Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

"reenactors."

Expand Messages
  • Larry Lozon
    ... claiming to be reenactors. ... re-enactors Re en actors Sink me, where would you get that idea Sir ?!?!?
    Message 1 of 22 , Nov 19, 1999
    • 0 Attachment
      >From: "Scott Jeznach" <scottj@...>
      >I think there are a lot of frustrated "actors"
      claiming to be "reenactors."

      --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      re-enactors

      Re en 'actors'

      Sink me,
      where would you
      get that idea Sir ?!?!?
    • Craig Williams
      ... claiming to be reenactors. ... Larry wrote, Re en actors Sink me, where would you get that idea Sir ?!?!? Careful Larry, this is not the first
      Message 2 of 22 , Nov 19, 1999
      • 0 Attachment
        >From: "Scott Jeznach" <scottj@...>
        >I think there are a lot of frustrated "actors"
        claiming to be "reenactors."

        ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Larry wrote,
        Re en 'actors'

        Sink me,
        where would you
        get that idea Sir ?!?!?

        Careful Larry, this is not the first word in the English language with a root word that's dangerously misleading. It's not reenACTOR, it's reENACTor. Hey arn't you the guy who thought recreation, (my preferred word, reduces misconceptions),was a sport not so long ago?
        Love Craig
      • NINETY3RD@xxx.xxx
        ... recreation, ... Well there ya go. BUT -- we can dissect that too: re- EN- *ACT*- or. Act -- that which an actor does. ;-) B
        Message 3 of 22 , Nov 20, 1999
        • 0 Attachment
          In a message dated 19/11/1999 4:44:26 PM, sgtwarnr@... writes:

          >It's not reenACTOR, it's reENACTor. Hey arn't you the guy who thought
          recreation,
          >(my preferred word, reduces misconc


          Well there ya go.
          BUT -- we can dissect that too:
          re- EN- *ACT*- or.
          Act -- that which an actor does.

          ;-)
          B
        • Craig Williams
          Benton said, ... In theory...yes..we hope,(I ve seen a lot of stuff called acting from close up that I wouldn t credit!). Of course if you adhere to Sir
          Message 4 of 22 , Nov 20, 1999
          • 0 Attachment
            Benton said,
            >Act -- that which an actor does.
            >
            In theory...yes..we hope,(I've seen a lot of stuff called acting from close
            up that I wouldn't credit!). Of course if you adhere to Sir Lawrence
            Oliviers' phylosophy," an actor prepares". He researches ,gathers the
            neccessary tools and brings them to his performance and does not stop
            polishing his performance until the wrap party! Now if all re-enactors ,(or
            rather those who don't already), approached thier hobby with the same
            intensity!
            >
            >>The War of 1812: In Europe, thousands fought over the fate of hundreds of
            square miles: in North America, hundreds determined the fate of THOUSANDS of
            square miles...
          • BritcomHMP@xxx.xxx
            In a message dated 11/20/1999 11:47:09 PM Central Standard Time, sgtwarnr@idirect.ca writes:
            Message 5 of 22 , Nov 21, 1999
            • 0 Attachment
              In a message dated 11/20/1999 11:47:09 PM Central Standard Time,
              sgtwarnr@... writes:

              << Benton said,
              >Act -- that which an actor does.
              >
              In theory...yes..we hope,(I've seen a lot of stuff called acting from close
              up that I wouldn't credit!). Of course if you adhere to Sir Lawrence
              Oliviers' phylosophy," an actor prepares". He researches ,gathers the
              neccessary tools and brings them to his performance and does not stop
              polishing his performance until the wrap party! Now if all re-enactors ,(or
              rather those who don't already), approached thier hobby with the same
              intensity! >>

              Ah but Craig. What if a re-enactor is playing first person in front of the
              public, as say a senior officer, and he gives an order which, though safe, is
              against site rules (of which he has not been previously informed) and an
              official of the site, dressed as a private in fatigues, instead of saluting
              and quietly pointing this out, berates him in front of members of the public?
              How should he react? :-) (and no I am not trying to rake up ancient history,
              as I am thoroughly ashamed of my reaction at the time I am genuinely seeking
              guidance as on that occasion I was, initially, just trying to maintain first
              person).

