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

Re: PC and other stuff from Marilyn

Expand Messages
  • Marilyn Penner
    -Dear Terry and group: Since you responded to my last e-mail on list, I ll reply to it on list. Taking your last comment, about addressing individuals
    Message 1 of 2 , Apr 29, 2000
      -Dear Terry and group:

      Since you responded to my last e-mail on list, I'll reply to it on
      list. Taking your last comment, about addressing individuals off-line:
      I meant my last e-mail to be read by the entire list because from
      reading the digests, I've received the impression that more than
      one correspondant is into reenacting as a way of getting back at a
      modern "enemy". (like the modern irregular militias and militant
      racist organiziations), not as an interpretation of history or as a
      way of having fun. If I'm mistaken in that assumption, I humbly
      apologize to the entire list. If I'm not, perhaps it's something that
      needs to be discussed.

      -- 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
      this list?

      > The discussion on the word "Yankee" did get out off track. I think
      > some people were mixing up ACW into their opinions. During that
      > the term "Yankee" was a negative term but in 1812 would Americans
      > take it as a slight?
      A good question. I don't think it was made clear during that
      discussion that it was about usage in 1812-14, not about 1861-65 or
      1999-2000. So, was it a negative term in 1812? The Rev. War
      Patriots apparently turned a British insult "Yankee Doodle Dandy"
      a badge of pride and defiance. "Look what we 'Yankee Doodles' did to
      you!" George M. Cohan in the early 20th century wrote a song about
      proud he was to be a "Yankee Doodle Dandy, Yankee Doodle do or die."
      Susanna Moodie (1830's) was an English gentlewoman immigrant, and she
      did not think much of her "Yankee" neighbours, some of whom were not
      born in the US but who's parents or grandparents came from the US
      before or after it became a republic. From my limited reading I
      assume that the English thought every white English speaking North
      American was a "Yankee" and every white Francophone a "Canadian". But
      did the white (or non white) Anglophone in North America in 1812 like
      to be called a Yankee? Did only the U.S. Northerner, or only the New
      Englander like it? How did an Anglophone British North American
      Loyalist react to being called a "Yankee", particularly by someone
      like Mrs. Moodie who used it perjoratively? Maybe like some black
      people who use the "n- word" among themselves but would strongly
      resent a white person using it?

      > Marilyn's Comment: Also that you appreciate that inflicting harm
      an adversary is not the best way of showing your love of your
      > Terry: I agree it's not the best way but it is the most powerful
      to show your patriotism.

      Marilyn: I agree that risking or giving your life to defend your
      compatriots or even your non-beligerent enemy from agression is the
      most powerful way to show love of your country (or of your country's
      ideals). One must search his/her heart and do what he/she believes is
      right and honourable. I respect the soldier's dedication and
      discipline, also his/her great courage. I respect the re-enactors who
      interpret these things. I don't agree that any government should
      a citizen to do what he/she believes evil and I don't believe the gun
      should be the only symbol of patriotism in reenactments or in modern
      life. (I'll say it off line from now on; just let me say it now on

      >About the "power lust" comment...If a reenactor is power hungry
      he/she won't go far. You have to remember that reenacting is
      therefore what is there to prevent someone to just walk away from
      power hungry individual. I've seen it happen and usually people like
      that either learn quick or end up being by themselves.
      Can you "walk away" during a battle re-enactment when this person
      uses this power harmfully? Can you "walk away" when re-enacting is
      what you really want to do and you don't want to give up doing it? I
      hope if there is a victim of an abuse of power, the others in his
      group will stand by him.

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.