How would you rate your own authenticity?

[HOG.EYE.MAN]

Re: How would you rate your own authenticity?

How would you call someone starting into the more authentic crowd? Progressive?

Sure.... As long as you're improving your uniform/gear from "sutler row" to "authentic vendors," and changing your mindset.

Becoming authentic as possible is an on-going quest! Sometimes, it's not that easy..... takes work and research, to get to the top.

good luck,

Sweeds,

[Clark Badgett]

Re: How would you rate your own authenticity?

Aaron, don't go there ;) The Mudsills are alright, but few of them can properly portray Kentuckians, much less the peculiarities of Louisvillians. Or did they drop the "5th Ky, Louisville Legion" name lately. Careful about using the term hardcore, as the most authentic people I've ever known don't even use it. As for me, I'm just progressive, and I'll gladly go stitch for stitch with anyone.

[HOG.EYE.MAN]

Re: How would you rate your own authenticity?

The Mudsills are alright, but few of them can properly portray Kentuckians, much less the peculiarities of Louisvillians.

Clark, I dissagree with this statement. I've met many knowledgable historians in this group and some of the best impressions I've ever seen came out of the Mudsills.

Careful about using the term hardcore, as the most authentic people I've ever known don't even use it.

That's pretty interesting. In my case, authentics I know, do use that term. The term is being used more often then it ever has in the past. I think people abuse that term also :wink_smil

[Milliron]

Re: How would you rate your own authenticity?

Aaron, don't go there ;) The Mudsills are alright, but few of them can properly portray Kentuckians, much less the peculiarities of Louisvillians. Or did they drop the "5th Ky, Louisville Legion" name lately. Careful about using the term hardcore, as the most authentic people I've ever known don't even use it. As for me, I'm just progressive, and I'll gladly go stitch for stitch with anyone.

Without diving into what is an inane argument (I dislike labels, and this poll begs flame wars)--if the poll asks you if you're a hardcore, and you decide you are, why disagree? This poll is akin to:

1. I'm awesome
2. I'm somewhat awesome
3. I'm OK
4. I'm a jerk

If I mark "1" am I being untruthful, or am I just short on modesty? After all, the poll asks me to decide. What qualifies one as a "hardcore?" Who are you to say?

Incidentally, I know Aaron well enough to vouch for him to make the claim to "hardcore," whatever that is. It doesn't seem fair to ask one to classify oneself and then to lambaste them for deciding they're the top echelon. I agree that most hardcores don't classify themselves so, but to do so (particularly when you are asked to), doesn't mean you aren't, just that you may not be as modest as others would like.

This is truly all I have to say on this topic.

[HOG.EYE.MAN]

Re: How would you rate your own authenticity?

Bob,

I appreciate the compliment.... You're right though, this is a touchy subject to some people. This thread can easily turn into a flame war.

[paulcalloway]

Re: How would you rate your own authenticity?

There was a time when we didn't have polls at all because they would frequently unravel into a pointless flame war. Thanks for keeping everything civil guys.

These aren't scientific polls... they are only here for curiosities sake.

[SCTiger]

Re: How would you rate your own authenticity?

Paul:

No flamming at all, Amen. Anyways in the modern military venacular, the hardcore soldier would be the one that scored the highest on physical fitness tests, had a superior appearence (uniforms, Ranger haircut), accepted the toughest assingments, was unaffected by the weather or conditions and was always looking for a new badge, (airborne, Ranger Special Forces.) Mostly they didn't mind the long hours and sweat. Most of all they are serious about being a soldier and it ceases being a job and becomes a lifestyle.

In the c/p/h I would have to classify a hardcore as someone that was intense and serious about the hobby. Now this wouldn't doesn't mean they would march 19 miles and dig a fox hole with their spoon. To me a hardcore would do everything possible to replicate the ACW soldier within safety & health reasons. No cheap shortcuts or excuses type. Again they are serious about the craft, are heavily involved and see the hobby as more than a fellowship in the woods. Most are misunderstood by their comrades who are enthusiastic but not as intense. The hardcore should be the advanced scouts of the hobby, develop new sources of information and serves as the ultimate example of what we could attain. I have quite a few people I would nominate as hardcore but, they would deny this.

