LCYingling3rd
Sergeant
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2021
- Location
- Lycoming Co., PA/Sarasota Co., FL
I really didn't think age 66 was old, but I am not up to snuff on all of this stuff!
I literally thought "cosplay" was limited to those that like going to ComiCon type events and dressing up as Marvel comics type characters! It would never dawn on me to consider what living historians (reenactors) wear as a "costume." "Period dress" or "period clothing" would be the terms I would use. A "costume" is associated with the theatre to me. And I don't think that living historians go through line memorization and weeks of rehearsal before their events. That is what someone in a "costume" must do in my mind??? But I am obviously out of touch!
I am not a reenactor/living historian; however, I have been a spectator at historical events since the early 1990's. I did get to participate in the Cedar Creek event in 2006 and that was enough for me because it was an absolutely awesome experience, and I could feel the powerful pull and dizzying sensation of me falling down that very expensive and time-consuming rabbit hole; and I really could not expend the time or money to do that correctly. Needless to say, in my mind the terms "reenactor" and "living historian" are essentially synonymous.
I understand that most people associate the terms "reenactment" and "reenactor" with the big events where historic battles are being "reenacted." I don't know, but I think many people associate the terms "living history" and "living historian" with the more "static" events where the participants are simply demonstrating camp or fort life and may set off a cannon or fire a musket to show how it was done to the spectators. I really never saw the distinction. At the static event the participants are "reenacting" camp life? As far as I can tell? And, at the large battle events the participants are also certainly "educating" the spectators.
Honestly, I thought that all such events were called reenactments, and the participants were all called reenactors back when I first started attending. I found that the participants began preferring to call themselves "living historians" because they weren't simply reenacting history, they were attempting to live it, and if spectators were present, they could help the spectators better understand what that history looked like.
Yes, I understand that there are varying degrees of accuracy from Farve to stitch counting Hardcores. But the fact of the matter is that I was a historical snob for a long time. I thought only we book studying history buffs were in it for the actual history. I thought reenactors were just weekend warriors who wanted to play army on weekends. People who traded in their paintball guns for toy muskets! I found that I was not only extremely wrong, but that many of the reenactors knew far more about Civil War history than I did! I remember my first camp walks with my children and grandchildren and how we would stop and talk to people and they would explain cooking or weapons or cavalry equipment. Or whatever. We all learned a lot!
The reenactments were also "living history" in the sense that you can experience it in a different way than you experience history in books. I remember attending the 135th Antietam event where there were close to 13,000 living historians. I remember watching the troops moving through the landscape, maneuvering around clumps of trees, rocks, varying degrees of elevation; breaking apart and regrouping as they moved. It was something that my books did not describe very well, and it wasn't until then that I got a sense of what troops moving on a battlefield may have looked like.
Oh, we spectators realize that it isn't "real." There will be no limbs blown off and shell fragments shredding flesh. But of course, we also realize that many, many more men would be falling. We understand that there were no aluminum canteens. But from a distance that is okay with me. And if that is what it takes a beginner to afford the hobby, well, we will deal with it. We also see the occasional digital camera on the battlefield and the bag of UTZ potato chips in camp. In general, though, there are excellent history lessons to be had at these events.
For these reasons I use both terms interchangeably. However, I prefer to call all of the participants "living historians" because they are bringing history to life for me like no book can. I don't smell the powder and the bacon or hear the boom of cannon in a book. (I remember one year at Cedar Creek when a battery up above the Heater House got six guns to fire simultaneously and it was grand! Not only could I feel the pressure wave, but it also set off car alarms in the parking area! Okay, that wouldn't have happened in the 1800's, but it was way cool!) There are so many ways that these events educate like books can't. It was wonderful to see children get excited about history. Many history schoolteachers are fabulous, however, attending these events really brings history to life for children like no classroom can. My kids and grandkids are grown and now they are interested in history because of these events. That is fabulous to me!
I guess I am an old head. "Cosplay?!?" I just can't swallow that term. And these people dressing up to have their picture taken is neither reenacting nor living history to me. It's just silliness.... But maybe fun for them...who knows...
