Progressive? Hardcore??

[ley74]

Re: Progressive? Hardcore??

Heir Schmidt:

Not to pretend for one minute to get into Paul's skull, my fondness for this forum has been its willingness to help people along. Several points:

Many more people read this forum than post. (Me for one.) The discussion among the H/As is truly enlightening and trends many to loftier aspirations.

Many have made the jump to the dark-side as a result of this forum. Some not all the way but ,placing an emphasis on forum titles serves only to put up barriers. Defeating what seems to be the purpose of the forum.

If the true H/As are burning out from the evangelical mission of this forum, (and some may be) it is a true shame. Other boards/forums have resorted to very restrictive parts of their forum, to enable the elite to converse without the interuption of the unwashed.

For those of us who watch more than post, it is obvious that the relationship of the quanity of posts between this forum and the Szabo forum is inverted. As the numbers increase, those who choose not to use the "search" feature increases and the overall quality decreases. Rather than answer the same question for the umteenth time, most posters are directed to the search feature. If a poster does not follow our rules (names on posts for instance) no quarter is given. Only so much can be tolerated.

This community is heavily populated with some of the most gifted and prolific researchers outside (and possibly inside) academia. As an example, you have helped me off-line to improve some of my projects. I thank you for sharing your gifts. The joy in our portrayals and research should be to continue to foster those who would contribute, not be shy in gleaning wheat from shaff and hold our events to the correct standards.

What was it that Pogo said? "I have met the enemy and he is us!"

[billwatson]

nothing wrong with "authentic"

Merriam-Webster:
Main Entry: au·then·tic
Pronunciation: &-'then-tik, o-
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English autentik, from Middle French autentique, from Late Latin authenticus, from Greek authentikos, from authentEs perpetrator, master, from aut- + -hentEs (akin to Greek anyein to accomplish, Sanskrit sanoti he gains)
1 obsolete : AUTHORITATIVE
2 a : worthy of acceptance or belief as conforming to or based on fact b : conforming to an original so as to reproduce essential features c : made or done the same way as an original

There are more, but these are the ones relevant to our discussion. And consider the connotations if we said "authenticated" campaigner or whatever. In that sense, "authenticated," that's what I thought the site was striving for from the very beginning, where you go to find out how to do it based on factual knowledge and informed insight.

All of these labels make me tired. There have been attempts over the years to control the language of the discussion. So you've got a word originally intended to convey a condition of change (progressive) used to label one tier of reenactor. As pointed out, all reenactors are either changing or not changing, and it has nothing to do with where they are on the authenticity scale. So what was that definition of "progressive" as "mainstreamer but trying to do better" or whatever all about? Oh, nothing, just perhaps an attempt by some to make others think that they had arrived at the hall of the gods and were where everyone will go when they have "finished" their progression. "I'm perfect, you're still trying." etc.

If you walk away from all the discussion about how "campaigner" is a misnomer because after all we don't just portray soldiers on campaign, you can use the phrase in another way. It's true, it only describes one of the soldierly conditions we depict. But it might very well define our endeavors as living historians. A "campaigner" could easily be a reenactor/living historian who is not sitting in the garrison camp of endeavor, but is actively campaigning -- moving in a wilderness of knowledge and experience in search of greater authenticity. Authentic campaigner.

When you think about it, people kind of split along garrison/campaign lines in their real worlds, too. Some folks are satisfied just sitting around sleeping in the barracks and polishing the guns, other folks are itchy and need to be out looking for a challenge. George Follanbee Babbitt compared to Ahab.

Whew. :-)

[marine05]

Re: Progressive? Hardcore??

First let me say that the name for the forum is excellent for the following reasons:

1. Most of us are progressives (for if we are not continually seeking improvement the we are saying "I am perfect" which not one of us are), with no other descriptors, as we are trying through research, both our own and that of others, to improve our impressions and provide to those that are interested a glimpse into the live of a ACW era person, military or civilian.

2. There is a wealth of authentic pictures, writings, etc. covering virtually every aspect of the war and period life.

3. Campaigner has a nice ring, besides what other word really fits, authentic campers, authenic play soldiers, authentic personages.

