Great Kilts?? at the Renn Faire

[davedove]

Ron, The Tartan Terrors do, I believe, have a shirt! It says "Real Men Wear Kilts" on the front and has the Tartan Terrors logo on the back. You may be able to find it at their website, which was posted earlier in the thread.

They were selling that shirt on site at the Faire. I don't see it on the website though.

[macwilkin]

These posts all strike a familiar chord with me, since I participated in Civil War reenacting for a decade, and still participate in living history programs with the NPS; in fact, the battlefield where I work at just had its annual "Moonlight Tour" a couple of weeks ago.

I find one very effective way to present a "first person" living history event, where the reenactors act like they are in the time period, is the "ghosted scenario", where participants ingore the tourists, and the tourists are told that the reenactors cannot see or hear them. Trying to do first person with the aforementioned wags that try to trip someone up can be frustrating and pointless, and other people who are there to actually get something out of the program won't. I've dealt with a few in my time, and I have heard countless stories from other rangers and reenactors of "dialogues".

I've seen some very bad history at Civil War reenactments, and some very good programs as well. You can't judge all renfaires, reenactments, etc. by one "bad apple", but those of us who participate in such events and take our impression of a soldier, civilian, etc. should attempt to be as accurate as possible, unless you are doing something "just for fun", such as a renfaire.

That being said, as someone who makes his living with history, I sometimes worry about the "quasi-history" in movies, on television and at renfaires, Civil War reenactments, etc. Yes, enjoy life, don't take it so seriously, but the thing that worries me is that many visitors to these kind of events will never read a history book about the subject, and will base their knowledge of the Civil War, etc. on what they see alone, which makes a bigger mess that we in the history field have to attempt to clean up.

Just my thoughts...

Cheers,

Todd

[MacSimoin]

That being said, as someone who makes his living with history, I sometimes worry about the "quasi-history" in movies, on television and at renfaires, Civil War reenactments, etc. Yes, enjoy life, don't take it so seriously, but the thing that worries me is that many visitors to these kind of events will never read a history book about the subject, and will base their knowledge of the Civil War, etc. on what they see alone, which makes a bigger mess that we in the history field have to attempt to clean up.

That being said, it explains partly why you're a moderator here. Well put, Todd.

[davedove]

That being said, as someone who makes his living with history, I sometimes worry about the "quasi-history" in movies, on television and at renfaires, Civil War reenactments, etc. Yes, enjoy life, don't take it so seriously, but the thing that worries me is that many visitors to these kind of events will never read a history book about the subject, and will base their knowledge of the Civil War, etc. on what they see alone, which makes a bigger mess that we in the history field have to attempt to clean up.

Yes, that is a sad situation Todd. Unfortunately, there's not much you can do except to try to educate them (if they're willing). It's bad enough when even history books don't always agree, let alone when entertainment throws its version into the works.

[Shay]

That being said, as someone who makes his living with history, I sometimes worry about the "quasi-history" in movies, on television and at renfaires, Civil War reenactments, etc. Yes, enjoy life, don't take it so seriously, but the thing that worries me is that many visitors to these kind of events will never read a history book about the subject, and will base their knowledge of the Civil War, etc. on what they see alone, which makes a bigger mess that we in the history field have to attempt to clean up.

That's true, but is that the fault of the people engaging in entertainment, or is that the fault of the parents not encouraging their children to read the real books? Or the fault of the people who don't bother looking beyond the surface?

The same thing happens in literature- 'Clan of the Cave Bear' is rife with historical inaccuracy in the name of dramatic license, but it got me interested in a certain period of history and the real theories and facts behind the stories. There's a series of romantic 'historic' novels called I think the Highlander that makes efforts to be more factual in it's historical presentings, but still, the author draws in real characters to make it feel more 'true,' which automatically makes it more false, because those real people obviously never interacted with fictional characters. Or take the Da Vinci Conspiracy- a book using real historical documents and current historical theories as the backdrop for some made-up documents and theories advancing the plot if not the main thrust of the book.