I literally thought "cosplay" was limited to those that like going to ComiCon type events and dressing up as Marvel comics type characters! It would never dawn on me to consider what living historians (reenactors) wear as a "costume." "Period dress" or "period clothing" would be the terms I would use. A "costume" is associated with the theatre to me. And I don't think that living historians go through line memorization and weeks of rehearsal before their events. That is what someone in a "costume" must do in my mind??? But I am obviously out of touch!
I am not a reenactor/living historian; however, I have been a spectator at historical events since the early 1990's. I did get to participate in the Cedar Creek event in 2006 and that was enough for me because it was an absolutely awesome experience, and I could feel the powerful pull and dizzying sensation of me falling down that very expensive and time-consuming rabbit hole; and I really could not expend the time or money to do that correctly. Needless to say, in my mind the terms "reenactor" and "living historian" are essentially synonymous.
I understand that most people associate the terms "reenactment" and "reenactor" with the big events where historic battles are being "reenacted." I don't know, but I think many people associate the terms "living history" and "living historian" with the more "static" events where the participants are simply demonstrating camp or fort life and may set off a cannon or fire a musket to show how it was done to the spectators. I really never saw the distinction. At the static event the participants are "reenacting" camp life? As far as I can tell? And, at the large battle events the participants are also certainly "educating" the spectators.
Honestly, I thought that all such events were called reenactments, and the participants were all called reenactors back when I first started attending. I found that the participants began preferring to call themselves "living historians" because they weren't simply reenacting history, they were attempting to live it, and if spectators were present, they could help the spectators better understand what that history looked like.
Yes, I understand that there are varying degrees of accuracy from Farve to stitch counting Hardcores. But the fact of the matter is that I was a historical snob for a long time. I thought only we book studying history buffs were in it for the actual history. I thought reenactors were just weekend warriors who wanted to play army on weekends. People who traded in their paintball guns for toy muskets! I found that I was not only extremely wrong, but that many of the reenactors knew far more about Civil War history than I did! I remember my first camp walks with my children and grandchildren and how we would stop and talk to people and they would explain cooking or weapons or cavalry equipment. Or whatever. We all learned a lot!
The reenactments were also "living history" in the sense that you can experience it in a different way than you experience history in books. I remember attending the 135th Antietam event where there were close to 13,000 living historians. I remember watching the troops moving through the landscape, maneuvering around clumps of trees, rocks, varying degrees of elevation; breaking apart and regrouping as they moved. It was something that my books did not describe very well, and it wasn't until then that I got a sense of what troops moving on a battlefield may have looked like.
Oh, we spectators realize that it isn't "real." There will be no limbs blown off and shell fragments shredding flesh. But of course, we also realize that many, many more men would be falling. We understand that there were no aluminum canteens. But from a distance that is okay with me. And if that is what it takes a beginner to afford the hobby, well, we will deal with it. We also see the occasional digital camera on the battlefield and the bag of UTZ potato chips in camp. In general, though, there are excellent history lessons to be had at these events.
For these reasons I use both terms interchangeably. However, I prefer to call all of the participants "living historians" because they are bringing history to life for me like no book can. I don't smell the powder and the bacon or hear the boom of cannon in a book. (I remember one year at Cedar Creek when a battery up above the Heater House got six guns to fire simultaneously and it was grand! Not only could I feel the pressure wave, but it also set off car alarms in the parking area! Okay, that wouldn't have happened in the 1800's, but it was way cool!) There are so many ways that these events educate like books can't. It was wonderful to see children get excited about history. Many history schoolteachers are fabulous, however, attending these events really brings history to life for children like no classroom can. My kids and grandkids are grown and now they are interested in history because of these events. That is fabulous to me!
I guess I am an old head. "Cosplay?!?" I just can't swallow that term. And these people dressing up to have their picture taken is neither reenacting nor living history to me. It's just silliness.... But maybe fun for them...who knows...
Bringing the