A couple weeks back a good friend asked me why it is so important to me that other people are accurate in their living history portrayals. At the time, I had no profound answer. The best I could come up with is that it could possibly be a teaching thing. After all, whether in a formal or informal setting, your students, what they learn and how they demonstrate their knowledge is a reflection of you and your abilities.
I still don’t have any better answer.
But, that question certainly came back to me as I was reading through Jeff Spevak’s article in the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, “Caught in Time”. I read through the sections enjoying his use of words as he describes this admittedly unique hobby. Then I reached the section entitled “Supply Depots” at which point I came to a screeching halt as I read the words “____’s costume shop.” Those who know me well can likely picture the facial expression I had as my head titled to the side in irritation. This creak in my neck continued as I read further about historical items from another era being used. Of course this creaked neck and irritated facial expression was not the author’s fault. How was he to know the buttons things like this can push in certain reenactors?
Now, before I continue in the direction I am headed, I want to say Mr. Spevak’s piece is one of if not the best I have read regarding the nature of Civil War reenacting. He spent a good deal of time trying to get to know some of us peculiar creatures. He asked very good questions, pulling them together into a thorough article. (There is a supporting article as well.)
Let us get back to why this section made the question of why it is so important to me that other people are accurate pop back to mind
It boils right down to – One or two people can end up representing a whole group of people whether that is in a newspaper article or a student’s field trip or a family’s weekend vacation experience. So, that person or person needs to be as good as they can possibly be.
Yes, the individual mentioned has put a good amount of effort into his attire. He has thought out what he wears, why he wears it, and how he can best put his attire together.
But, there are those of us who spend hours and hours, often each day, some to the equivalent of a full time job or more, studying every aspect of our attire, our accessories, our pieces of material culture, our behavior and so on to make sure they can truly represent the Civil War era to the very best of our ability. In our research, we develop a deepening understanding of the era and respect for the extant pieces of material culture. We put a great deal of effort into acquiring or planning and constructing each garment we wear and every other item we choose.
I’m going to be completely honest here in saying, we don’t like it when the methods some people choose to develop their impression diminishes the way in which we develop ours. We don’t want spectators, whether a family, a group of students or journalists, to walk away from an event with a skewed or worse yet inaccurate understanding of the era or living history.
To some this makes us “thread-counters”, “stitch-nazis” or “mavens”. I’ll admit, I am finding this type of accusation harder and harder to contradict. Yes, I am picky. I am incredibly picky. I want to do my best. I want you to do your best. I believe research and accuracy are extremely important. Does this make me one of those things? Maybe. But, I assure you – I am more than happy to help you achieve your goals. I am more than happy to share my research (when it isn’t committed elsewhere.) I am also comfortable in admitting when I am wrong or there are holes in my research. I am human. I just want to see the best possible representation of our given time period because we are educating children and families.
Mr. Spevak’s article definitally helped point out one, no two reasons why other people’s accuracy is important to me. Each one of us has chosen to take on the responsibility to educate people, young and adult, about this era in American History. They deserve accurate information.
If I Had My Own Blue Box: 
Just read the article…I think the author got a lot of things right. I wish that several of the reenactors had not made excuses for inauthenticity. I think that there are at least two camps of reenactors…those who defend their inauthenticity, and there are a myriad of excuses, and poke and glare angrily and call the other camp “stitch-nazis” or “thread counters”. There are those who mock either in the other camp, and offer little help, or desire to receive help. However, if you see someone who really knows their stuff, and you want to know your stuff too, there is no harm in asking questions, and learning more about research and techniques. We should all be in the mind to improve. It’s not about judgment. It’s not about criticism. It’s about all continuing up the authenticity ladder, and leaving excuses behind.
I do believe that the “wrong people” are often the people most eager to talk to the media and end up representing us. Unfortunately, we have been skewed by the media so often that reliable people have no interest in speaking with them.
Who can blame them? Frequently reenactors who talk to the media are newer and don’t know that they are doing anything wrong.
I hate to think of any people as the “wrong people”, but, yes you are right.
I know many of us would like to know what attracts journalists to the less accurate people or portrayals. I’ve sat down a few times attempting to put together a guide for photojournalists to help them find good, accurate impressions to photograph. Each time I wanted to focus on the positive but kept falling into the “don’t photograph this” direction.
I know this particluar journalist wanted to get photographs of my husband and I the weekend before this article came out. I think he also had other questions. I wasn’t at that event because I needed to focus on the 1830s travel program I was doing. My husband was there but busy in his roll making him difficult to find.
Another worry of mine is – if the media are having challenges finding those who are doing exceptional impressions, how many visitors are not finding those impressions as well?
Anna
I agree! My particular area of concern, however (in addition to correct clothing), is historically-accurate cooking of the late 18th and early 19th centuries. I strive unceasingly to use ONLY the receipts (recipes), equipment, utensils, and ingredients that were available during those time periods. It drives me absolutely nuts when some supposed “expert” hearth cook doesn’t do her/his homework, doesn’t bother with proper research (the “it’s too much work” attitude) into the hows, whys, whats, and wherefores of cooking and the general foodways of that time period. Heck, you can do it online! I spend literally hours, even days, on it, why can’t you, why don’t you? Or golly, seek out someone like me and pick his/her brain! You’re teaching the public in the process…you wouldn’t tell them that 2 + 2 is 5, would you? So why tell them that, “Yes, pizza was made in 1820”?! What’s particularly annoying are those who use adapted centuries-old receipts (or worse, modern ones posing as historical) and think it’s perfectly OK. Well, it’s not. If you’re going to represent the past and its cooking, then follow the past. If you’re too lazy to figure out a 1740 or an 1828 receipt and follow it, then you’re obviously not really interested in re-creating history via food. So let me do it. Otherwise, what’s the point? Take your “mo-dern” recipes, with their baking powder and evaporated milk and your glass-jar Dazey churns and go join Martha Stewart in her cooking pursuits…or go to cooking school and become a cook at a local restaurant. Leave the authentically-based, historically-correct cooking to us “cook-nazis.” Please.