Most assoicate hardcore with "macho" where the phony tough prove themselves with feats of physical stupidity, like starving 2 weeks prior to an event. If we are going to use the term, lets keep it honorable. Every hobby or sport will have an elite segment, might as well call them something! :D

[coastaltrash]

Re: How would you rate your own authenticity?

Even with good gear I still fall way short of the original boys, which is why i voted myself a farb.

Paul:

No flamming at all, Amen. Anyways in the modern military venacular, the hardcore soldier would be the one that scored the highest on physical fitness tests, had a superior appearence (uniforms, Ranger haircut), accepted the toughest assingments, was unaffected by the weather or conditions and was always looking for a new badge, (airborne, Ranger Special Forces.) Mostly they didn't mind the long hours and sweat. Most of all they are serious about being a soldier and it ceases being a job and becomes a lifestyle.

In the c/p/h I would have to classify a hardcore as someone that was intense and serious about the hobby. Now this wouldn't doesn't mean they would march 19 miles and dig a fox hole with their spoon. To me a hardcore would do everything possible to replicate the ACW soldier within safety & health reasons. No cheap shortcuts or excuses type. Again they are serious about the craft, are heavily involved and see the hobby as more than a fellowship in the woods. Most are misunderstood by their comrades who are enthusiastic but not as intense. The hardcore should be the advanced scouts of the hobby, develop new sources of information and serves as the ultimate example of what we could attain. I have quite a few people I would nominate as hardcore but, they would deny this.

Most assoicate hardcore with "macho" where the phony tough prove themselves with feats of physical stupidity, like starving 2 weeks prior to an event. If we are going to use the term, lets keep it honorable. Every hobby or sport will have an elite segment, might as well call them something! :D

[Outrider]

Re: How would you rate your own authenticity?

Patrick,
Amen Brother.

Patrick McAllister
Critter Company
W.I.G.

[2ndNHDOC]

Re: How would you rate your own authenticity?

Thanks I have three years to work on the impression.

Brian :)

Brian, it is a rule to sign your full name to all posts on this forum - Mike Chapman

[Miche_Todd]

Re: How would you rate your own authenticity?

I would label myself a progressive, since I am progressing from my beginings in the mainstream side of the hobby. I plan on only attending good, progressive events from now on, and am committed to researching everything I can to further my impression and knowledge. :-)

[GWilson]

Re: How would you rate your own authenticity?

I will have to agree with Patrick on this one. We are all farbs compared to original soldiers.

[PrettyBoyDonovan]

Re: How would you rate your own authenticity?

Well, I've done some thinking, and relaized I am a mainstream. I'd like to think of myself with a progresive mindset though. I'll soon start to aquire better gear and such. I've been trying to do little things to try and better my impresion so maybe by next year I'll be a progresive.

[dusty27]

Re: How would you rate your own authenticity?

While I agree with the sentiment that we will never achieve anything close to the originals, I think the question was intended to make the forum members to look at themselves and to grade their impression based on other reenactors and not the originals.

I think one of the posts explained that it was a difficult question based on so many aspects of reenacting. I think we need to ask ourselves; "What makes a PERFECT reenactor?" From there, you can compare yourself to that ideal and mark the poll where you feel it is appropriate.

I don't think anyone is presuming that they measure up in any way with soldiers in the Civil War. At least I hope not.

[County Militia]

Re: How would you rate your own authenticity?

I'd say I'm a progressive. I am a member of a unit who, if anyone would take a look at them, is mainstream. It's obvious to see that most of the unit (not everybody) doesn't put a huge amount of effort into their appearance. My understanding is that with them, comfort is the key.


I try to keep it half-way authentic, and am concious of the way I look at events. If I read reports or in doing research I find something that is contrary to my garb, I do the best I can to make it more period and authentic.


I'm not saying I'm the most authentic person in Missouri -- far from it. But if you were to compare me to the members of my battery, I would be on the progressive side of things.