Looking Ahead to Improvement

[Charles Heath]

Re: Looking Ahead to Improvement

So are we saying that a Scandinavian Christmas Holiday food was issued to soldiers during the ACW? Lye and Cod.....mmmmmm.

RJ,

"We" didn't say that at all. I love it when people insist on reading things into what I write. ;)

[Rob Murray]

Re: Looking Ahead to Improvement

Upwards of 90%+ of us should have been wearing Frock Coats.....over half of us weren't.....shame on us....and not enough great coats.

RJ,
Can you truly document the above statement? When we (members of the 1st and 2nd Minn.) did our research for the 2nd Minn. at Mill Springs, we had to go into the boxes of letters and documents at the M.H.S. to find out what they were really wearing. Letters document that while the 2nd Minn. had received a full clothing issue, they had packed their frock coats and put them in storage. Until we uncovered this information, it had been assumed by the experts that they had been wearing frocks.

throw in a pair of Navy trowsers (early war 2nd WI, 2nd MN)

The 2nd Minn. was not wearing Navy trousers. They were wearing dk. blue issue trousers. Our ASSUMPTION is they were from the S.A..

[RJSamp]

Re: Looking Ahead to Improvement

RJ,
Can you truly document the above statement? When we (members of the 1st and 2nd Minn.) did our research for the 2nd Minn. at Mill Springs, we had to go into the boxes of letters and documents at the M.H.S. to find out what they were really wearing. Letters document that while the 2nd Minn. had received a full clothing issue, they had packed their frock coats and put them in storage. Until we uncovered this information, it had been assumed by the experts that they had been wearing frocks.
The 2nd Minn. was not wearing Navy trousers. They were wearing dk. blue issue trousers. Our ASSUMPTION is they were from the S.A..

I wasn't the one that documented/did the research on the 89th Illinois. The Frock Coat comment has nothing to do with Mill Springs, the 1st or 2nd Minnesota. In general, I don't think we (Federals) don't own what was issued because it is EXPENSIVE to own all that they were issued.....not because it isn't authentic to have the ability to werar a great coat or frock coat when called for. My opinion is that even if we could document that x% of the men wore great coats on the road to Stone's River in December 1862 that many of us would use 'expense' as an excuse to not procure/wear an over coat.....or cite the web site's lesser preferred options when in fact 100% of all men in the unit had been issued a great coat (and maybe lost it, threw it out, or had it stolen).

"Navy" should have been Navy Blue....Dark Blue...... the 2nd WIS wore them after their 2nd issued gray suit....see the Madaus article appendum to the "Railroad Cut" book (Lance Herdegen), also Nolan's 1961 juggernaut "The Iron Brigade" and Otis "The Second Wisconsin Infantry". I thought you all looked sharp at Mill Springs in Dark Blue trowsers....I, and a Regular Army bugler and a Provost Sergeant at Division headquarters, wore our dark blue trowsers as well....

[Rob Murray]

Re: Looking Ahead to Improvement

RJ,

I know you didn't write the guide lines for OP3. I think I see what you're getting at ( and if I do, I agree. ) but I would like to see better documentation of guidelines. Just because there is a photo of someone in (name a uniform) doesn't mean they were actually dressed like that. Some event guide lines are well documented and some are not. I also understand if an event wants numbers, some times you have to take the number 2's and 3's. I've done that, I'm not perfect. BUT only after talking to the event organizer.

[Charles Heath]

Re: Looking Ahead to Improvement

Having cranked out a few dozen sets of uniform and equipment guidelines myself, I'd like to see better documentation as well; however, in many cases the answer neither exists in text nor photograph. Even if it does, then there is the question of whether or not the gear is being reproduced. Given the amount of information that isn't available, starting with the usual set of defaults and working from there will generally suffice.

[Dale Beasley]

Re: Portable First Persson- Rethinking the model

Just an idea...

During the WIG Event Outpost III, I heard so much talk in the begining about keeping first person. You know I was thinking, these soldiers who have been with each-other for months, and possible years would have talked to death the price of a hog, how to plant crops, etc. We are not actors. Soldiers have not changed much in the past 150 years, they sit back... complain about thier Officers, NCOs, marching, food, cleaning their rifle, and joking with each-other.

So I guess if you are doing a static living history, maybe you have to act your part as with an event like Outpost...you just go with being a soldier.