              Kindest regards

              Tim
            • Scott Jeznach
              After posting my last referenced diatribe, I realized I might offend those who are professional actors. (Many apologies to Craig and Benton) I m actually a
              Message 6 of 22 , Nov 22, 1999
              • 0 Attachment
                After posting my last referenced diatribe, I realized I might offend those who are professional actors. (Many apologies to Craig and Benton) I'm actually a big fan of stage and screen.

                My point is: if you want to be an actor, pay your dues, learn from the veterans, and go act on the stage and screen. If you want to be a reenactor, pay your dues, learn from the veterans, then go reenact. Don't confuse one for the other.

                Scott J.
                Royal Marines
                -----Original Message-----
                From: Larry Lozon <lalozon@...>
                To: WarOf1812@onelist.com <WarOf1812@onelist.com>
                Date: Friday, November 19, 1999 4:18 PM
                Subject: [WarOf1812] "reenactors."


                >From: "Scott Jeznach" <scottj@...>
                >I think there are a lot of frustrated "actors"
                claiming to be "reenactors."

                ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

                re-enactors

                Re en 'actors'

                Sink me,
                where would you
                get that idea Sir ?!?!?
              • BritcomHMP@xxx.xxx
                In a message dated 12/2/1999 3:04:27 PM Central Standard Time, sgtwarnr@idirect.ca writes: Craig, Yes indeed it is a serious inquiry. I have always believed
                Message 7 of 22 , Dec 2, 1999
                • 0 Attachment
                  In a message dated 12/2/1999 3:04:27 PM Central Standard Time,
                  sgtwarnr@... writes:

                  Craig,
                  Yes indeed it is a serious inquiry. I have always believed that it is by
                  examining the past that we learn. As I said in initially trying to maintain
                  first person I allowed my buttons to be pushed and am thoroughly ashamed of
                  exploding in the way I did. It is something that I think should be avoided at
                  all cost and in this vein I will answer the very logical points that you put.

                  << Regardless of the dress of the site
                  representative, the re-enactor must adhere to the rules, so that if a safety
                  issue was in need of imminent discussion the site rep. doesn't have to go
                  and change his/her clothes to put something straight.>>

                  Agreed, and for this reason the rules should be spelled out clearly to all
                  who have command positions. One cannot assume that all the rules will be
                  naturally known, however I think it is a good idea to have the controlling
                  site person in modern clothes so that they can interact without looking
                  anachronistic. They could also use the correct uniform and take command,
                  however if command is delegated it should only be delegated to a person
                  trusted by the site, and that person must be fully briefed.


                  << There is inherent
                  danger in making the communication between site and re-enactor adhere to a
                  "role playing" relationship. If a site supervisor is a woman who is of the
                  opinion that women should represent women and does so herself,( to add to
                  the visual mozaic of the event), what impression would she have to be doing
                  to be heeded by say a Major General? >>

                  I think here it is a matter of degrees. The person appointed to command is
                  (or should be made aware of) who is in charge and that person should have the
                  trust to be able to communicate in a period way. In the example you give
                  above the female in charge cold drop a curtsy, say "If you will pardon me
                  sir, it is of great importance that I speak to you in private." This would
                  give the CO the opportunity of speaking quietly and being privately informed
                  of the problem so that he can correct it. If he stupidly ignores her it could
                  escalate but if the CO has been chosen by the site I cannot see him doing
                  this.

                  If on the other hand the female stalks across the paradeground screaming at
                  the top of her voice at the supposed commander of the fort "WHAT THE HELL DO
                  YOU THINK YOU ARE DOING?!!" Especially if he does not know that anything
                  wrong has happened, what is he to do?

                  Which is worse? To allow himself to be berated by someone the public can see
                  is clearly his social inferior?
                  To shout back and say something like "HOW DARE YOU SPEAK TO ME IN THAT
                  MANNER? I WILL SEE YOU IN MY OFFICE THIS MINUET!" (thus giving an opportunity
                  for the two to discuss the problem in private)

                  I am of the opinion that this is a problem that should never happen but if it
                  does I think that some sort of universally accepted guidelines would be an
                  advantage.

