Philosophy of Authenticity

[Hawkyns]

Wow, I missed most of that, but then I flunked Psych 101

In Defence of Elitists.

I'm still of the opinion that we need the elite groups. Being elitist has never been a bad thing for me. Not in the sense of looking down on others, but in being top of the game. My impressions, all of them, are not static. I've got boxes full of kit that was purchased as being top of the line at the time, but has been superceded by better research or better production. To my mind, it's being an elitist that makes me spend my time poring over archeological journals and reports, wills, and period government documents. These groups are the ones that get called when History Channel needs somebody or when a museum is liikng for something special.

Now let me put it in another sense. All elite groups are not historical elite groups. There are elite groups that specialise in street theater, playing to the crowds. I could never do that. But there are times when that is needed too, parades for instance, and fundraisers. Put me in front of a couple of five year olds and I don't know what to do. I can't relate to them on an intellectual level, so I have no point of reference. The kids are bored, the parents are miffed, and we've just lost the audience. It takes a specialised type of person to do that, another kind of elite, if you will.

Look, we're never going to bridge the divide between historical and pollywood pirates. We all do our thing. But to assume that elite means putting someone down because they are not stitched up right is a bad assumption. It is just someone who is at the top of their game, either as a historical interpreter or a street player. There are some (many?) who do not aspire to either group. They go to the renfaires in whatever their kit is and spend the day doing the pub crawl. They interact mostly within their own group and that's fine for them. They are not interested in how the public sees them or even how other pyrates see them. That's fine. Without them, there would be no dividing line to separate the elitists.

Hawkyns

[hurricane]

I don't think it all has to do with elitism. It is being looked at aghast or ostracized because someone doesn't want to go all the way at any level of performance, whether it's street performance or full on re-enacting.

For me, I like doing re-enactment to a point. It's fun and it's great to learn from others and educate the public. But I'm not going to forego my hammish performer side and not play with the kids at their own childish level just to be more correct. It's just not me.

The only problems I've had is when the more hardcore re-enactors look at me, like -- What's he doing? That's not proper. I thought he was one of us. Case in point - the parade of crewes last year at PiP. Several of the re-enactors looked at me and asked me where my crewe was. I replied we weren't doing the parade -- we were doing other things for the festival. There was that classic - "he's not playing like he should look".

Baseline... I do this for fun. And if an activity isn't fun, I won't do it no matter how authentic or correct it is. I know my own crewe damn near mutineed two years ago when we went absolutely proper at all levels -- by day two the ladies were ready to string me up with their stays that they hated so much. So, that whole thing went away on the final day. It wasn't fun for them.

I appreciate those that seek perfection and revel in getting it right. Just don't expect me or my crewe to ever be that. We'll come close, we'll fake it when we can or have to, but we love all aspects of the game - from the brash Hollywood rogue and buxom wench to the representations of Sir Henry Morgan and Mary Read -- and everything in between.

Just don't expect us to march in a line with all the rest and we're good.

-- Hurricane

[RedJessi]

And back to Mission;

I LOVE LOVE LOVE the fundamental attribution error theory. It was actually a huge break through in my own thinking that - ironically enough - lead me away from evolutionary psychology research and towards the actual psychotherapy I do now. It was the theory that most perfectly dovetailed with something I had pretty much believed for a large portion of my life but didn't know there was a theory to explain it.

One of my favorite quotes was also spawned by the theory - by Edward Jones who responded to Lee Ross's initial publication of the idea by saying he found the term (fundamental attribution error) "overly provocative and somewhat misleading" before adding "Furthermore, I'm angry that I didn't think of it first."

Anyway, it was my consistent questioning of the extrapolated labels that had been decided upon through observation of unrelated personality characteristics that convinced me I might possibly make a good therapist (ie, a personal desire to avoid the behavior by which conclusions are jumped to in order to avoid the complex entanglements that invariably come up by actively jumping right into said entanglements and attempting to....uh....detangle them).

When it comes down to it, this is truly ashame... as there is no reason not to have the two different groups and one is truly not better nor worse than the other... just different... Our crew loves working with both "Reel and Real" as they afford great opportunities to show off the differences in a positive light and still teach...as film/myth history is just as important as teaching the factual history...I find it fascinating how one develops or leads to the other and the then back again...

You are right - but until people stop stereotyping, it's something that we will have to deal with - both good and bad. On the upside, the more individuals can participate in conversations like this - and actively learn about these attributional biases and errors and such - the more they can become aware of the behaviors and attempt to avoid them. If only there were a way to make it sound less.....academically obtuse. lol

Sterling - are you using the MultiQuote or reply functions?