The only bone I continually pick is with those that are wrapped around garb and equipment and matching it specifically to a particular year. Even names like RD-II jacket, a reenactor designation, or the apparent perference for Enfields vice Springfields, knowing that the latter was produced at twice the quantity as the former, detract from authenticity. Being on active duty for nearly 30 years has taught me that there are no absolutes concerning the military or the government, as an example in the Marine Corps we have two differernt fighting knives, the K-bar and new bayonet, so we also have two bayonets, old and new; we have two different kevlar helmets, the new "lightweight" and the older model that is .5 lbs heavier; 4 different types of combat boots; three different models of the HMMWV; three models of the M-16; three models of packs; three models of canteens; two flak jackets. Some changes we make for active forces (regulars) only and some for all. So for a fellow to come up to another reenactor and state "after so and so date in 1863 no one used that" pretty much doesn't understand how the military works and more or less always has.

This website is a superb resource and a learning tool. "Authentic Campaigner" hits the nail on the head it encourages us to set goals, progress to them and then set higher goals. It is sort of like position improvement, it is continuous.

And please pardon the soapbox, there was no intend to demean or insult, just making a point that we all have something to learn and this is the place to do it!

s/f

DJM

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Progressive? Hardcore??

Hallo Kameraden!

Ah, the flames of discussion are dwindling and embers barely glowing- so I will stir them once more with the Devil's Advocate Stick, while wearing the Devil's Advocate Hat, and then disappear for a spell...

"Most of us are progressives (for if we are not continually seeking improvement the we are saying "I am perfect" which not one of us are), with no other descriptors, as we are trying through research, both our own and that of others, to improve our impressions and provide to those that are interested a glimpse into the live of a ACW era person, military or civilian.

The Philosophy of Progressivism is a sound one, and a very, very good one- for if one is NOT moving forward, one is actually moving BACKWARD (there is no standing still).

While it holds us in good stead mentally, in the Mental World of Attitude, Self-perception, Inter- and Introspection, and Philosophy-- IMHO, it fails us miserably in the area of Application and Function.
Because "Progressive" (any any catch phrase or buzzword that is curently in vogue or de rigeur) is self-applied- how do we as event hosts and event sponsors determine that the "ability of the person is such that it can not only minimally support the goals and objectives of our "event," but actually further it for the benefit of the participant himself/herself AS WELL as their comrades?

Going back to this experience at OUTPOST:

"While that may be fine for the Progressive M-er bringing along the Progressive F-er, or the Progressive C-er bringing up the Progressive M-er. But how does this work:

After driving 14 hours to the OUTPOST event, to be assigned to a rifle pit for the weekend with the "Progressive" out on just his third "reenactment, and a "Progressive" in his second year of Mainstream life"

Neither one could meet "OUTPOSTS'" EBUFU standards for clothing and gear, but more importantly NEITHER knew or could relate to "impression," "persona," "the scenario," or the unit and men being portrayed and the why and the what they were there doing.

Yet, if one were to ask those two, they would boldly and proudly self-proclaim themselves as "H/A's," or failing that, "Progressives, fully having earned the right to be there by being first 'juried' as well as by supporting the
goals of the OUTPOST event."

Agreed. Labels do not work. Definitions do not work. Terms and classifications do not work. Buzzwords do not work.

What does work to help ensure, assure, insure that an EBUFU event set at the H/A "level," better yet, "requiring certain things" from its participants can do see that the majority in attendance can, will, and do meet and support the event's intentions.

Can "I" (a mythical self and unreal cyber entity created for the AC Forum) really expect to go to a so-called H/A event and not have it "busted" and/or crashed by F/Mers unable to support it at any level (except perhaps "numbers") but self-declaring themeselves to be "Progressives" and not only highly worthy, but deserving to "be there?"

Second, for the AC Forum... IF the AC Forum serves as the "College or university" for the H/A Community and all those "alphabet lads" desiring, striving, working, "progessing" to get "there... anyone can READ the AC Forum and learn. Why, necessarily does 13 year old Little Johnnie Farbycake
(no slight intended or directed at the real Little Johnnie Farbycake, a Progressive I can vouch for...) "need" to post questions about whether Federals wore blue or not here on the AC Forum when there are others more suited for those questions?
And where do, or should, or could the AC Forum Mods "draw a line?"

Or as Robert Burns said: Ye best laid intentions o' mice an' men oft ging aglae?

No one sees it, since they have not been there yet, enough, at all?

