Folks,

With Eli Gerry's permission, I'm posting his reply to some troll, going by the name of Mike Fowler, over on Szabo's Forum. I felt this was one of the better discussions of our common Hobby I have ever read.  

________________________________________________________________

I have been in the hobby for 16 years, I have never done mainstream, and I would go out on a limb and make the statement that I have never been accused or thought of as a F-word(I choose not to use that word as it only aleignates and prevents people from wanting to bridge the mainstream/campaign gap). That being said, this is a hobby and everyone gets out of it what they need. This isnt life, this isnt reality, this isnt a profession-its simply a recreational outlet to escape the modern complexities of the 21st century, and the fulfillment of a primedial need for socialization. You want to know why mainstreamers do it the way that they do it? Get ready, here is the big secret enlightenment that has been carefully guarded since 1962.......get ready, here it comes.....are you ready, can you handle it?.....almost there...... BECAUSE THEY WANT TOO!!!!! Nothing more elaborate than that. You know what else? that is OK, because this is all make belief, reguardless of what level of accuracy you choose to pursue. The biggest "Farbism"(I cant believe that I used that stupid non-word) in this hobby is the attutudes. NO ONE IS AUTHENTIC, the only authentics died a hundred years ago, and truth be known they probably would think we are all pretty silly for doing this anyhow. If you are diluded enough to think that the right name brand sack coat makes you any more of a man, a better person, or even a more knowledgeble about the CW than someone else, then you are about 15 years old or you live a pathetic existence and have never accomplished anything in real life. Until, you knock out all of your teeth, contract dysentary, kill and avoid being killed, and campaign for 4 years...well then you really have nothing to tell me about how "authentic" you are. The only thing authentic about this hobby is the mindset, and the quality of the human beings that participate. Sorry to feed the fire guys, this guy is a tool and really doesnt deserve an answer, but now that he has one maybe he will go back to his rock and play dungeons and dragons with his loser buddies. -ELI GEERY- oh and that is my real name as it appears on my birth certificate, ask around.
__________________
-S.ELI GEERY-
29th Infantry DIV
(currently deployed)
The Dippin Gourd Mess
MOOCOWS
_______________________________________________________________

Where's the common ground? One guy yells about farbs, another guy yells back that the other guy's a farb too, so there!

I guess the common ground is that everybody gets to sling personal insults at everybody else. Okay...

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

Quote :

hanktrent wrote : I guess the common ground is that everybody gets to sling personal insults at everybody else. Okay...

Hank,

I didn't take this message as anything like that. Perhaps I should have asked to delete the specific reference to "Mike Fowler" at the end of this message, as it was only germain to the thread from which I took this post. I didn't see where Eli called anyone a "Farb". In fact, just the opposite.

What I did see, was a person who has always been involved with the more authentic wing of the Hobby, defending the right of others to pursue the Hobby as they see fit; without being being crucified, especially by nameless trolls on the internet.  

Bill,

Quote :

Eli wrote: If you are diluded enough to think that the right name brand sack coat makes you any more of a man, a better person, or even a more knowledgeble about the CW than someone else, then you are about 15 years old or you live a pathetic existence and have never accomplished anything in real life.

So which one am I?   I do believe that having the right sack coat makes a person more knowledgeable about the CW than someone else.  The fellow with the more accurate sack coat not only gets to "experience" what it's like to wear a more accurate sack coat, but probably also puts in as much, if not more, research into his portrayal.  Clothes do not make the man, but they sure do help along the road of continual progression, toward that unreachable goal of authentic.

Just my two cents worth,

Linda.  

--Last edited by Linda Trent on 2007-10-02 11:23:02 --

let me apologize for the heated reply to the original poster "Mr. Fowler", I am not usually one to allow any emotions to seep into my posts. For those who arent familiar with this thread, this particular "individual" was attempting to stir up trouble, and to a certain extent he did. I do research my impression and I take great pride and put alot of time into it-when I can. I have been deployed for nearly 18 months and that has afforded me a decent amount of personal time, with little oppurtunities for an outlet. However, at other times in my life I have been too busy being a Dad, or a boss, or a husband to devote as much time to research. I understand that many people fall into this catagory, there are also a large number of individuals, that just arent willing or able to put as much effort(or money) into a hobby. I firmly believe that you can learn something from anyone(either how to, or how not to), and I will be the first to admit that I have learned things about the conflict at large or a particular battle or individual, from reenactors with horrible(by my standards) impressions. I have also been completely turned off and even disgusted by the attitudes of people with some of the most impressive impressions. Also having the right brand name sack(for example)does not mean that someone researched their impression, or else there would be alot fewer JT Martins and alot more St. louis or Cinncinatti depots being worn. At the end of the day, its up to each and everyone of us to choose what level of commitment to our impressions that we want to pursue, the end result is that we all get the same sense of enjoyment to match what we are willing to put into it. I have been asked many times why I NEVER wear my glasses to a reenactment, I always answer "because I cant see a thing without them"-a puppet show is much more enjoyable if you play like you cant see the strings.