I'm saying obviously, when you're paying money to be entertained, if you buy it hook line and sinker without checking it's accuracy, you're being niave. Life, and history, does not make good copy for the most part, and almost anyone presenting a time or story to you in one neat little package is going to be using their best judgement on how to present something for your consumption, not give you a history lesson.

For example- they do sell dreadful 'great kilts' at the Ren Faire. But every year, some guys get interested in kilts that might not otherwise. They find out later they didn't get a good one, but there is caveat emptor, at least here in the States, especially someplace like a Ren Faire where you get caught up in the moment- and forget the no-return policy*. You get into something mostly because it was presented to you, not because you wake up one morning and decide, without ever seeing one for sale or on a live person, "I need a kilt."

BTW- Half the crap they sell for women and men isn't totally historically accurate, either (I'll never forget the bellydancer in TARTAN that I saw there once) so why expect the kilts to be different?

*A wise decision in this arena, though, because otherwise people would 'buy' garb and return it at the end of the day for a full refund- effectively renting the clothes for free.

[macsim]

Just curious....has anyone been to a Renn Raire and seen Blackmore's Night? Hard for me to believe my alltime guitar hero Ritchie Blackmore, the author of "Smoke on the Water," is now dressing up in tights and a Seinfeldish "puffy shirt" and doing Rennaisance music at these things. I've heard some of the music online and I've yet to develop a taste for it. Somehow it just doesn't carry as much weight when you smash your lute onstage.

[Shay]

Yep- and it's very running-around-with-fairies music. Sometimes they're wicked evil fairies, I'm sure.

My daughter (who's seven) loves it. I like it for pleasant background music when I'm knitting. That should tell you how hard-core it is.

[macsim]

[QUOTE=Shay]stories. There's a series of romantic 'historic' novels called I think the Highlander that makes efforts to be more factual in it's historical presentings, but still, the author draws in real characters to make it feel more 'true,' which automatically makes it more false, because those real people obviously never interacted with fictional characters.

I think you're referring to the "Outlander" series Shay, a series of books by Diana Gabaldon. Since the main character is named "Fraser" I obviously took an interest in them. I had all these women coming to my tent at Highland Games talking about "Jamie this" and "Jamie that." I read the first one just to see what it was all about, got hooked and read the rest and they were actually quite good. She goes to a lot of trouble to make them fairly accurate (although there are some really bad goofs when the characters move to colonial North Carolina - no such place as Greensboro until after the Revolution) and they have certainly aroused some...er...interest. I've had my picture taken with more than one young lady who wanted a momento featuring a "real Fraser" in "Jamie's tartan." I'm okay with a little fiction!;)

[bubba]

From my own observations, a ren fair is not, and isn't intended to be, a reenactment. It's a chance to play dress up and go play with the other kids. There's nothing whatsoever wrong with that. You'll have some that try their best to make their costmes as authentic as they can while others use their imagination to create something with the flavor of fantasy. It's a matter of fun and escape. You have to keep things in perspective. Historical reenactments are great and I've been to some good ones at The Old Wade House in Wisconsin and some that aren't so great at the Gignon Mansion in Kaukauna, Wisconsin. Ren fairs aren't to common around here. I've been to a few in California but that was many years ago. Basically, it comes down to a historical event or a history themed party. Each has a place and it's pretty much up to the individual to know the difference.

[Jimmy Carbomb]

Right on Bubba!

I always thought that it was common knowledge that Renaissance Faires were in existance to provide men with an outdoor venue to get ripped on some interesting ales, get them well fed on whole turkey legs, and afford them the entertainment of leather-clad women!

That's why I LOVE to play at these things! Do you have any idea what the view is like from the stage?!!! :-D

I don't care if they think they're Elizabethan or Ethiopian, as long as they're dressed like THAT!!!