Well, here ends the Devil's Advocacy for this week, and my attempt to foster and support a discussion during the Summer Doldrums.. ;-) :-)

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt
Heretic, Blasphemer, Agitator, Cogitator Mess
A Proud Member of the Breaking an Egg to Make an Omelette Rifles

[billwatson]

Re: Progressive? Hardcore??

I love paradigms. One of my favorites is to operate on the basis that most problems are never really solved, they are merely replaced with other problems you can either deal with more efficiently or would prefer to have over the original ones. It eliminates a lot of frustration.

There's no standing still for reenacting as a hobby, nor is there any standing still for the various interest groups within the hobby. Either progress or regress. For those interested in authentically depicting history, here's the alternatives in this combined paradigm of "no real solutions/progress or regress" :
1. Set up standards so that only those now at a certain level of knowledge and skill can participate, and dwindle in numbers as the group erodes through attrition and no new members are taken in;
2. Set up a system that accepts people wherever they are so long as they are interested in progressing, and grow -- but accept that a certain level of discussion and a certain amount of resources will be consumed at a level those farther along the progression consider redundant and repetitive.

There's a kind of corollary thought: If people who are interested in a richer and more informed depiction of history, and they can't come in here and be tolerated with their basic and even childish questions, where then will they go? And how will people become skilled and knowledgable enough about depicting history to qualify for participatory membership here?

And to expand on that thought just a little bit, the Unitarians have a kind of approach to things that,curiously, resonates. The Unitarians I have always thought of as a kind of church for people who aren't dogmatic about religion. Their comment to parents: "If you aren't teaching your children about God, who is?" If we are not willing to take a moment to explain to a kid which side wore blue and which side wore grey and why, who will? You know darn well who will, and you're essentially driving people who want to grow into the camps of the philistines....

[marine05]

Re: Progressive? Hardcore??

Ah, so many varying shades of grey, especially to those that want to paint the perfect contrast between black and white, ultimate and penultimate, etc. If one feels that they have reached the pinnacle of reenacting, it must be remembered that from the pinnacle the only direction is down, so another peak must be found to scale.

The point has been made about this site, I believe and paraphrasing from Gen John A. Lejeune, "...the relationship should be more like teacher and student." We are all students here, and at the same time teachers, for there is always some tidbit of information to be harvested from the fields of history. Remember once a upon a time all of us were babes, knowing nothing about the world. What if all those 'grown-ups' had shunned us and not imparted their worldly experience upon us? Let us be tolerant of those who ask, for remember even if you have heard the question 500 times, it is the first time that individual has asked.

I have yet to meet a person of any hobby or walk of life that was born with the knowledge of the ages. All of us make up our own titles, is there a test to become a hardcore? Who made you one, is there a commission that selects? I believe that all of us, what ever we call ourselves are self-proclaimed. I will say it is quite obvious to any observer those that play at this and those that are serious.

Fan the flames!!!!

s/f

DJM

[Charles Heath]

Re: Progressive? Hardcore??

Part I: Unjumbling the Xmas Tree Lights

Curt et al,

As per your original question, the A-C Forum name works well. First I've always like Allis-Chalmers products, and "A-C" shows up near the top of those alphabetized lists of favorite places on the web. It's as good a name as any, and given the gyrations halts-and-starts from Easy Forum to EZBoard to the Glenn Jones era to the present configuration, it doesn't need any more instability, disruptions, changes, and so on. Some months have been a rough ride on the A-C.

Bob Sullivan probably laid things out well some years ago with a quip about anyone more authentic than he was a hardcore, and anyone with less attention to authenticity was a farb. Black, white, and gray with most people feeling they fell in somewhere in the middle.

In terms of the six classifications of reenactors, the A-C had a copy of my earlier postings and some great comments from Cal Kinzer alongside Paul's later article. A number of us, as you mentioned recently, learned a lesson about archiving articles on websites. A similar effort was published in CCG circa summer 1986, and that was either a four or five group examination. I cleared out a good number of CCGs over the past winter, but may still have that one in a filing cabinet. If anyone happens to have a copy of my ramblings on the subject, originally posted under Phineas Pharb, or Cal's essay, please feel free to post them here.