Back on topic, I know the in/out group thing is easiest to set example to with the PC/non-PC pirates (because of the fairly obvious distinctions between the two), but I think to add to more confusion, there are various striations and styles of PC re-enacting that are likely more at play with this discussion than with the PC/non-PC thing. I think many have within this discussion have done a good job at illustrating some of the many styles of historical re-enacting. It is also my observation that most re-enactors do tend to work in varying styles of re-enactments, some more in one style, some more in others... With a fair number that are fairly migrant and work in many if not all styles.

Glad to make you grin, Mickey!

And you are correct about the secondary stickiness. I've been avoiding broaching that as it is a topic I feel would become more volatile. PC/Non-PC is more broad and easily recognizable and less likely to be taken personally.

Look, we're never going to bridge the divide between historical and pollywood pirates. We all do our thing. But to assume that elite means putting someone down because they are not stitched up right is a bad assumption. It is just someone who is at the top of their game, either as a historical interpreter or a street player. There are some (many?) who do not aspire to either group. They go to the renfaires in whatever their kit is and spend the day doing the pub crawl. They interact mostly within their own group and that's fine for them. They are not interested in how the public sees them or even how other pyrates see them. That's fine. Without them, there would be no dividing line to separate the elitists.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but that was a perfect example of the Fundamental Attribution Error!

You state that "pollywood pirates" are only interested in renfaires and pub crawls - both of those are assumptions and are equally as inaccurate as you say the impression you've gotten of an elitist as a negative is. But in that statement you have made something of a slur (pollywood) as well as made assumptions against people who are not "on top of their game" and do not "aspire" to be/do more.

I am not ignoring that you give "street performers" credability of a sort, but merely asking that you look to how you language also puts them down.

For clarity, I also did not state that ALL PC pirates put non-PC pirates down. If that were the case, I would not be involved in this conversation at all. But I started out in March 2008 as a non-historical pirate. I went to pirate day at the local Renfaire. I typically went to renfaire about once a year or so, and had standard rennie garb - so I added stereotypical elements and called it pirate. In fact, here's a picture from that morning before heading out to the faire:

I had fun - enough so that I decided to attend PiP, on my own, without knowing a single soul in the community beyond what I learned in about 5 weeks of posting here (intermittently at best, due to school) before the event. But between March 08 and December 08, with no input from anyone else, I had begun to make changes to the clothing I had. I started opting for handspun and linen fabrics, got a pair of breeches (as interpretation that women were likely to dress like men on ships) and thus I was slightly better by the time PiP rolled around. But I still had zippered slouch boots, metal grommets, upholstery fabrics, and rennie bodices as well - though at PiP I purchased a weskit to further my gear.

The point being : this had nothing to do with how the public, how the rennies or how the pirates would view me - because I wasn't attached to any particular group. But to assume that I was uninterested or just out for a day of drinking is just as erroneous as the charges you level against the idea that elitist groups have a negative impact overall (which, interestingly enough, I don't believe anyone implied).

I can say that if I ran into someone who treated me, in the above garb, as if I WERE only interested in drinking at faire....well, I certainly wouldn't be part of this community. In fact, it would totally turn me off to the hobby as I would take it as a slight against my intellectual capacity based on what I was wearing and therefore having absolutely nothing to do with reality (ie fundamental attribution error! hehehe). However, I feel that I was lucky with the people who I did form relationships with, as they have helped me in research (and sewing - where I have limited ability) as well as teaching me various and sundry bits of data and skills. And because of those people, in a relatively short period, my kit has become much more accurate (following image from May 09 - a mere 5 months after PiP - and the boots are gone, though you can't see! LOL):

However, much like Mission - I have no interest in participating in elite events. Does this mean I don't "aspire" to more than what I have? Absolutely not. It just means that what I most appreciate about the hobby is the teaching/learning/community aspect. So, the real question to me is, how much does an elitist attitude damage that aspect?

Edited October 5, 2009 by RedJessi

[blackjohn]

However... I have no interest in participating in elite events.

Interesting statement. Are you limiting yourself? If you have no experienced with a so-called "elite event" first-hand, how would you know for sure?

And just what is an "elite event"?

And are there "non-elite events" too?

[RedJessi]

However... I have no interest in participating in elite events.

