Jump to content

RedJessi

Member
  • Posts

    419
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by RedJessi

  1. That too is my rub. I can't stand the lack of imagination, given the wealth of information out there. It's just so disheartening to see so many Jack imitations, most of which are poor. I'd rather see some originality and broaden the tapestry of an event. I just can't take any more Jacks. Enough, already! Really, why can't someone be Blair or Dog Brown from Cutthroat - those were some interesting characters to work with. Some of the characters from Nate and Hayes would be great too, like Blake... and that's just out of two movies. - Hurricane Hawkyns, I get the idea based on how often I've seen you make fun of the people who dress like him at events. To put it simply? No. Not everyone is capable of that. Which is exactly why there is a market for premade costumes. Also, some people get a kick out of recreating -not a time period, but a specific person or icon. Which is why every year people dress up as Superman for Halloween. Gosh, why can't everyone make their OWN iconic superhero? Well, because it takes a whole lot of talent to do what Jerome Siegel and Joseph Shuster did when they created Superman. Not EVERYONE can create Superman. Not EVERYONE can create their own interpretation of a pirate - fantasy or historical. Does that mean those people should be looked down upon because they are not as talented and knowledgeable as you? Should they not be allowed to participate? Should they be ridiculed for not having the same abilities or the same level of interest as you do? Are there a lot of Jack Sparrows at pirate events? Absolutely. I think that's a given. But it doesn't bother me in the slightest. I am interested in how much effort they put into to portraying the character, I am interested in why they chose him and I am most of all interested in why they decided to dress like him on a hot day in March to come out to a park and hang out. So I ask them. Sometimes they just shrug and says "He's a cool character" or "My girlfriend likes him" or some variation. Sometimes it's because he's the first pirate to catch their interest - and then they start asking questions - and maybe they get interested in actual GAoP and maybe they don't. But At least a dialog was opened. Which I feel is a lot more productive than snickering or rolling my eyes at ANOTHER "effin" Sparrow.
  2. Frankly, we should all always be learning. Isn't that one of the points of this whole enterprise? It is the people who think of themselves as the utter experts that I find the most troubling. Maybe that's part of my own personal philosophy of life/education - which dovetails with one of my favorite quotes from Picasso - "A painting is never finished. It just stops in interesting places". Education is never completed and mastery is never attained. We just stop and move on to other things when we've hit out own line.
  3. Why do you hate Jack Sparrow? I'm having a hard time grasping this concept. Is he authentic? No - what in Hollywood is? But are we authentic? If you are really honest with yourself, I think you have to answer no as well - we can only make educated guesses at how accurate we are. Is he entertaining? That's a matter of personal taste. Are we entertaining? Same as above. Did he raise the awareness level in the general public and spawn several History Channel specials to be aired in the wake of each movie? You better believe it. Were all those specials accurate? Probably not - but neither are we. I think we all do the best we can and I doubt the dramatic documentarians were maliciously trying to spread disinformation. Do we raise awareness levels? If only we had his marketing campaign - I think we do as good as we can. So....explain this to me. Why hate a fictional character that raised awareness? It seems kind of like a wasted effort to me - and all you are accomplishing is making yourself feel a whole lot of negativity, because I can just about guarantee you that not a single one of those 19 Jack Sparrows was concerned with your ire. They were there to have fun.
  4. As one of the people who received training the day before being on the line - and as a member of the first all woman crewe - I feel I must speak up here. Mainly because I feel it is an incorrect supposition, but also because it is an insult to Grace and the quality of the instruction she gave us. Grace went over, back and forth, not just the "how-to" of firing a big honking gun - but also the safety issues, answered every question myself, Kate Souris and Rusty Nell had, and made sure we understood what we were doing and WHY we were doing it. We had a specific count for each move, and she made sure we were each comfortable with our positions. When I told her at the offset that I was not comfortable in one position, she promptly made it a crewe discussion and we were all given opportunity to define our own comfort zones. We took the matter of manning the gun together extremely seriously and not a one of us would have accepted any nonsense around the weapon. In fact, when another pirate stepped up on the line just minutes before the battle and asked to join a crewe - Grace refused to even have our crewe as a consideration in the matter. There was no way we were letting a totally unknown element into the mix on a moment's notice. We kept our crew together for 2 days (in fact, we were specifically requested to return the second day) and I cannot give Grace enough credit for being the reason we did so well. Flash forward to May, and Kate and I are on the Santa Maria, manning another gun (much smaller) - perfectly comfortable with what we are doing because of Grace. And when there was a misfire - despite the gun owner stating how he felt we should handle the matter - because of our own sense of safety and respect of the danger such weapons can present - we both refused to continue on the line and stepped down to let the owner handle the matter himself - because we didn't necessarily agree with what he said to do and neither of us had personal experience with the matter. The point being that you don't have to have 10+ years experience to have a sensible head on your shoulders and you don't have to have known/witnessed/heard of a guy who lost a limb to comprehend the dangers of firing a weapon.