The term "Progressive," as applied to reenactors, comes from a book about race, religion, and politics in 20th Century Richmond, and before that the national Progressive Era of politics. Remember reading "The Jungle?" Well, that's the gist of things, as a certain reform was needed. It appears to have done the intended job over the past few years.

In effect, without using monikers, reenactors fall into a number of groups, namely those who:

- really don't give a dang
- have some clues, but not too many
- have good gear, but camp poorly
- enjoy distance events, and don't get caught up in the gear
- move beyond the gear, camp well, and explore historical nuances
- have a microfocus on gear and really not much else

Group 1: To this day, I still see people wearing work boots, leaving coolers outside tents, fantasy drill, and doing all sorts of things more closely related to camping in funny clothing as opposed to anything remotely related to history. The now defunct Cobb's Legion springs to mind, but most any Fighting Valley Division group will provide the needed imagery. Like a few old lawnmowers I have known, it's good to realize they are beyond the scope and scale of repair abilities. Even Hercules couldn't clean those stables.

Group 2: The next group does really have clues, but not too many. These would be the Vinnie's Brigade, Longstreet's Corps, and so forth. Even the mainstream has subtle subdivisions. Some of these folks try to keep a clean camp, some don't.

Group 3: Some of the other otherwise mainstream groups have excellent gear, but retain the poor camping habits of the previous group. Basically gearheads in common tents for the rebs, and gearheads in dog tents for the feds. Sit on a cooler, drink a cold beer from the tin cup, and talk about how great that new Ben Tart jacket looks.

Group 4: The group that enjoys distance events have a tough time finding that type of event, and at one time went great lengths to attend such events as Raymond 1, the Red River series, and other "march" events. If for no other reason that the love of distance, they could be called self-sufficient marchers, or the Volksmarchers of the reenacting hobby. For what it is worth, these same fellows would attend less attractive events, hang out, go home muttering about the state of the hobby and look forward to the next marching event.

Group 5: Surely there could be a synergistic combination of the gearheads and the marchers? That was the missing link, IMHO, and it was also a confidence game. More on that later, but one had to either be a gearhead or a marcher to move into this category. These people yearned for information, and books like The Hardcracker Handbook, and 3rd Miss. Inf. Handbook were of great value.

Group 6: The last group was more mythical than functional. Knowledge was hoarded, makers were kept secret. Frankly, sitting around under shade trees talking about how many cap pouches a maker could reproduce or how many cartridge boxes were kewl and which ones weren't wasn't a heck of a lot different than listening to folks in the first group earnestly wish they could predict what would have happened at Vicksburg had Johnston arrived with sufficient troops to attack Grant. (Bet you thought I was going to say "if only Stonewall had lived!" There had to be something more than gear-gear-nothing-but-gear, and some in the hobby may remember a mention of "the year to get beyond the gear." What a big disappointment to get to that level and thing "is this all there is?"

I'm leaving out a lot of parts, but this subject has been beaten to death over the years. The strange part is each group can get along with the group next to it (especially if they needed numbers for an event), but moving two groups over was like oil and water. Not sure why, but others have mentioned that over the years.

So to add in the labels:

Group 1: Farb
Group 2: Mainstream
Group 3: Authenticist*
Group 4: Campaigner
Group 5: Progressive
Group 6: Hardcore

At one point termed the "authentics" due to clothing and equipment details, but the only authentics have been dead for nearly a half-century.

There's a method to this madness, and I'll try to continue that a little later in Part II: Teaching and Preaching. Try to hold yer fire until the end.

Charles Heath

[Charles Heath]

Re: Progressive? Hardcore??

Part II: Teaching and Preaching

Pogue says, "Who is us?" Hard question to answer, isn't it?

If you'll notice, there's something missing in the first part. It's mostly about gear, linear events, and little about history or period army activities, such as tactics (drill), and vignettes like issuing rations, pickets, and guard duty. Something else is also missing, and that is the spread of information.