Interesting statement. Are you limiting yourself? If you have no experienced with a so-called "elite event" first-hand, how would you know for sure?

And just what is an "elite event"?

And are there "non-elite events" too?

Oh, I'm absolutely "limiting" myself. Another way to look at it that I am drawing a line as to where my involvement is appropriate for me - as Hurricane stated above, I don't feel the need/have desire to be recognized as the very best (which is not to say that it isn't a worthwhile goal, just that it is not MY goal).

But the erroneous assumption is that I am doing so without any knowledge. Just because I have never been to such an event doesn't mean I haven't spoken to individuals that have or done research on what it takes to get there/be involved at that level. And I am sure that if I *DID* attend such an event, I would find aspects of it more than just a little enjoyable. But the rub of it is the amount of time/effort/dedication/cost - in all the previous areas as well as financial cost of clothing, accessories, weapons, books, vacation time, travel expense, etc etc - versus where I feel my level of enjoyment would be, compounded by the fact that I have several other hobbies - professional and personal - that I want to dedicate time to, have led me to the personal choice that elite events are not a priority/interest for me.

I would define an "elite event" as one that is invite only, offers no or limited spectator involvement, and sticks to strict period accuracy as de riguer.

I would define a "non-elite event" as something more along the lines of PiP - there are camps of PC and non-PC participants, it's open to spectators, it offers entertainment as well as education - from living history types to lecturing/academic types.

[Mission]

I think having an elite group as a model is a good thing, but it has to go hand-in-hand with the comments I made previously (in post #59 on this page.) If you want to be a good model for others (or a leader - which is a good thing) I believe you have to do certain things to to inspire most of them to attempt to follow your example (however you define 'better' - as an elite Hollywood or an elite PC pirate):

1. Be open to other people and their opinions, not dismissive when they don't agree with you.

2. Complement what people do right and recognize that criticism is more likely to make people disregard you than change their behavior and avoid it.

3. Recognize that there is a nice way to make suggestions and use that method. As I mentioned, I think volunteers (and we're basically all volunteers around here) are really only open to suggestions on improvement when they regard you as an expert to be admired and emulated.

4. Be friendly and open in communicating ideas with others (particularly outside of the core "in group.") Good leaders do not hoard information - that's a power play. Most folks turn away that fairly quickly.

5. Accept that you are sometimes wrong and admit as much. (This is something that is really hard to do, but we're all human. Being a 'human' leader (or elite if you like) seems like a contradiction, but it is really the best sort of leader there is. Many leaders have a hard time accepting this.)

Of course, some folks prefer hoarding info, excluding others and criticizing. But I don't see how they can really be effective hobby opinion leaders.

[Quartermaster James]

Perhaps it's time to throw this spanner into the works: A Modest Proposal.

[Mission]

I agree with Jessi. Being a re-enactment leader or trying to create the ultimate garb (again, inasmuch as we can determine what that is from our limited resources and perspective...) is not for everyone. So what? Folks should do what they enjoy and in the level and quantity at which they enjoy it - a lot of people regard it as a hobby, not a competition. But it's nice when those who do want to strive to serve as good and helpful examples of what you can do if you want.

[michaelsbagley]

Perhaps it's time to throw this spanner into the works: A Modest Proposal.

One of my favourite articles on the art of re-enacting ever!!! And an article that HUGELY defined and affected the way I proceed with the hobby... However, also an article that is very open to lots of different types of interpretation, especially once one gets into how to execute, and whether to take it on a personal level or how to implement it on a group or *societal* level.

* By societal, I mean re-enactment society level.

[Dutchman]

i'm trying to figure out where "elite" keeps popping up.

[RedJessi]

i'm trying to figure out where "elite" keeps popping up.

I think you meant why "elite" keeps coming up?

Well, that is the assumption I will operate under as I try to respond - if not, disregard and clarify please?

"Elite" is being used as a shorthand to acknowledge that there is an inherent ingroup/outgroup bias that is often present at many events. Just as people on this forum have referred to "pollywood pirates" and just as they have referred to those on this forum as "stitch nazis".

I figure "elite" has less negative connotation than "nazi", less off-putting academic parlance than "ingroup" and still acknowledges that there are social constructs in place that put one group in higher standing than the other - a fact recognized by both the PC and non-PC alike.