[Hank Trent]

Re: Portable First Persson- Rethinking the model

Soldiers have not changed much in the past 150 years, they sit back... complain about thier Officers, NCOs, marching, food, cleaning their rifle, and joking with each-other.

So I guess if you are doing a static living history, maybe you have to act your part as with an event like Outpost...you just go with being a soldier.

I've often heard that argument, but here's what I don't understand. If people haven't changed, and therefore still react the same if put in the same situation, why was there any modern talk at Outpost, or the Red Rivers, or any similar event? From what I can tell from the AARs, participants were realistically busy doing what Civil War soldiers did, or pretty close to it.

The answer, apparently, is that people haven't changed, and even when busy, no matter what century, they like to talk about interests and experiences other than what's directly in front of them. Therefore, unless they specifically work at it, reenactors talk about unrelated modern interests, rather than unrelated period interests.

Edited to add: I reread your post, and I now see what you're saying--that reenactors only talk about unrelated things because they're getting together for the first time in a while on Friday. Okay, that makes sense. I agree with you there! However, we're right back to acting ability, because apparently "acting" bored with your companions requires just as much acting talent or self control as talking only about period things, because reenactors are still having trouble accomplishing it.

How would you suggest reenactors learn how to act bored and talked-out, when they're just itching to talk about the internet and last month's event and the latest research they discovered, as soon as they see people they haven't met in a while?

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[JimConley]

Re: Looking Ahead to Improvement

The idea is good, but could we call it a camp of instruction? Or a progressive garrison event? Or anything but what it isn't?

Calling it an immersive event is like saying you don't have to march anyplace to have a campaign event. Or you can allow reenactors to come in polyester uniforms and still have a progessive event.

Hank,
I don't wish to get into a technical debate with you over how either you or I would define certain things. I was speaking in generalities in my previous post and didn't think that it would have warranted such tight criticism. If I were to put together an event like that, I certainly wouldn't stretch to claim it as a fully-immersive experience. However, I will say this: I do not think my comments before were so outrageous that you should have replied in the condescending manner in which you did. I don't appreciate that. Also, it's obvious that you consider first person to be a necessary part of enjoying your hobby, and that is commendable. But, even with the absence of first person, I do think that having a good physical impression, a good attitude, a willingness to shed modern accessories and practices, a want to learn and share information, and living the life of a soldier for a weekend provides a pretty damn good form of immersing one's self in the past.

[Dale Beasley]

Re: Portable First Persson- Rethinking the model

Hank,
You have made some good points. I have always thought that "Events Drive First Person". I have also thought of "First-Person" as protraying soldiers on the move...so busy not to think of anything modern.

You are right at Outpost there was at times modern talk, but it was a minimum...no perfect world and no bullets flying. We spent most ot the time in the Ranks picking at Chicken Man ...who lost his rifle along with other things, this type of "Carring-on" would have happened then and now.

The Company/Unit that I belong to realize that there will be modern talk, because we are all such good friends, we want to visit and catch up. So we allow for "Fard Friday" and get busy Saturday morning.

Have a Good Holiday, I am at work.

[flattop32355]

Re: Portable First Persson- Rethinking the model

How would you suggest reenactors learn how to act bored and talked-out, when they're just itching to talk about the internet and last month's event and the latest research they discovered, as soon as they see people they haven't met in a while?

I'll assume (always a dangerous thing) that you are speaking to the time after the event goes "active", as opposed to beforehand during arrival/assembly.

I think it has a lot to do with type of event you're attending. Since this is the AC, I won't discuss the "There's nothing to do after the battle, and I don't want to go to the ball" part of many mainstream reenactments, other than to say that I get truly bored out of my skull during that time.

Specific to Outpost III, on Saturday we had an extended "down time" in the afternoon. The strange part about it was that I didn't mind it a bit: We had been on the move or in action from 3 a.m. and marched all over the field and back again multiple times, including some double timing and one very exciting dead run. After we marched to our camp site in the sunken road, almost all the effort made for the next few hours was devoted to preparing positions, cooking/eating, guard and camp duties and sleep. I noticed very little banter about anything unrelated to what had to be done in the period moment. It's about the first time at any event where an extended "down time" was a relief rather than a burden. I can imagine that, under similar circumstances, the real soldiers were less concerned about conversation that with recovering their strength.

It could well be quite different for a garrison or winter quarters scenario.