                  Cheers

                  Tim
                • Craig Williams
                  Tim, Sorry for my long silence, my e-mail server has been f#*$ed up and I m only now digging out from under. In answer to your query, I m afraid that it does
                  Message 8 of 22 , Dec 2, 1999
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Tim, Sorry for my long silence, my e-mail server has been f#*$ed up and I'm
                    only now digging out from under. In answer to your query, I'm afraid that it
                    does seem curiously like "ancient histoire" but on the basis that you are
                    serious I will say this . Regardless of the dress of the site
                    representative, the re-enactor must adhere to the rules, so that if a safety
                    issue was in need of imminent discussion the site rep. doesn't have to go
                    and change his /her clothes to put something straight. There is inherent
                    danger in making the communication between site and re-enactor adhere to a
                    "role playing" relationship. If a site supervisor is a woman who is of the
                    opinion that women should represent women and does so herself,( to add to
                    the visual mozaic of the event), what impression would she have to be doing
                    to be heeded by say a Major General?

                    Standing by Sir,,

                    Craig
                    >------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  • Larry Lozon
                    Re: an E from: Craig Williams If a site supervisor is a woman who is of the opinion that women should represent women and does so
                    Message 9 of 22 , Dec 2, 1999
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Re: an "E" from: "Craig Williams" <sgtwarnr@...>
                      If a site supervisor is a woman who is of the opinion that
                      women should represent women and does so herself,
                      ( to add to the visual mozaic of the event), what
                      impression would she have to be doing to be heeded
                      by say a Major General?
                      ...................................................

                      This subject was brought up at a meeting
                      at an historical site where a lady is in fact
                      the Supervisor of the site.

                      It was recommended that the lady do the
                      oppression of the commanding officer's
                      wife. And, wear a spencer made of red
                      superfine and having the facings and
                      buttons of the Regiment.

                      In this capacity she would be respected as
                      the Commander's wife and would show
                      some military authority as well.

                      Larry
                    • NINETY3RD@xxx.xxx
                      ... Was that a Freudian slip there Larry? *O*-ppression.....? ;-) B
                      Message 10 of 22 , Dec 3, 1999
                      • 0 Attachment
                        In a message dated 02/12/1999 3:27:21 PM, lalozon@... writes:

                        >It was recommended that the lady do the
                        >
                        >oppression of the commanding officer's
                        >
                        >wife.

                        Was that a Freudian slip there Larry?
                        *O*-ppression.....?

                        ;-)

                        B
                      • Bateman, Andrew
                        Benton Jennings wrote: Was that a Freudian slip there Larry? *O*-ppression.....? ;-) B Andrew writes: Is there an echo in this room?
                        Message 11 of 22 , Dec 3, 1999
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Benton Jennings wrote:

                          Was that a Freudian slip there Larry?
                          *O*-ppression.....?

                          ;-)

                          B

                          Andrew writes:

                          Is there an echo in this room?
                        • NINETY3RD@xxx.xxx
                          ... Echo? What Echo? Echo? What Echo? B
                          Message 12 of 22 , Dec 3, 1999
                          • 0 Attachment
                            In a message dated 03/12/1999 8:23:32 AM, abateman@... writes:

                            >From: "Bateman, Andrew" <abateman@...>
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >Benton Jennings wrote:
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >Was that a Freudian slip there Larry?
                            >
                            >*O*-ppression.....?
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >;-)
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >B
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >Andrew writes:
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >Is there an echo in this room?

                            Echo?

                            What Echo?

                            Echo?

                            What Echo?

                            B
                          • Craig Williams
                            -- ... Two. Me and one to hold my penis..MY MOTHER!...MY LADDER!!!
                            Message 13 of 22 , Dec 3, 1999
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --
                              >>
                              >>
                              >>Was that a Freudian slip there Larry?
                              >>
                              >>*O*-ppression.....?
                              >>
                              >>How many Freudian phyciatrists does it take to change a lightbulb.........





                              Two.



                              Me and one to hold my penis..MY MOTHER!...MY LADDER!!!
                              >>
                              >>Oh grin..Craig
                              >>
                              >>
                              >>
                              >>
                              >>
                              >>
                              >>
                            • Craig Williams
                              Tim, some thoughts on your last missive; for this reason the rules should be spelled out clearly to all who have command positions. You mean sorta like a12
                              Message 14 of 22 , Dec 3, 1999
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Tim, some thoughts on your last missive;

                                "for this reason the rules should be spelled out clearly to all who have
                                command positions. "

                                You mean sorta like a12 page safety guide that includes a schedule that is
                                distributed to all participants if not by mail before hand, then during
                                registration the night before an event?