[Hawkyns]

Jessi, I think you are reading too much into what I'm saying. (One of the reasons I hated psych) I read what's on the surface and what is said, not what might be behind it. I use pollwood as a term to describe pirates whose research and persona comes from popular culture, not as a putdown. I've always said that there is a place for everyone in this hobby, whether it's staffing a museum replica ship, or just going to your buddy's pirate costume party. As far as the faire pirates who roll from pub to pub, I know many of them, both from MDRF and NYRF. I'm fairly active up and down the northeast, and I know who is out there. It's a fact that there are many who I do not see outside those venues. There are some who extend beyond that and many more who do not. That's fine. Nobody is saying they have to do more. But the fact remains that there are 'names' out there who everyone recognises and who are seen to be leaders in their part of This Thing That We Do. They are elites, and will always be recognised as such by those of us who are active at this year round. On the continuum, there will always be people who are between the two ends. How far one progresses towards the elite end will always be a personal choice, but it will also always be a determinant when people look at us and rate us. And that is something that people do, like it or not. Some people can take the criticism of being called a stitch nazi or Jack sparrow wannabe, some can't. Some people take umbrage at the most polite suggestion, others ask to be critiqued down to the underwear.

I take people as they are and treat them as I find them. I long ago gave up being PC to spare people's feelings. I've no doubt it has alienated a few over the years. I also know it has created a circle of friends (more like family) who have similar attitudes. I don't offer unasked for help, but I also don't ignore what is wrong for the venue. if that is the elitist attitude that some are talking about so be it, but to back off on the search for excellence because some don't like it does no service to anyone.

Hawkyns

NB- This comes across as harsh, and directed at you Jessi. It is not and is not meant to be. But parsing words is not what I am known for. It is simply how I feel, using the best terms I know.

Hawkyns

[RedJessi]

Jessi, I think you are reading too much into what I'm saying. (One of the reasons I hated psych) I read what's on the surface and what is said, not what might be behind it. I use pollwood as a term to describe pirates whose research and persona comes from popular culture, not as a putdown. I've always said that there is a place for everyone in this hobby, whether it's staffing a museum replica ship, or just going to your buddy's pirate costume party. As far as the faire pirates who roll from pub to pub, I know many of them, both from MDRF and NYRF. I'm fairly active up and down the northeast, and I know who is out there. It's a fact that there are many who I do not see outside those venues. There are some who extend beyond that and many more who do not. That's fine. Nobody is saying they have to do more. But the fact remains that there are 'names' out there who everyone recognises and who are seen to be leaders in their part of This Thing That We Do. They are elites, and will always be recognised as such by those of us who are active at this year round. On the continuum, there will always be people who are between the two ends. How far one progresses towards the elite end will always be a personal choice, but it will also always be a determinant when people look at us and rate us. And that is something that people do, like it or not. Some people can take the criticism of being called a stitch nazi or Jack sparrow wannabe, some can't. Some people take umbrage at the most polite suggestion, others ask to be critiqued down to the underwear.

I take people as they are and treat them as I find them. I long ago gave up being PC to spare people's feelings. I've no doubt it has alienated a few over the years. I also know it has created a circle of friends (more like family) who have similar attitudes. I don't offer unasked for help, but I also don't ignore what is wrong for the venue. if that is the elitist attitude that some are talking about so be it, but to back off on the search for excellence because some don't like it does no service to anyone.

Hawkyns

NB- This comes across as harsh, and directed at you Jessi. It is not and is not meant to be. But parsing words is not what I am known for. It is simply how I feel, using the best terms I know.

Hawkyns

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.

[Hawkyns]

Well, actually, no. Pollywood as we use it came into being because we saw too many renfaire pirates with stuffed parrots attached to their shoulders...

Hawkyns

[RedJessi]

Well, actually, no. Pollywood as we use it came into being because we saw too many renfaire pirates with stuffed parrots attached to their shoulders...

Hawkyns

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.

[Mission]

Am I mediocre because I can't really sew?

I'm a mediocre freebooter.

I don't think 'elite' is a bad term, although I decided to change it to 'leader' in my previous post because it does sound bad. Words are indeed sticky.

I think Sterling made a good point that not everyone has the same goals. In fact, deciding that everyone wants to achieve the same goals as you do (being in the leadership of the hobby, for example) is take make an attribution error - you are attributing your goals to others.

Are some folks not up to snuff and presenting history inaccurately? In fact, I would argue everyone is doing that no matter how much research they've done. (We can't escape our 'present' mindset without traveling through time and being ensconced in the real thing...and even then, I'd suggest that since we've tasted the future, we're still not 100% accurate. Our present references color everything we do and say but because we're in the middle of it, we don't realize it.) Still, are some better than others? Sure. But calling others to task for not doing what you want (even in the name of accuracy) is to make the attribution error mentioned above. If someone doesn't want what you want and this bothers you, you have a problem. (They don't necessarily have one, though.)