Quote :

let me apologize for the heated reply

Thank you for the apology.  And a speedy journey home!

Linda Trent  

--Last edited by Linda Trent on 2007-10-02 13:04:25 --

This doesn't really have anything to do with any of the above posts, but deals with how to find common ground.  I posted the following on the Citizens' of the CW list almost a year ago, and it still holds true today.

Quote :

The greatest thing that happened to the hobby, in my opinion, is the internet -- and I'll be forever grateful to Mrs. Hughes for talking us into our first computer.   The internet has allowed people to find others who have similar reenacting styles, but live hundreds of miles apart and would have never known of each other otherwise.  Admittedly, I'm talking about my own style of reenacting, but it could go for just about anyone. I've talked to others who are like-minded with myself and we've all concluded that since we've started doing our own events we've had a much more enjoyable hobby, and have become more tolerant of others and their rights to do what's fun for them. We slip occasionally, but for the most part...  Finding your niche in the hobby is what's important.  If there aren't events that fit your particular need, find people who have a similar style and create your own events!  Sure it requires a bit of work, but the fun of watching the event unfold and watching everyone have fun, while having fun yourself, makes it very rewarding. Why should we try to get everyone to attend the same events?  That will just set the hobby back to the 1990s when there was a lot more frustration because there were too many different styles of reenactors, all at the same event, all with different expectations, and only some being fulfilled?   It allows everyone an opportunity to attend events that fit their individual needs, without forcing all sides to attend the same event where those on either end wind up frustrated, disappointed, or lonely.  I know 15 years ago I had to go off and sit by myself at events because no one wanted to do what I enjoyed doing.

Common ground to me means that we all have to be responsible for reading event rules and guidelines, and if you have questions contact the organizer.  If you're not happy with an event and the organizer keeps his/her promises, then it's the participant's fault if they didn't have fun.  

I think that if everyone did this, and everyone was happy with the events that they attend we'd all find ourselves happy and with a healthy hobby, with participants much more content with one another.  But that's just my opinion -- others may vary.  

Linda Trent
lindatrent@zoomnet.net  

--Last edited by Linda Trent on 2007-10-02 13:34:22 --

I guess I come at the idea of "common ground" a little different than some.  I look at this forum and its idea as a way for me to talk with people of varying knowledge and experience.  On here I am not able to see your kit, so I can't determine what level you are at. By reading your posts, I can get an idea of what types of events you may be more likly to attend, and if I would have a an opportunity to meet any of you.  

I see that we have a common link in the topic, how far into the topic each of us dives is based upon our own level of desire.

Then again I am in this hobby for my enjoyment, and in so doing I will take it to the level that I will enjoy.  As I look at events to attend I do take into account that my presence/participation may have an impact on the others at the event and their enjoyment of it.  So like Linda said, we read the event rules/guidelines and impression requirements, and if I can agree to them and live by them, then I attend.

Not sure if I made sense, but in my head it all seemed to make sense.

In my opinion, if one is serious about the hobby regardless of whether or not they are campaigner or mainstream, and regardless of how much they can invest into their clothing, one will learn more about his or her impression, and will in turn, educate the public more about the time frame in which we enjoy representing.

When I started out, I'll be first to say that my first impression had much to be desired. However, I began to improve on it as finances allowed. Now, I still have much to improve on, and I'm continually working on my impression.

I have met many "Fowlers" who condemned me and  my impression, but having said that, I've met many great folks who take their impression to a higher standard, and have been very helpful to me in improving my impression. I believe the most important thing to have in this hobby is a good attitude, and an open mind.

Roy Queen  

--Last edited by roy on 2007-10-02 15:47:01 --

Yep, it's a hobby. And, how much effort you want to put into it is up to you. If you have fun making paper airplanes, go for it. If you build balsa and canvas gas powered airplanes that you can control remotely form a mile away, enjoy yourself.