                                "it is a good idea to have the controlling site person in modern clothes so
                                that they can interact without looking anachronistic."

                                I'm sorry,aren't modern clothes anacronistic?Kidding aside, a site
                                representative should be able to be seen in and around the re-enactors and
                                not be obvious. This way visitors photos are not ruined, and the ambiance
                                can be maintained as much as possible. If it becomes neccessary for a site
                                supervisor to step out of character to address a problem, then it is
                                incumbent on the re-enactors to assist the site rep in rectifying any
                                difficulties. Once the problem has been dealt with then everyone can go
                                back
                                into character. When I was the safety co-ordinator of the Battle of
                                Ridgeway
                                the battle designer and myself were able to drift between both sides
                                unobtrusively because we dressed as period undertakers. I firmly believe
                                that it is up to the discretion of the event co-ordinator what he/she wears
                                to their own party (within historical context), without having to bend over
                                backwards to accomodate the re-enactors.

                                "They could also use the correct uniform and take command",
                                If they know how. There is nothing more dangerous than someone who figures
                                they can command because they've read A book and spent a little or even a
                                lot of money on a swishy bit of schmatta from Whitehall. You know the type.

                                "if command is delegated it should only be delegated to a person
                                trusted by the site, and that person must be fully briefed."

                                Agreed, like at a scheduled meeting prior to the safety meeting which of
                                course would be outlined in the safety/schedule handed out before the event.

                                "The person appointed to command is (or should be made aware of) who is in
                                charge" That would be at the briefing.

                                " and that person should have the trust to be able to communicate in a
                                period way. In the example you give above the female in charge could drop a
                                curtsy, say "If you will pardon me sir, it is of great importance that I
                                speak to you in private."
                                I certainly hope that her next sentence once cloistered behind closed doors
                                is not ,"Your hat is on fire ". This doesn't work in an emergency, Tim.


                                "female stalks across the paradeground screaming at the top of her voice at
                                the supposed commander of the fort "WHAT THE HELL DO YOU THINK YOU ARE
                                DOING?!!"

                                Depending on what she was yelling about, she may be justified . If the
                                re-enactor commander has been supplied with the said documents mentioned
                                before, this problem isn't likely to arise,so I thinks it's moot.

                                I am in total agreement with you when you say that ,"this is a problem
                                that should never happen ", and barring an international conference of
                                historical site supervisors holding a summit on "how to be of complete
                                service to a re-enactor", I think using a little common (sorry I used the
                                "C" word) sense is in order.



                                Just a few thoughts...
                                Craig

                                "God is on the side of the big battalions",Voltaire
                                "No foolin'." Craig Williams
                              • BritcomHMP@xxx.xxx
                                Dear Craig, Obviously we are on the same page. A few other thoughts on your post though.
                                Message 15 of 22 , Dec 4, 1999
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Dear Craig,

                                  Obviously we are on the same page. A few other thoughts on your post though.

                                  <<"for this reason the rules should be spelled out clearly to all who have
                                  command positions. "

                                  You mean sorta like a12 page safety guide that includes a schedule that is
                                  distributed to all participants if not by mail before hand, then during
                                  registration the night before an event?>>

                                  No, I mean that if a specific activity is not allowed at a particular time
                                  while being allowed at others this should be spelled out at the pre event
                                  meeting, not assumed that the non park person in charge happens to be fully
                                  conversant with the variations in the rules.

                                  <<"it is a good idea to have the controlling site person in modern clothes so
                                  that they can interact without looking anachronistic."

                                  I'm sorry,aren't modern clothes anacronistic?Kidding aside, a site
                                  representative should be able to be seen in and around the re-enactors and
                                  not be obvious. This way visitors photos are not ruined, and the ambiance
                                  can be maintained as much as possible. If it becomes neccessary for a site
                                  supervisor to step out of character to address a problem, then it is
                                  incumbent on the re-enactors to assist the site rep in rectifying any
                                  difficulties.>>

                                  No, I mean that in an emergency someone in modern dress can jump in and do
                                  what they like without affecting the first person interactions. For any
                                  member of the public who sees someone other than supposed commander (private,
                                  washerwoman etc.) obviously exercising command at a crucial time the
                                  'theatrical' illusion is gone fore the weekend. As members of the public know
                                  in which age they live a 'modern' person would not have this effect.
                                  It is like having a problem at the theater, Its one thing to have the manager
                                  walk on stage and correct a problem after which the action of the play can go
                                  on. It would somewhat spoil the effect to have a member of the cast do it.
                                  Its the difference between being performer or 'front of house'.