The idea people could share information outside their peer group was pretty dang novel. Sure, CCG had some great articles in the middle of some maudlin event reports, recipes, whines, and parodies. It didn't scratch the surface, and at some point a grassroots effort was building where people wanted to know more, do more, and about the same time quality gear was becoming easier to purchase, and could be acquired in days rather than 14-18 months. It used to be a standing joke about how many people were in and out of the hobby before they ever received their gear from the handful of quality makers. Folks would fixate on gear for months at a time, and then when it came in, they'd have few places to go other than fests or SOYA LH events

While this is starting to sound like the history of the world part, MCMLXVIII, there's a point -- eventually. One of the big breaks in terms of information was the Hardcracker Handbook. In spite of warts and copyright questions, it was a good idea. It filled in many gaps, and the time was right for such a publication. The Watchdog had been quietly barking along providing sort of a Consumer Reports at a time when such was truly needed. The information quandry was solved by email, listservers, and forums. It allowed a good many "readers" aka students thirsting for knowledge to stand on the shoulders of a few dozen "researchers."

Information sharing signaled the end of information hoarding. Knowledge is power, and much of that power now shifted to people with access to the internet. Gone were the $400 per month phone bills, too. This gain in information caused a demand for quality goods. Anyone remember the great blanket shortage? Nowadays, one can't swing a cat without hitting a quality federal issue reproduction blanket. A fresh fish these days can oufit himself in gear a hardcore of only a dozen years ago could barely dream about -- and all within a week thanks to in-stock vendors. Likewise, some of the older makers have passed on, but their production items remain cherished. This caused sufficient demand for goods to create the luxurious market we have today.

Information and gear problems solved. Perfect? No. Workable? Yes. With knowledge and gear in hand, what is there to do? How about putting them to use. Outside the small numbers at LHs, and outside the herds of cattle at megafests, there wasn't much going on in terms of events in the battalion (100-150 men) range for people who wanted to campaign (walk somewhere) with this newfound gear and knowledge. Over the years, the carpe eventums (seize a corner of an event and hold it) aka interpretive areas, and campaigner adjuncts (event marches) were pretty much the bread and butter, but for God's sake, look at all the circus in th background, foreground, and even planes with banners flying overhead (I don't mean the Hunley situation, either). The unsolved paradigm was events by people who wanted a certain type of event for people who also wanted that type of event. Others just wanted to collect reproduction clothing.

Crazy, but it worked, and those events in some cases defied a label. How could campaigners enjoy a garrison event in an old masonry fort guarding prisoners in casemates? How could 1,200 men ranging from farbs to 'cores march side by side a heat baked route in Mississippi for three days, or a week in Louisiana? How come folks couldn't organize those same events in their backyards? They did, and people came to those events and enjoyed them. Suddenly, the stand alone event became popular, but in the background was the nagging realization of the human costs inherent in recruiting for these efforts, and the shock as to the lack of retention. Some people, grabbed the model by the horns and made a quantum leap. You know who you are. Others vaguely thought they might know someone who had been to an event and made some poor reproduction of events they should have attended. It was a mixed bag. Events were either really good or really bad, as the learning curve was steep.

Units that had a little gumption, realized they could fill their ranks with flotsam, jetsam, mainstreamers, and whatever. Some groups understood they could use the rest of the hobby as filler. Other groups were more altruistic and adopted these new-to-the-dark-side people and began to re-educate them in a long term approach. In some cases, it was their first education. This is nothing new really, as people were mentoring since before the CW centennial.

Mentoring? There's a word. What happened to those people who went back to big events to show the streamers. Well, a good number of them never returned having burned out on that suicide mission. Others realized it was better to bring along new folks to the better events where they could see how things worked, or not. After someone had progressed, it was hard to go back again. Lost a lot of crusaders that way. Remember the mortal combat over galvanizing? Dual impressions? The birth of a federal campaign battalion in the East?

In a rambling nutshell, that's the teaching and preaching end of it. To get back to the name of it, there's merit in the "authentic campaigner" name. One cannot get an authentic experience as if on campaign sitting around at a mainstream event in a see of mediocrity and ironmongery, seas of canvas, and camping "campaign style." It does no good, and it is false notion to think it is even remotely related to a campaign. Perhaps the people on this forum are those who seek the few and far in between campaign events, thus they are in search of the authentic campaign. Not totally unrelated is the quest to preserve the ground on which the original campaigns and battles were made, for a preservation march in a shopping mall parking lot just isn't the same, is it? It's a journey. Mike Murley had a wonderful essay about "The Journey" that was deemed controversial at the time it was posted and then deleted by the heavy hand of the provost on Szabo's. Bill Watson alluded to this in his post with his not towards "authenticity" being the truth, and the "campaign" being a "journey" towards that truth. The joy is in the trip itself, not the destination. I like this, "campaigning -- moving in a wilderness of knowledge and experience in search of greater authenticity." Gee, semantics are fun.

