Each year, History Alive (June 12-13, 2010) gathers re-enactor groups from around Brisbane to one place at one time to show off. The groups involved span pretty close to the entire timeline of human history from the Near East of about 2000 BC to the very recent past. As well as being loud, colourful and a great day out, it gives a very clear snapshot of the state of living history groups in Queensland.
The first people I encountered on the day was Contact Front, the Vietnam re-enactment group, walking through around the site in skirmish line in silence and communicating only by hand signals. This was actually quite confronting and I know there’s some debate over whether it’s too soon after the event for such a group.
Members of the Ludi Gladiatorii Romani were practicing knife fighting, under instructions and with dummy weapons, in their camp enclosure. This was interesting and I would have liked to have chatted with these guys to find out more about them but there was no one available who was not fighting.
In the main arena, any number of supposedly medieval groups in period costume flailed away at each other with swords in a thoroughly pointless display of stupidity. These guys know nothing of period fencing and many cannot even hold their weapons effectively. They are nothing more than drinking clubs who wear funny clothes.
Once this dross was cleared away, the Australian Napoleonic Association and similar groups gave a demonstration of fire and movement early nineteenth century style. The were using black powder muskets and, even though there was less than a dozen soldiers per side, the field was soon obscured by smoke as they by turns advanced or retreated in line and good order. Surprisingly, the French lost.
They were followed by Prima Spada School of Fence performing a skit about dueling in the Renaissance, starting with a insult given (almost) unintentionally in the street and proceeding to naked blades at dawn. Then they got silly and it dissolved into an all-out brawl.
The question I kept asking myself as I toured the site, the groups and watched the various events is what do these people want visitors to get out of their display. For the most part, I had trouble understanding or discovering what the lesson each group or display intended to me to learn.
There seems to be no value proposition presented to the audience other than “oh, look at the pretty costumes and the people acting silly.” There is nothing to draw people in and get them interested in history. The whole event is entire passive and a spectator sport. It’s just too easy to change channels and do something else. In short, everyone seemed happy just to say “we’re re-enactors and we’re here to stay” – like a pride march for history nerds.
And there’s the rub. From the apparent age of the re-enactors, they’re not here to stay for very long. Unless something is done to introduce new people into the fold, the entire re-enactment movement is liable to die a slow, withering death.
In order to avoid this fate, something needs to be done to, for instance, convert the public who attend History Alive and other events into paid up members of all groups which take their historical fancies. There needs to be more engagement with the public. There needs to be a program of getting the public involved, of teaching them about history, and of explaining to them what we find so cool about the past. We need to turn them into us.
Nice round up and a very good point about lack of purpose. I am finding this to be all to common – no one stops to ask “why are we doing this?”.
Do you think the Abbey Museum’s Medieval Festival will achieve a better result next month?
Don’t get me wrong. I really enjoyed History Alive but, with my well-known passion for history, I wish it were way to infect others with it.
The key to modern re-enactment appears to be spectacle. This, the Abbey can do and do well.
Intresting you say the abbey can deliver where history alive does not, all the drunkin medieval groups you were slagging off are quite a big proportion of participants at the abbey not making alot of sense?
Makes perfect sense. The Abbey is about spectacle in a way that History Alive was not.. Let’s see what’s on at Abbey Tournament website:
The “High Medieval Tournament” I saw at History Alive was disappointing to say the least.
Hi all,
Great discussion.
Couple of issues.
Tighter scripting is important for all periods and a sensible outline of the units history presentation would be smart for the punters.
Not sure about reenactment dying a slow death The ANA has had strong growth over the last 5 years and members annually participate in European engagements soch as Waterloo, Austerlitz and Veere.
I believe that we are all still learning the craft after more than 40 years in this country and I know that sounds weird but the ANA for example is working to move from single unit representations to multiple units on the field which gives a bigger scope for fire, movement and nationality representation.
Regards
Mark Koens
Chair
ANA
Obviously, I’ve expressed myself poorly. The ANA display was the outstanding highlight of History Alive for me – the black powder fire and movement was dead interesting. Multiple units on the field and any kind of combined arms display would be magnificent. i can’t wait to see it.
As for still learning the craft of demonstration, 40 years is a long time for an apprenticeship. I was struck by the lack of younger people engaging in the displays. I also see a high cost of entry into the hobby for participants. Those uniforms, weapons and the required black powder license are expensive. Is the latter the cause of the former or are there simly too many other distractions?
The WW2 display I saw was also good but suffered from a lack of people on the field to make it feel more ‘real.’ This is the core of the issues I was trying to get across.
Hi Chris,
All is well with your thoughts. I think it is great that someone from outside the hobby shares a passion and realistic concern.
By 40 years, I mean the broad spectrum of reenactment.
Yes! the Napoleonic era we do is very expensive and when competing with X box and playstation it is hard to come out in front often for youth interest. Saying that we had a number of under 18s on the field and in the camp. We try to make it a family hobby as much as possible and thus continue the hobby. Inclusivity rather than inclusivity must be a priority for it to continue. Thanks for the positive feedback.
Regards
Mark