-- In WarOf1812@egroups.com
, "Terry Lubka" <tlubka@p...> wrote:
> all my readings of personal diaries they often referred to the
> as "Frogs"... but the question is how far
> should a reenactor go to portray the person in history?
In your 19th century persona, it's understandable, because we (the
public and the other reenactors) are aware that you are speaking as a
person of that time. The 19th C. French soldier would've spoken a few
pithy insults at his English enemy. So would the person re-enacting
him. But are you in your 19th century persona when you are e-mailing
Just out of interest, sometimes I don't think people are concious they are doing this kind of thing.
I was recently at a meeting of a 'side' to which I do not belong, (no names, period or location!) and when I pointed out that, during this planning meeting, people were consistantly referring to their re-enactor compatriots as 'the enemy', they were genuinely surprised.
So as I say I think that quite often it is unconcious and then, when someone takes offence and comes back with a similar slur the original person defends the original remark and off we go!
If we remember we are friends first a lot of this will go away.
Of course it does help if one can tell the diference between being funny and being offensive!