                                  I think in this same context if park people choose to dress up the 'how' they
                                  go in and out of character is very important. Their attitude in this will
                                  very much determine the amount of co-operation they get. You catch more fly's
                                  with honey than vinegar.

                                  <>

                                  Quite, the problem is usually not what anyone wears but how they behave while
                                  wearing it.

                                  <<the female in charge could drop a
                                  curtsy, say "If you will pardon me sir, it is of great importance that I
                                  speak to you in private."
                                  I certainly hope that her next sentence once cloistered behind closed doors
                                  is not ,"Your hat is on fire ". This doesn't work in an emergency, Tim.>>

                                  That depends on the emergency, There are many period ways of getting
                                  someone's attention but if of course we are speaking of a risk to life and
                                  limb then all bets are off. If on the other hand it is a breech of park rule
                                  that someone was not informed of I think the belligerent attitude it
                                  inexcusable. (A particular incident at Chalmette comes to mind).

                                  I think part of the large problem here, particularly for battles, comes from
                                  sites where individuals do not (and do not have the skill to) command on the
                                  field but want to dictate how the minutia if the battle should go. I have
                                  always though that we who are in 'harms way' should control the action
                                  because it is literally our backsides that are out there. The few bad
                                  incident arise when (as the Chalmette incident of many years ago) someone
                                  takes the attitude that 'this is MY site and you will do what I say whenever
                                  I say it and if you break a rule, even if I haven't bothered to tell you
                                  about it, I am hauling you on the carpet in front of everybody'.

                                  PS That particular 'lady' is no longer at Chalmette.

                                  Cheers

                                  Tim
                                • BritcomHMP@xxx.xxx
                                  As it got sniped in my original reply somehow Craig wrote:- I firmly believe that it is up to the discretion of the event co-ordinator what he/she wears to
                                  Message 16 of 22 , Dec 4, 1999
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    As it got sniped in my original reply somehow

                                    Craig wrote:-

                                    I firmly believe
                                    that it is up to the discretion of the event co-ordinator what he/she wears
                                    to their own party (within historical context), without having to bend over
                                    backwards to accomodate the re-enactors.

                                    I replied:-

                                    Quite, the problem is usually not what anyone wears but how they behave while
                                    wearing it.

                                    Cheers

                                    Tim
                                  • Craig Williams
                                    Tim, in response Obviously we are on the same page. Nope. if a specific activity is not allowed at a particular time while being allowed at others this
                                    Message 17 of 22 , Dec 8, 1999
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Tim, in response

                                      "Obviously we are on the same page. "

                                      Nope.