I think the original post is a great jumping-off point for a discussion, but then I thought Fowler's post was too.

I agree with most of the points that Eli Geery made--that none of us can be authentic, that mainstreamers do things the way they do because they want to, etc.

The problem I had was that the post was worded in a way to hit on a lot of the typical sore-points and arguing points of the hobby, rather than to find common ground, so it seemed out of context here.

"You don't have lice and dysentery so don't tell me there's anything wrong with my impression" has been the rallying cry that got many a progressive tossed out of his original home unit, when he tried to encourage more interest in authenticity.

"You're a pathetic loser because you're so wrapped up in this stuff. Get a life!" has been the response many researchers have gotten when they try to share their interest in historic minutiae with other reenactors who don't care about it.

It seemed to me like walking into an insult exchange: "You're ugly." "Well, you're fat." And then "You're fat" being held up as an example of common ground: Can't we all agree that so-and-so really is fat?

Well, even if so-and-so *is* fat and no one can deny it, the argumentative tone just doesn't make for the kind of calming, inclusive, uniting observation we can all hold hands and sing kumbaya around.

But hey, I'm up for a good us vs. them fight any day!

Hank Trent
hanktrent@voyager.net

This woud be the place I'd least expect to find an "us vs. them".

For what it's worth, I frequent this humble abode more than anywhere else now.  

--Last edited by mstuart on 2007-10-02 17:50:28 --

This has made for some interesting reflection, albeit discussed much and often over the last few years on several forums and around even more campfires. I too have heard the F word thrown around to describe anything and everyone at one point or another, whether one is from the progressive set or mainstream set, but I do really tire of hearing you can't be authentic without experiencing dysentary, real bullets, and total deprivation.  I think that frame of thought is a cop-out.  Just because we can't (luckily) go through that, doesn't mean we can't concentrate on what we can go through, whether that is material culture, social culture, political history,drill and camplife, etc.  I've met phenomenal living historians who were wearing straight-outta- Mainstream X Sutler duds, but had the right attitude.  I've met guys with the best kit money can buy but had a crappy attitude.  The old often written Big 3 - Man, Method, and Material Culture = all three are equally important.  Yes, its just a hobby to some, but it is an obsession and way of life for others.  WE CAN COEXIST AND GET SOMETHING FROM THIS!

I must have missed something.  I had previously thought this forum was set up to accommodate the entry level hobby participant,  those at the pinnacle of the hobby with polished impressions, as well as we who are floating around somewhere between those two extremes.  

Curtis,

You are correct, this forum is supposed to be for every faction of the hobby to coexist together in peace, love and harmony; typically we do pretty good, considering we're all human with our own ideas of how to reenact. Which is why I was surprised to see this post brought here as an example of one of the "better discussions of our common hobby."

The problem that I saw is that the original post did use a number of words that tend to be considered flame bait, and would not be considered to be in the spirit of common ground.  I know that it's difficult to read posts written by people we don't know because we don't know the true emotion and sentiment the author would have the reader feel, and often that's lost somewhere in cyberspace between the author and the reader.  The reader uses the wrong tone and well, there you have it; it comes across sounding much harsher than it was intended.  And taking a post out of context only makes things harder.  If anyone would like to see the original thread please go to http://www.cwreenactors.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5874

I would like to see the forum return to 'common ground,'and carry forth as it has.  We've been able to keep the flame wars down to a minimum, and I hope that you all will continue to help us by keeping in mind that this is "The Common Ground" forum.

Thanks to everyone over the last however long I've been a moderator here, there's really been very little work for me to do.  

Linda Trent
lindatrent@zoomnet.net  

--Last edited by Linda Trent on 2007-10-02 21:07:48 --

Thanks for the quick explanation, Linda. Also, thanks for the job you do as moderator.  I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I keep hanging around because of this forum's civility.  It is truly refreshing

Everyone,

we are still your friendly, peaceful Common Ground forum.  I appreciate all of the kind words as we do make a concerted effort to keep this forum "clean".  I feel I have the best moderators anywhere.  We all come from a little different background.  Bill and Robert are the fence sitters and they will tell you so.  Grumpy and I are the c/p/h types and I think it shows.  Linda is a true p/h authentic for the citizen world and knows her stuff.  The thing is we moderate the complete spectrum with a friendly nature.  Bill's initial post was to spark conversation and it did.  But to let things cool, I'm going to close this thread.  It may reopen after some mod discussion, but in the meantime I will start a new post about Common Ground.

Thanks All!