Embedded with the reenactors – American History – Salon.com
Embedded with the reenactors – American History – Salon.com.
I've been involved with reenacting for most of my adult life, sporadically but intensely. And to be perfectly honest, as a historian I have truly mixed feelings about that. In part, it's the whole "honoring one's ancestors" aspect of reenacting / living history, which I've never fully understood; in part it's the notion that someone who has never done primary-source research, has perhaps watched a documentary or two, and partially absorbed a secondary source (usually dubious) can tell a wide-eyed public that he/she is a "historian." But more about that later. I want to ruminate on this for a couple of days and write something up. And if anyone is reading this, I'd like to read their opinions about the merits/flaws they see in historical reenacting … let me hear from you.
newest »
My participation was born out of my interest in history not really out of the notion of honoring anyone. But my Dad's participation in WWII did drive me to WWII events.
I like to think I "do it right" without going to extremes. I'm confident I know the history of the era and feel that I can educate the public accordingly. As I've gotten older I am tending more towards the "living history" as opposed to the "battles." We did the 150th Bull Run last summer in 3 days of 100 degree heat. Not healthy.
I cannot say that about all re-enactors. There are some that go to such extremes that it becomes part of their "real life." And there are many that don't know their history. Unfortunately they always seem to be the ones that gets the public's ear.
Done right, it can be an enjoyable hobby. I can't tell you how many times I've been complemented on my passion and helping someone understand an era or event in our history. You just have to watch out for the FARBS and those that distort the facts, It is those few, and I emphasize "few", that give the rest of us a bad name.
Hope this is helpful.