                                      "if a specific activity is not allowed at a particular time while being
                                      allowed at others this should be spelled out at the pre event meeting, not
                                      assumed that the non park person in charge happens to be fully conversant
                                      with the variations in the rules."
                                      Tim this is what a schedule is for, any major deviation should be cleared,
                                      no exceptions.
                                      >
                                      ><<"it is a good idea to have the controlling site person in modern clothes
                                      so
                                      >that they can interact without looking anachronistic."
                                      >
                                      >I'm sorry,aren't modern clothes anacronistic?Kidding aside, a site
                                      >representative should be able to be seen in and around the re-enactors and
                                      >not be obvious. This way visitors photos are not ruined, and the ambiance
                                      >can be maintained as much as possible. If it becomes neccessary for a site
                                      >supervisor to step out of character to address a problem, then it is
                                      >incumbent on the re-enactors to assist the site rep in rectifying any
                                      >difficulties.>>
                                      >
                                      >No, I mean that in an emergency someone in modern dress can jump in and do
                                      >what they like without affecting the first person interactions. For any
                                      >member of the public who sees someone other than supposed commander
                                      (private,
                                      >washerwoman etc.) obviously exercising command at a crucial time the
                                      >'theatrical' illusion is gone fore the weekend. As members of the public
                                      know
                                      >in which age they live a 'modern' person would not have this effect.
                                      >It is like having a problem at the theater, Its one thing to have the
                                      manager
                                      >walk on stage and correct a problem after which the action of the play can
                                      go
                                      >on. It would somewhat spoil the effect to have a member of the cast do it.
                                      >Its the difference between being performer or 'front of house'.
                                      >
                                      >I think in this same context if park people choose to dress up the 'how'
                                      they
                                      >go in and out of character is very important. Their attitude in this will
                                      >very much determine the amount of co-operation they get. You catch more
                                      fly's
                                      >with honey than vinegar.
                                      >
                                      ><>
                                      >
                                      >Quite, the problem is usually not what anyone wears but how they behave
                                      while
                                      >wearing it.
                                      >
                                      ><<the female in charge could drop a
                                      >curtsy, say "If you will pardon me sir, it is of great importance that I
                                      >speak to you in private."
                                      >I certainly hope that her next sentence once cloistered behind closed doors
                                      >is not ,"Your hat is on fire ". This doesn't work in an emergency, Tim.>>
                                      >
                                      >That depends on the emergency, There are many period ways of getting
                                      >someone's attention but if of course we are speaking of a risk to life and
                                      >limb then all bets are off. If on the other hand it is a breech of park
                                      rule
                                      >that someone was not informed of I think the belligerent attitude it
                                      >inexcusable. (A particular incident at Chalmette comes to mind).
                                      >
                                      >I think part of the large problem here, particularly for battles, comes
                                      from
                                      >sites where individuals do not (and do not have the skill to) command on
                                      the
                                      >field but want to dictate how the minutia if the battle should go. I have
                                      >always though that we who are in 'harms way' should control the action
                                      >because it is literally our backsides that are out there. The few bad
                                      >incident arise when (as the Chalmette incident of many years ago) someone
                                      >takes the attitude that 'this is MY site and you will do what I say
                                      whenever
                                      >I say it and if you break a rule, even if I haven't bothered to tell you
                                      >about it, I am hauling you on the carpet in front of everybody'.
                                      >
                                      >PS That particular 'lady' is no longer at Chalmette.
                                      >
                                      >Cheers
                                      >
                                      >Tim
                                      >
                                      >>The War of 1812: In Europe, thousands fought over the fate of hundreds of
                                      square miles: in North America, hundreds determined the fate of THOUSANDS of
                                      square miles...
                                    • BritcomHMP@aol.com
                                      In a message dated 12/8/1999 9:53:37 PM Central Standard Time, sgtwarnr@idirect.ca writes:
                                      Message 18 of 22 , Dec 9, 1999
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        In a message dated 12/8/1999 9:53:37 PM Central Standard Time,
                                        sgtwarnr@... writes:

                                        << Tim, in response

                                        "Obviously we are on the same page. "

                                        Nope.

                                        "if a specific activity is not allowed at a particular time while being
                                        allowed at others this should be spelled out at the pre event meeting, not
                                        assumed that the non park person in charge happens to be fully conversant
                                        with the variations in the rules."
                                        Tim this is what a schedule is for, any major deviation should be cleared,
                                        no exceptions. >>

                                        Er. Craig?
                                        First you say 'Nope' meaning I assume we are NOT on the same page and then
                                        make the statement above which seemingly agrees with what I have said.

                                        I can see one potentially large difference in interpretation here in that one
                                        could take your statement to read that any and all actions anticipated must
                                        be cleared at a pre-event meeting. However you implication is that the entire
                                        responsibility is on the re-enactment commander. If he is not aware of the
                                        site rules, and the site neglects to inform him off the rules, it is still
                                        his fault if he breaks them because it "should be cleared".


                                        Leaving aside that I have NEVER attended a meeting where any site has gone
                                        into anything like that detail I would say that there are two problems here.

                                        1, It is impossible to think of all the eventualities that can happen in a
                                        re-enactment or 1st person scenario in front of the public so there must be
                                        some flexibility. Your statement about 'checking deviations' beforehand
                                        assumes that an unplanned action is known to be a deviation from the rules
                                        and can be anticipated. If it could be anticipated it would not be unplanned
                                        (catch 22).

                                        2, It is the SITES responsibility to state very clearly and unequivocally
                                        what the no-no's are before the event. If the person is not given the
                                        information he can hardly be expected to abide by the rules.