Or are they? Without sounding too much like a popular presidential candidate, let's look at another side of the issue. Remember that comment about a masonry fort event, such as I-600-I or I-600-II? How about the fabulous 151st NY's Winter 1864 event in Newfane NY? The civilian on civilian battles at Athens, MO, in 2001? What of Outpost 1999 and 2000? Harper's Ferry Election Day? Those are not exactly campaign events, but very good events nonetheless. We found a glimpse of truth in those places. Just a glimpse, but it was a clearer vision that say at 135th Gettysburg (aka Goofysburg) in 1998, or any Resaca of the Damned: Return of the Living Coon Peter Bone.

Something else is missing. What is it? Remember all those activities from events? Pay call, mail call, packages from home, a ride on a train, wagons rolling along, mounted artillery, a recalcitrant pack mule, playing games, picket duty, roll call, guard duty, minstrel shows, ration issues, equipment issues, ammunition issues, snake oil salesmen, foraging, fatigue details, skits, period politics, home life, plays, tableus, revivals, and finally picking up the manual to rediscover (for the first time) drill. Mainstreamers used to do that. At some point they abdicated those period activities and I really don't know why. Just look at how a handful of people have revived bugle work to the extent there is a shortage of horn tooters.

To get back to Curt's quandry in the field, at events, a company such as Bill Watson's Company I, and those that came before it, work fairly well. Outpost, by nature of the 1-2-3-4 system of organization on site would have partially negated this, but that system is rare. I've been shouted down a few times that this forum needed a sump where a post could either move from here to Szabo's at the press of a button (see the question about the locked Museum of the Confederacy Haversack Gift Shop's Stars N Bars necktie thread for an example), or the non-flame bait honest questions could go into a special place for "incubation" or "awkward squad" or maybe the "camp of instruction." How does one vet those questions? That I don't know. It really is a subjective area, and every objective tool I can imagine for this purpose has flaws.

To be blunt, "Progressive" has been bastardized within the hobby to mean anyone who has just upgraded his shoe laces is now halfway to hardcore. It was intended to be a level where the pursuit of authenticity took on a holistic approach. On one hand, I wish I had not introduced or promoted the concept of the Progressive Reenactor for years and years ad nauseum; however, I realize about half the people posting on this forum wouldn't be here had not such a pyramid scheme transpired to get people to attend better events, and then get their pards to attend better events, and so on. Ya know what? Event attendance has gone into the toilet. It has been sliding since early 2002. "Attendance" also includes not making projected attendance forecasts. Some of you know what I mean.

With event attendance in a slump due to a combination of a variety of heavy duty factors, maybe this is a good time for some introspection, perhaps even some rebuilding. The question remains "who is us?" I believe the "us" is smaller than it was about 3-4 years ago. The numbers aren't there. Hard to be a functional brigade with a handful of men. Hard to be a battalion with a company. Perhaps some adjustment in event design in terms of scope and scale is in order during this ebb. I'm speaking of stand alone events, and not necessarily the add ons, like the carpe eventums and campaigner adjuncts. It's way past time to move the primary focus away from the accessory events to the stand alones, IMHO.

On to Part III: More Whining

Charles Heath

[Charles Heath]

Re: Progressive? Hardcore??

On to Part III: More Whining

It's raining like crazy and the sun is shining. Not all of life make sense. For folks who haven't been around a while, this doesn't make a lot of sense either.

Dividing the hobby into two factions wasn't anything new. Exacerbating that schism was something that worked to the EBUFU advantage, at least for a while. Basically, if someone wanted more than the typical cooler-n-cot fest, they had a choice. Pounding on the evils of for-profit megafests and other gross crimes against history worked well for recruiting when they were still around. After a bad G'burg, recruiting went up. Same for every really crappy Chancellorsville, Sharpsburg, Grant-vs-Lee, Manassas, and so on. "Still going to the wrong events?" was a good battle cry. Maybe everyone needs to go to a really crappy event about every 24 months to remember just how good it is on the dark side of the moon. (Here's a poorly kept secret, most folks in the CPH world do go to a FMA event at least once each year, if only to shop and hang out.)