  5. I think I tend towards your and Mission's way of thinking, Patrick - there there is only so much we can "know" - the rest is our best educated guess. To cage it in any other terms is fooling ourselves, fooling the public and doing a disservice to history. In that way, it's kinda like science - which never finds a theory 100% proven - just strongly supported.
  6. I am sorry for your loss, but marvel at the send off you gave your friend - well done, sir.
  7. Do ye mean me or Piratelooksat40? For me - I mean in reality - not fantasy - having a dagger strapped to a thigh seems like a counter-intuitive idea to me, due to not actually being able to get to it in anything but an awkward manner - rendering it pretty much useless in an actual fight.
  8. I am honored to be counted in such good company!
  9. (NOTE: The pictures of these instruments is not meant to imply that the human being in said pictures can play with with any sort of proficiency. In fact, you should feel sorry for said instruments and might consider this posting as their cry for help.) (and, yes, I use nylon strings and yes, I realize that means most guitarists therefore think I am insane.)
  10. You know, I always wondered about this. While it is a sexy idea, it would seem that a blade holstered to a thigh...under skirts and possible mantua or more, would be quite difficult to actually get to in a timely manner. Were they actually used? Were daggers in stays more likely (as that seems more practical to me).
  11. Again, I ask that you give creedance to the idea that none of this is meant as a personal attack against you. No one that I have seen has suggested anything negative about the fact that you are willing to offer your experience in setting up insurance as a bad thing, so using emotional loaded language like "pardon me for offering" does nothing but create exactly the sort of division I think most of us are trying to avoid.
  12. First the fundamental attribution error and now the culture of fear? You are going to make me swoon, Mission! In my mind it comes down to professionalism. Those of us who want to do more and be more understand that there are costs involved with that. Costs that are both financial and restrictive. That applies whether you are running a full scale sea battle between ships, a sword circle, or interactive street theater. Being just somebody in pirate kit is not enough for me. If I class myself as a 16th or 17th century sea gunner, it is important to me that I actually have as many of the skills as I can to support that. Just saying it is not enough, I have to be able to prove it, to myself and others. In order to do that, I have to participate in activities that are dangerous to both myself, the crew around me, and the spectators. In order for venues to allow me to do that, they want more than my handshake to prove I know what I am doing. Insurance, qualifications, standards- all of these speak to the mundane risk analysts that I am not some yahoo with a cutlass and a pistol that is likely to sink their ship when I fire a broadside. If somebody is going to do street theater with little kids, they want to be sure that the pirate is not a pedophile or likely to somehow injure the kids while fooling around. They want to be able to point to some group that has connections with other sites that can say "Yeah, we've worked with these guys and their organisation. they're OK." Hawkyns I am still not catching the correlation. My dictionary widget says that the definition of elite is a group of people considered to be the best in a particular society or category, esp. because of their wealth, power or talent. It also comes from the French elire, derived from the Latin eligere - 'to elect'. Nothing in there about believing in insurance or the positive benefit of organizations, nor is there anything in your statement about being electing. I am sure I am missing something, but I cannot think what.
  13. Hawkyns, I'm curious as to why you ascribe the title of "elite" to those who want insurance - as, from my point of view at least - that was a totally separate debate? I am not picking up the crossover of topics you are implying...
  14. Well, I can only speak for myself, and I have been to limited events, but I did have the experience that there were times that I attempted to strike up conversations with people about their clothing or what was going on for the day or what they were working at only to dealt with so abruptly that I walked away from the interaction feeling as if I had been so much as told "I don't have time to deal with you" or "go away, newb". This could be because those persons were busy, hadn't slept well, don't like redheads, or any number of reasons. I can accept that and am also stubborn enough (and am curious/want education enough) to go find someone else to ask. But were I not the type of person I am, I could well have walked away from pyracy altogether. And what if I had spoken up - what would the outcome have been? It's pretty hypothetical when you get down to it, because the person could have gotten more frustrated/annoyed/short tempered with me or pointed me in the direction of someone who was willing to help. In the end, I found my own way, because I am determined and thick skinned - and maybe that is what is needed in this type of hobby. But I think exclusionary tactics weaken the fold to some degree. Ransom - well said.
  15. I am not really following this thread of discussion very well. Is there some concept that an overarching organization must be established? Makes no sense to me. I say relegate this to the event/group level. If some people want an overarching org., great, they can create one, certify pirate re-enactment groups, hold events and do their thing. Why shouldn't they? Some people love belonging to large groups - more power to them. If some events insist on people belonging to crews or crews belonging to the overarching organization, great, they can do that too. I see no problem with any of that. (We freebooters who want to attend such events will obviously have to make a decision.) But saying everyone must belong to the overarching org. and trying to force existing "open" events (like PiP for example) is once again trying to impose one group's goals on other people. It will drive some people away from the hobby - what's the point of that? And I think that is part of the fear many are reacting with. That an organization will be created and instead of creating new events that cater to that particular organizations goal/viewpoints - that it will instead attempt to co-opt and then completely take over existing open events and change them to meet their own standards, thus excluding others who do not have the same viewpoint.