                                        It is foolish for the site to make assumptions about what someone who does
                                        not work there may or may not know about the rules. If the site were to
                                        follow up their non decimation of such information by publicly chastising an
                                        individual problems will ensue. Particularly if no danger is inherent in the
                                        action.

                                        I am glad that we are on the same page with the rest of (and indeed the bulk
                                        of) my post.

                                        Cheers

                                        Tim
                                      • David_Webb@xxx.xx.xx
                                        This is a very interesting discussion, and while a conference is not needed, it might be useful for reenactors and site managers to get together to exchange
                                        Message 19 of 22 , Dec 9, 1999
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          This is a very interesting discussion, and while a conference is not needed, it
                                          might be useful for reenactors and site managers to get together to exchange
                                          views on safety, direction and communication at events.
                                          I think that for big events, one should try to have emergency staff in modern
                                          clothing, identified. We hire, for a ridiculously tiny honorarium, St John's
                                          ambulance. We also have crowd control staff in modern dress, on the lines, and
                                          an emergency plan. Our key first aider has a walkie-talky so that they know
                                          what is going on in the battle, and a cell phone so they can call 911 if an
                                          emergency is requiered.
                                          Site staff in period costume are on the field also, and they are there to
                                          ensure safety, but also to help unit commanders with communications, etc. If
                                          the site does not have a person or people on the field for a demonstration, then
                                          things can go wrong, and even get dangerous, and usually the site person then
                                          has the option of going out in modern dress to shut things down, or have some
                                          sort of tissy fit in public, or just ignore dangerous stuff.
                                          I was a safety officer at a 7 Years War Event at Louisbourg this year. The
                                          safety officers wore armbands, attended meetings, and were on the field with the
                                          staff during the battles. This worked out very well, since we could discuss
                                          things before they went wrong. For example, the Brit commander and I together
                                          decided how close we could safely move troops on a flank nearest the crowd. The
                                          site ropelines were no longer relevant because of a strong wind blowing from us
                                          onto the crowd, and we had to respond to this wind change to avoid flashing or
                                          smoking out the audience. With an unobtrusive walkie talky, the opposing
                                          commanders could cue phases of the planned scenerio, and even communicate if
                                          they chose.
                                          We had one safety problem. A planned failed assault went wrong when one
                                          participant did not die, but chose to attack the Fortress of Louisbourg and its
                                          French defenders single handed. I guess the bushido code lives on in New
                                          England. The difficulty was compounded when two Frenchmen obligingly shot him
                                          at point blank range. A safety officer was there and tried to stop this silly
                                          and dangerous charge, and also to deal with the two idjits who really made
                                          things worse by firing at this guy. Since he was on the field in kit, this
                                          problem was dealt with, and the battle was not interupted. With no one on the
                                          field, a site person might have gone out in modern clothes to shut things down.
                                          What was good about this episode was that the 3 stooges were identified, and the
                                          site worked with the event and unit commanders to deal with the problem, and the
                                          unit commanders took appropriate disciplinary action. With no costumed staff
                                          on the field, a battle between the site and the unit or field commanders would
                                          very possibly resulted.
                                          At the same event, there were some site guard units who really were not very
                                          experienced in tactical demos. They actually frightened some of the reenactors,
                                          and instead of banning the guard units, or having participants walk from the
                                          event, safety officers were placed to monitor and advise the guard units as
                                          their sole responsibility. This was done tactfully, and everyone was happy and
                                          got to participate.
                                          Finally, we had an unfortunate artillery commander who had his foot run over
                                          by one of his 6 pounder guns. His group, and all the participants left the
                                          field, and no one noticed his problem. I was on site as a safety person, and
                                          because I was in kit, I was near enough to see that he was in distress. I was
                                          able to get help, and save his nice officers boot by getting it off before his
                                          foot became too swollen. With no one on the field in kit, it might have been
                                          some time before he was noticed. I really do think it is useful to have staff
                                          in period costume on the field, especially in big battles.
                                          While reenactors and site managers all share responsibility and liability at
                                          events, the host organization as property owner usually gets sued as the
                                          primary target. As an employee or agent for Parks Canada, I am aware that the
                                          deep pockets of my employer are on the line. So are the historic programmes at
                                          Parks and Sites across Canada, and many could close down or be suspended if we
                                          have a bad accident that frightens senior administrators and politicians. This
                                          would also lead to stricter rules ( such as no opposed sides tacticals) and some
                                          other organisations might follow our lead. Finally, in event of a bad
                                          accident, especially involving negligence, it is only the site staff and
                                          managers that will lose their jobs and blight their careers. Federal, State, or
                                          Provincial labour laws usually apply, and criminal charges can result for
                                          participants and hosts alike.
                                          A number of reenactors ( or living historians, as opposed to dead ones) have
                                          jobs in film, or as exotic dancers, or whatever, and could also be in a
                                          difficult employment situation if they were directly involved in an event
                                          accident. But it is the event safety officer at most historic sites, and the
                                          site manager, whose jobs are really on the line. If my paycheck is on the line,
                                          I get to call the shots at my site, and this includes deciding on hosting an
                                          event or not. I do have a veto. I really must communicate with, work with, and
                                          listen to the event participants, and especially the commanders, and treat them
                                          with respect, and hope that my trust in them will be justified. If there is an
                                          accident, all parties loose , all of us have liabilities and responsibilites,
                                          and so all of us have the authority to act to stop dangerous activity.
                                        • Craig Williams
                                          David,. Bravo and well said! Craig
                                          Message 20 of 22 , Dec 9, 1999
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            David,.
                                            Bravo and well said!
                                            Craig
                                          • BritcomHMP@xxx.xxx
                                            Good points all Dave, I suppose we can expect the odd loon in the ranks and certainly it behooves all officers and NOC s to watch out for these individuals and
                                            Message 21 of 22 , Dec 9, 1999
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              Good points all Dave, I suppose we can expect the odd loon in the ranks and
                                              certainly it behooves all officers and NOC's to watch out for these
                                              individuals and quell the spirit of 'bushido' or anything else contrary to
                                              regulations and safety.
                                              At Mississenewa this year I ordered all muskets checked for their half cock
                                              with the rule that no muskets which did not have a working half cock were to
                                              be allowed on the field whether or not they have a hammerstall attached
                                              (everyone I am sure knows my opinion of THAT bit of frippery). No less than 3
                                              muskets failed the test!