[toptimlrd]

Re: Looking Ahead to Improvement

Deleted as I see others stated the same thing later in the thread.

[Charles Heath]

Re: Portable First Person- Rethinking the model

We had been on the move or in action from 3 a.m. and marched all over the field and back again multiple times, including some double timing and one very exciting dead run. After we marched to our camp site in the sunken road, almost all the effort made for the next few hours was devoted to preparing positions, cooking/eating, guard and camp duties and sleep.

Boys, and girls, raise your hand if you have read something similar to the passage above in a period letter. Very good, class., ver good. This is what happens when the dim, smoldering, smokey, Betty lamp is extinguished, and replaced by that wonderfully bright stearine candle.

Thank, you, Bernie.

I have seen Pukin' Bill Backus in Virginia, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Mississippi this year, and maybe even New York. I'm starting to think he is either homeless, or I owe someone a whole bunch of back payments in child support money. Just sayin'.

[Hank Trent]

Re: Portable First Persson- Rethinking the model

I'll assume (always a dangerous thing) that you are speaking to the time after the event goes "active", as opposed to beforehand during arrival/assembly.

Yes, I'm talking about the same time any other authenticity kicks in, typically late Friday night, obviously not in the parking lot with cars around or while rations are still be transferred to period containers, etc.

I think it has a lot to do with type of event you're attending.

If so, and it's just a matter of keeping participants busy enough, how does one explain this breakdown of companies that Terry Sorchy posted here: http://www.authentic-campaigner.com/...d.php?p=80311:

Case in point, all the federals at Outpost were OUTSTANDING. From what I heard from those that were there, Company A the ONV was in first person about 99% of the time ALL weekend. Thats what we do. At ALL events. It is where our comfort zone is.
Company B was about 75% with any modern talk kept very quiet.
Company C and D combined was less because thats just not what they do at most events.

Were some companies busier than others? Or was it, as he suggests, more dependant on what they were used to doing and therefore what they expected to do?

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[Hank Trent]

Re: Looking Ahead to Improvement

I do not think my comments before were so outrageous that you should have replied in the condescending manner in which you did. I don't appreciate that. Also, it's obvious that you consider first person to be a necessary part of enjoying your hobby, and that is commendable. But, even with the absence of first person, I do think that having a good physical impression, a good attitude, a willingness to shed modern accessories and practices, a want to learn and share information, and living the life of a soldier for a weekend provides a pretty damn good form of immersing one's self in the past.

Unfortunately, we do disagree on what subjectively feels like "immersing one's self in the past." That of course is neither here nor there, since we're both free to enjoy our weekends however we want, and seek out like-minded people to enjoy them with. No problem there.

What frustrates me is to see the the word "immersion" becoming a synonym for something like the old catch-all term "authentic," so that the one thing which used to set it apart is no longer part of the meaning. As another example, someone recently said she was going to an "immersion event" that included 9-5 third person interpretation to the public and modern accomodations after hours. I know, because I'd attended (and enjoyed it!) previously. She called it immersion, simply because the material culture and expectation of knowledge was higher than mainstream. Yes, I noted the difference to her, too.

The problem is, how can one seek out events where everyone's cooperating toward the same goal, without some agreement on what the words mean that we use to talk about events?

So let's say "immersion" now means what you described above. I've got no quarrel with that--it's just a word, after all, and all that matters to me (and most reenactors, I'd guess) is the actual experience at events.

What label would you suggest, to distinguish an event where the participants do interact as if they were in a specific time and place in the 1860s, in addition to the other things you mention above? Pick a word, any word. I'll gladly start using "immersion" to mean an event like you describe, and switch to the new word instead, when I want to be more specific. I'm serious! We really do need a good new word!

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

[Bill]

Re: Looking Ahead to Improvement

The problem is, how can one seek out events where everyone's cooperating toward the same goal, without some agreement on what the words mean that we use to talk about events?

Hank,

From other posts on other forums, you already know my attitude about labels. Why not post, and more important, advertise the rules, guidelines, and expectations of the various events out there? As long as the rules and guidelines are enforced, what difference does it make what people chose to call an event? Other than using labels as a club, which seems to happen rather often in our various Hobbies, what real purpose do they serve?

My guess is that if an event advertised that participants were expected to stay in first person from Friday night until Sunday morning, you'd know pretty well what to expect. It just doesn't seem too important how the sponsors or participants label the event.

I'll go back to sitting on the fence now.