  16. I would add the following to what Michael stated: Perhaps they feel they are not being heard, or that their PoV is being discarded as unworthy because they don't have the personal background or the years of experience in which to perfect a kit, impression, what have you. Perhaps they feel invalidated by not being part of the ingroup.
  17. To the same end, why not go in gently for the people who have not been around the block a few times, so they feel less wheelbarrowed over?
  18. I'm a mediocre freebooter. What's a freebooter, exactly? I keep trying to figure it out but I don;t think I have the meaning... That's what I call those who are not with an official crewe, sounds so much more pirooty than freelancer, eh? Hurricane LOL! Thank you for the explanation! Lancers were certainly not GAoP!
  19. Quote button notwithstanding, could you refer to the post you mean by it's number identification? I don't recall anyone saying patently that the idea wouldn't work, wholesale.
  20. I don't think anyone said any events had to change. And people have said they would opt out of events that they felt they would be ill suited for. And others still questioned those decisions. Which I think brings us right back around to the idea that each individual's involvement and degree thereof is a personal choice. Assuming why that choice was made, or assuming that there was no choice, just ignorance, is what I think many are trying say is damaging aspect.
  21. I'm a mediocre freebooter. What's a freebooter, exactly? I keep trying to figure it out but I don;t think I have the meaning...
  22. You say : "why not figure out what is needed and do it? Why not strive to better a group or oneself as an individual?" I dunno. Why? I am not attempting to say I have the answers. I am just attempting to give a voice to the otherside. No one is saying the striving personally, or as a group is a bad thing. No one is saying anyone should "settle for mediocrity" - though I would hesitate to use that term myself. Am I mediocre because I can't really sew? Or because I am new and don't have 10 years of reenacting behind me? Am I mediocre because I don't have the compunction to travel far and wide terrifically often because I have other interests that also require travel from time to time? Or is that half a dozen of one, six of the other? Or none of the above? Definitions become sticky, you see. And an organization creating definitions for a larger community can be just as sticky. It can damage the group, it can damage the community. It can also be helpful to the group and helpful to the community. I personally feel that the biggest factor in deciding which way that particular pendulum swings is how those definitions, ideas, changes, and standards are communicated. Are people going to communicate/present as mentors or autocrats? Is language going to be geared towards understanding or towards labeling? Is education going to be offered in the spirit of personal growth or dictated as an expression of personal expertise? I am not saying that any one person or any group of people are likely to fall on one side or the other of those question. I am merely putting the questions into the ring as having value and needing to be honestly looked at before proceeding. Just like many have said that a mistake to reenacting is rushing in inappropriately and with poor research, I am saying that rushing into creating a defined ingroup should be given just as much patience, caution and research.
  23. Again, I am not attempting to define how YOU are using the term. I am attempting to point out how OTHERS could interpret it's use and how THAT can hurt.
  24. I am not attempting to imply that your meaning behind the term was maliciously intentioned. I am merely pointing out that it is a loaded statement that is seen by many to be judgmental language. To whit: "Pollywood" - a combination of polyester and hollywood. Polyester is part of the cultural consciousness as a cheap, synthetic fiber most often associated with poor fashion choices. In the reenactor community, calling someone Hollywood denotes a person who has accepted what entertainment has shown as historical fact - therefore earmarking them as ignorant. Thus, in it's shorthand, "Pollywood" can be seen by some as equal to "cheap and ignorant". I am NOT saying that is what YOU are specifically saying. I am merely pointing out that it is a possible interpretation of the statement "pollywood pirate" in order to show how ingroup norms affect and damage outgroup individuals. Thus, it might be helpful to the community as a whole to replace those terms with something less likely to be construed negatively. I think Sterling has done a fine job by denoting the difference between PC and Non-PC without sounding like one is better than the other by actively going out of his way to say there are merits to each, as the rich history our country has by way of the art of film making is just as viable as the history our eastern seaboard has with actual pirates. And don't worry Hawkyns, it takes an awful lot for me to take a statement as a personal attack - my closest friends took to calling me "Justifiable Jessi" for a while due to my penchant for justifying the behaviors of others. hehe For the record, I don't disparage anyone for wanting to take this hobby to whatever extreme they want, on either end of the continuum. But, I do feel the need to point out how we create certain situations without knowing that we are doing so. Rest assured that if this was a RenFair forum and people were using the phrase "stitch Nazis" I would be pointing out how damaging that term is to the overall community - not the least reason being that I find using the term "Nazi" to refer to anything other than the events of the Holocaust deeply distasteful as well as horrifically disrespectful to the actual history of that particular event.
  25. For clarification, no one is calling anyone specific person or group here elite or elitist, nor is anyone saying that it is a negative trait to strive for something in particular that you want to strive for. All we are saying is that judging others for not wanting the same thing is not necessarily conducive to a happy and healthy community overall. I think we are all trying to avoid anyone taking this personally.
×
×
  • Create New...