                                              This is something I shall continue to enforce I can assure you.

                                              Cheers

                                              Tim
                                            • Kevin Windsor
                                              Dave. I have to wholeheartedly agree with what you said! I was at Louisbourg and I had an interesting position. I was doing a postgrad in Heritage
                                              Message 22 of 22 , Dec 11, 1999
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                Dave. I have to wholeheartedly agree with what you said! I was at
                                                Louisbourg and I had an interesting position. I was doing a postgrad in
                                                Heritage Preservation and part of my job that weekend was to evaluate you!
                                                (not you specifically but the safety officers and other staff) I felt that
                                                all of the staff did an outstanding job!! I witnessed the single man
                                                storming the fort and the only reaction I got from the crowd was "hey look
                                                at that stupid guy!" I feel that if you were wearing modern clothes and
                                                ran out on to the field and chewed him out then the whole battle would have
                                                been ruined. The walkie talkies were also not very noticable except for
                                                one man and when a visitor questioned me about it I informed her that he
                                                was probably a safety officer making sure no one did anything stupid. This
                                                seemed very reasonable for her. I also had a chance to speak with some of
                                                the re-enactors that were there and they were glad that the young pretty
                                                boys had some extra people watching them. That made them feel safer! I
                                                must admit that I have not been following this a closely as I should but as
                                                a person who helps put on events I know it is my job on the line and since
                                                I get paid for doing something I love I don't want to loose that so you are
                                                right! Anything that will keep it safe and make sure I or my site doesn't
                                                get sued I will do. Be that having uniformed safety officers or
                                                plainclothes or modern dressed people or as at Louisbourg both doing
                                                different things. With uniformed on the field and modern off with the
                                                public (although when the public started buying and wearing those t-shirts
                                                it got hard to tell the difference) If the public sees someone who looks
                                                like they know what they are doing then they will go and see them. If they
                                                loose a child or something like that then they don't want to spend hours
                                                looking for an officer because all they see are people in red coats because
                                                they are panicking. I feel that both are really needed! Some for public
                                                and some for re-enactors each working together.

                                                These are only my two coins thrown in the fountain though!
                                                Kevin
                                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.