This is why events and groups are best tailored to people of different interest levels. (Sorry, broken record, but that seems to me to be the best solution for people whose goals are such that they don't want to accept people whose goals are different.)

[Capt. Sterling]

Mission that all goes back to what you said before... there are different events available... if someone doesn't like one, don't go to it...why does that particular event need to change to suit that individual when it may be suiting others?

[RedJessi]

Am I mediocre because I can't really sew?

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...

[RedJessi]

Mission that all goes back to what you said before... there are different events available... if someone doesn't like one, don't go to it...why does that particular event need to change to suit that individual when it may be suiting others?

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.

[hurricane]

Am I mediocre because I can't really sew?

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

[RedJessi]

Am I mediocre because I can't really sew?

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!

[Capt. Sterling]

Mission that all goes back to what you said before... there are different events available... if someone doesn't like one, don't go to it...why does that particular event need to change to suit that individual when it may be suiting others?

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.

assuming anything is usually just leading to trouble, unless someone happens to guess correctly when they assume... boils down to what you are saying though... people read into things, form their own opinions and sometimes make the choice to attempt to judge correctly what the other person is trying to say or attempt to do without going to the other person and just plainly asking... "I don't think I understand where you are coming from, mind discussing it further?"

[Mission]

Mission that all goes back to what you said before... there are different events available... if someone doesn't like one, don't go to it...why does that particular event need to change to suit that individual when it may be suiting others?

I don't believe I said it did; if I did so (in all my verbosity ), I was wrong. My suggestion is that the events (and groups) be what they want to be and allow the individuals to decide if they want to be part of them. In fact, that is entirely my point. The events shouldn't have to change to suit the individual. The individual should change if they want to attend an event that is not really suited to their kit or choose events that are appropriate to their level of accuracy, interest, whatever. However, if an event or group is such that it can't attract enough people or attendees or whatever it needs to support itself, then the organizers may need to take that into account as well.

[Guest]

I'm kinda confused about something....

lets see ... Dutch is proposing a set bit of rules so we can join in an insurance policy...(or did I get that wrong?)

Then a lot of people are arguing that large groups don't work...

Then we get into the old argument about authentic vs. Reel/play/... what ever pyrates... (who never have set sword fights... not matter how hoaky/silly)(they still could use insurance...)

So my question is....

are we discussing a unified group set of rules for insurance.... (maybe that should be another thread)

Or are we discussing.... our philosophy of Authenticity....

See... we have split (once again.... heck we kinda do that...)

So on my Philosophy of Authenticity....

Heck (hell) you gotta start some where..... I still argue, hey...start out using cotton... it's cheaper... figure out what you need to learn (and how to sew it..) ... then make it outta the period good stuff..... (and once you play with the period fabric... yer hooked..... yeah...but you at least have something to wear as you make better/more period stuff......)

Lets see.... most of the people arguing "Period" will tell you that they have been playing for a long time.... they kinda forget to tell you the mistakes they made early on...

Yeah... it takes some time..... I still stand behind my cotton argument.... you gotta start somewhere... and those of us wot have played for awhile ain't goinna put you down... we want to be the light of the path... not no damn stop sign.....(woah... dang ... that's a good quotable line.....)

Dang.... almost alla my stuff is dang near correct (well yeah... there is some guess work and we can quibble over that in TWILL...) but ultimately... the final authority is yourself...... yeah... I know wot is wrong with my stuff... I can work to fix it....But I will be damned if someone else is going to tell me how to play....

I'm going to go with wot we in the Careening Camp at PiP figured out a few years ago....we have no standard of Authenticity..... we show up doing our damned best... and for some reason .... the next year.... everyone (by themselves) has "upped the notch".... we didn't have to tell them to do so... but eergh... that authenticity bug "bit" and they do it themselves........

Dang.... we talked about "out lawing" bucket boot in five years...... But now we don't even have to do that..... (and yeah Jim... I ain't goinna post that picture.... )

We don't need no stinkin' rules... we grow in different ways......

[theM.A.dDogge]

actually i believe that was the original tangent post subject..(before the tangents tangent about the issurance thang spun outta control)...was...should there be a centralised...standard for Authenticity..

question is still on the floor i believe

thank you for your support,

Pyrate King