any geographic quarter. It certainly isn't confined to one type of reenactor. :)

[DougCooper]

Re: Portable First Persson- Rethinking the model

Wick, what you are struggling with is the difference between "portrayal" and "representation."

I like it. There is room enough for everyone to participate under these two terms.

Great discussion Gribble!!

At Outpost, our company did a large amount of pre-event prep on our company, the regiment, Chicago area and Illinois politics, demographics, etc. Everybody took a name, developed a portrayal and we publisized them in the event work up. We had a great time at the event, staying in first person the entire time. It was easy really - all rosters used the original names and frankly, I had to work hard to remember the real names to thank in the AAR after the event.

Others in the other companies might not have done as much work prep work, but they still represented the regiment. When Jason Rheinholz circulated the petition on soldier's voting rights, it gave all the companies a quick first person subject besides the here and now military stuff to get involved with.

My basic portrayal is as a banker (when an officer) or bank clerk (when enlisted) and for Outpost I was still married with two kids, Scotch/German, Lutheran and a Lincoln man. I changed my avocation to railroad repair foreman, but all else remained as is.

Agree with Steve Ewing that most soldiers had long ago ceased discussing much "what were you before the war" stuff and like soldiers of all eras, spent most of their time discussing the here and now.

[ElizabethClark]

Re: Portable First Persson- Rethinking the model

That "here and now" might also include non-war things, though... letters and news from home, news of what's going on in the mineral fields, or lumber out in Oregon, or what an individual soldier plans to do when he's mustered out and back to 'real life'... again, there's that wider context.

[Johnny Lloyd]

Re: Portable First Persson- Rethinking the model

Greg-

What a great discussion. All too little has been formally discussed on this topic as it relates to progressives. (I personally like and use the term "progressive" because I feel it implies we are, at least, attempting to get "progressively better" at all aspects of our end of the hobby. IMHO, I feel the only ones who have the right to call themselves "hardcores" or "authentics". I know others feel this way from what I have heard and read.)

From the previous discourse, I feel we can relatively agree there are 2 types of first-person:
1) Interpretation for the public's historical knowledge
2) "Real" first person, as Hank says... known as "Authentic Event 1st Person"

I can only speak from my own use of first person for the past 10 years as a hobbyist in both the mainstream and (eventually) progressive realms. I've seen a broad-range of this kind of interraction- from "hokey" to downright dead-on. I have done little LH interpretation for the public, so I don't feel I'm able to comment effectively as some on here could- therefore, I will mostly address the second ennumerated point above.

I will go upon this supposition for the following:

For me, I feel that good first person at authentic events is driven by the events and atmosphere themselves. When others are in "first-person mode", then it makes everything that much easier for me to join-in. This reduces the "hokey-ness" factor and allows me to join-in the moment. As others have said on here, this may take some prior planning amongst other event attendees to come to an agreement as to how to take each others comments/reactions- otherwise playing first person- at an authentic events. What we sometimes say at authentic events would possibly confuse or negatively affect the uninitiated to the authentic side of the hobby- think about it. [IE- "Damned yankees! Down with your flag and cursed Union" -as an example. You can think of others that might not go over well if you tried to use them in the modern world on an everyday basis.] Prior coordination and understanding can aid this kind of first-person interraction greatly as well.

I feel as a military impressionist, to know your stuff when it comes to drill and customs does nothing for yourself or others' understanding of the period if you don't know proper period-correct deportment/familiarity with material culture (aka first person) at authentic events. On the other hand, sustained first person over a full weekend can sometimes lead to lapses in that kind of dialogue. This is okay, but it is ultimately up to the individual to police themselves to eschew modernism in deeds and words at an authentic event.

For me again, I feel that even though there might be (recently) a Saturn plant in the background, kids playing in a cornfield, and the sound of cars on the highway, I learn to tune these things out and concentrate within our own "bubble of history" and I feel I'm there in the 1860s. This ability to tune-out the modern world that fast encroaching into our old stomping grounds will be critical to "getting into first person" interractions - mostly if we wish to continue doing quality events in or near the areas where the event portrayed actually happened in. Even the occasional modernism spoken by fellow event attendees this needs to be applied judiciously to. Otherwise, let's find a nice patch of land in Montana that looks like Virginia in the 1860s and do our events there to TOTALLY escape ANY modernism. Time is coming that this might have to happen if urban sprawl has anything to do with it, unfortunately. But we do have ways of fighting back using preservation methods and the laws to our advantage.

For me, the ability to tune-out the modern world and preserve the illusion of "being there" in the 1860s at an authentic event/living history is a fine art form that one must hone with reason on a personal level.

Material culture and society of the day intrigues me sometimes more than the military stuff. At Outpost, I loved seeing the ox cart, cabin, etc. It made me feel like I was "there" even more than ever before. I got the feeling of "being an invader" on someone else's soil and it didn't feel very "Christian" to me- perhaps because I'm a Southerner, but also perhaps because I was taught to be on my best behavior in someone else's home when I was younger.

This felt very period to me at Outpost. Sometimes a little too period... ;)
When you feel THAT magic, you know it is not just a great event, but a true learning experience.

Take care- Johnny

[LibertyHallVols]

Re: Portable First Persson- Rethinking the model

Re: Interpretation -
While my experience is limited, I don't see much of this occuring at the NPS LH type events I have attended. Most of my experience at these events involves a designated speaker informing the public about what they are seeing. When spectators interact with individuals, the approach of the reenactor is generally in the third person. So, I don't know if first person interp is planned but not communicated widely, or just not planned.

Most of my experience with "first person" is at immersion events (aka EFUBU, if you're into acronyms). So, for me, the scenario as a military fella is generally my daily interactions with a group of folks that I may have known for a period of months, years, or a lifetime.

In this setting, I have found that elaborate "back stories" are really the "salt" to the impression, not the "meat and potatoes". For example, if portraying a New Englander in Virginia in November/December on a wet cold day, one might gripe about the wet Virginia winters compared to the cold but dry (eg "non-melty") winters of NE. If complaining about the typical soldierly diet, one might compare with "Mom's meals back home". Keeping out modern vernacular is a "must" and sprinkling in a bit of 186X vernacular, with some regional highlights (if appropriate) adds a bit to the "dish" as well.

Again, I'm a bit of a neophyte at this... but this is the stuff I see. I generally try to avoid being the booger on others' windows to the past. If I can create a "moment" (cuz that's about how long they last) for the folks around me, all the better.