People needed a choice, and they took the road less traveled for a while. The problem with some EBUFU events is they are cookie cutter. I hate to point out certain LHs have earned the acronym "SOYA" (Sit On Yer Arse) events, but it is true. They are only made more dull and boring when one considers they may have spent $800-1,000 for an event, instead of mowing their yard. In non-monetary terms, the study time, the other prep time, and organizational tasks do take a toll. Simply put, EBUFU events are more challenging in a variety of on and off field areas. As time goes on, they get progressively more challenging, or at least they should, and that is one contributor to burn out.

Life was good when "the us" could focus on 3-4 events each year. The calendar has spread out to include 12-15 events or more. Some of the conflicts have been the results of success, and trying to build on that success. (No finger pointing.) With a shrinking customer base, expanding venues is probably not a good idea. One of the unpopular ideas is for folks to consolidated their efforts in the upcoming lean year, and get back to not spreading "the us" too thin. I'll probably get tossed off this fine board (again) for the next two comments, but so be it. I've taken the sacrifice bunt a few times before.

First, this coming weekend is a really nice little event over in Boonsboro, Maryland. Perhaps you have heard of it. Take a look in the events section under "The Gates of Washington." Your friends, peers, and pards on the field, have busted their tails to put on an event that they hope is as good or better than the Fire on the Mountain effort in September 2000. These fellows moved an unspeakable farbfest from the mid-late 1990s to a rather decent event the last time around, to what they hope is an even better offering. They have about 900 people, and are hoping for more. This is a good time to support your friends.

Second, the Burkittsville event is hurtin'. If you want to go, you'd best make it known by registering now. Deadline is August 1st. I won't go into any details (ain't my place, and it would be wrong to do so) but the event does not have the registration dollars to make it happen at the moment. This is also a good time to support your friends.

If "the us" doesn't support their own events, then who will? I'd really hate to see that progress go down the toilet.

That's my whine, and I'm sticking to it,
Charles Heath

[Lone_Rebel87]

Re: Progressive? Hardcore??

Amen and bully for you! :D

Jordan Davis

[ScottMcKay]

Re: Progressive? Hardcore??

Heath,

One group that you did not mention was the one that has their gear up to snuff so much that they don't have time, nor incling to discuss the trappings of clothing & gear, but rather they live a term (whether it be a weekend or week) of surviving as a soldier ... complete with military protocol and responsibilities ... and armed with enough researched history or the timeframe of that scenario that they can mesh into it so much that they don't have time to discuss 2004 ... much less think of it.

That's what I call HARDCORE!

[LibertyHallVols]

Re: Progressive? Hardcore??

"Brevity is the soul of wit" -- Shakespeare.

[Charles Heath]

Re: Progressive? Hardcore??

Scott,

Yep, I left out a heck of a lot. Didn't want anyone to suffer needlessly from Chronic Campaigner Attention Deficit Disorder.

Anyhow, thanks for hitting the cream puff out of the ballpark, as I knew you would, but you left out the part about how all true 'cores believe in the courtesy flush! :D

Charles Heath

[marine05]

Re: Progressive? Hardcore??

Bottom line in my book is in order to present yourself as a soldier of the ACW you must endeavor to be that soldier in all respects. I have been a soldier (Marine) for better than 1/2 my life and it is easy for me to pick out a person that has been trained "under discipline" and one who has not. Even in reenactors it is fairly easy for me to pick out a reenactor that has been a military member and one who has not. You can take the soldier (Marine, sailor, etc) out of the army, but you can't take the soldier out of the man. Military people are fairly neat, organized and wear their gear in a soldierly and comfortable fashion, stand straighter and unconsciously fall into step with the person they are walking with. He can be dressed in rags, but there will be not mistaking the soldier. You can see the difference in the civilian wearing a military uniform, as it looks like a civilian wearing a suit of clothes, look at new recruits at any of the current basic training commands (primarily because the look like a soup sandwich or a sea bag with lips). In ACW vernacular there was a difference between a soldier and a scalawag.

s/f

DJM

[Charles Heath]

Re: Progressive? Hardcore??

You bring up a great point:

"...but you can't take the soldier out of the man."

Getting rid of the muscle memory in the hands at the position of the soldier (attention) is about as difficult a habit to undo as any I know.

Charles Heath