Category: Living History

Wolf Whistle

On By kittycalashIn History, Literature, Living History, TV Review3 Comments
Thomas Cromwell, Hans Holbein the Younger. The Frick Collection,1915.1.76
Thomas Cromwell, Hans Holbein the Younger. The Frick Collection,1915.1.76

At last it has arrived: Wolf Hall. I waited, and did not use a proxy server to watch it early. Just as well that I watch PBS online as I have, thus far, watched the first episode three times.

At last I can understand people’s enthusiasm for historical programs some of us seethe at and cannot watch: my knowledge of the Tudors and their material world is limited enough that I am captivated and not annoyed (except by Anne Boleyn’s wrinkled silk satin bodice, which is striking in its puckers) and I read the books when they came out, and have thus forgotten enough of the details to be merely annoyed and not enraged at changes. (Other, real, critics have caught the language changes in the scene with Wolsey; Mantel is better, of course.)

The third Wolf-watching was with Mr S, who was suitably impressed by the low-light filming. As a former photographer who did a lot of night photography, improper and unbelievable lighting in film does cause an outbreak of caustic commentary. Not this time (he merely noted the fill light on Liz Cromwell’s face in one scene). With 20,000 pounds spent on candles, the BBC did this one right– and lucky for them the advance in camera technology.

But forgot the astronomical cost of all those tapers, that’s not the point: the point is what was believable and how the staging and lighting were used. I believed Wolf Hall all the more because of the low light, indoors and out, matching the time of day. I know how dim it is to light only with candles, and what a pain it is to make them, and how expensive. Light is money, whether you’re paying Ameren, National Grid, or the candlestick maker.

Aside from Hilary Mantel’s brilliant stories and all those candles, what makes this Wolf Hall good television? You know what I’m going to say: the authenticity. No, there are no Tudor accents, late or otherwise; these folks use our vernacular. And excellent arguments can be had about the historical accuracy of Mantel’s characters.

There are other arguments about the material details:

“The dull palette used – presumably in conscious contrast to The Tudors – created an ambience which, at worst, was lacklustre or, at best, homely. And it is that homeliness that concerns me most.

The homely is unthreatening. So, we are invited to view a ‘Tudor world’ as we know it or, rather, as we would like it to be. For instance, I was struck by how classless the society was – social gradation seemed to have disappeared both in the interactions and the interiors. There was little sense (as there is in the novels) of the heavy distaste for a man of such lowly birth as Cromwell’s; there was limited hauteur in a Norfolk or, indeed, the king. Meanwhile, the buildings which were home to Cromwell – still, at this point a lawyer in Wolsey’s service – seemed to lack none of the late-medieval conveniences afforded to the higher born and bettered housed. This is a world which has been domesticated for us so that it is tame, familiar and quintessentially English.”

Anne Boleyn
by Unknown artist
oil on panel, late 16th century (circa 1533-1536)
21 3/8 in. x 16 3/8 in. (543 mm x 416 mm)
Purchased, 1882. NPG 668 [Britain}
I will say that I was struck not just by the cleanliness of everything in an age before detergents (the blacksmith’s yard is remarkably pristine) and the amount of stuff in Cromwell’s house, but also by the softness of class lines. An argument could be made that depicting that much background detail would distract from the larger story, that of Cromwell and Anne and Thomas More, and the dissolution of the Catholic church in England.*

I know Cromwell ended up with riches but on the BBC he seemed to start ahead of where I thought he was at the start of the novel, mercenary and mercantile background aside.

Still: the spirit of the story and of Mantel’s Cromwell seem well-drawn here, and that’s what makes the difference between a series of living Holbeins and a gripping tale. That’s also what makes the difference between museum mannequins and costumed interpreters: emotional authenticity.

No: you cannot get costume and material culture wrong and still claim emotional authenticity as your defense. But the factor that makes a good event or site great is the believability of the characters, and that means more than a lecture on fine details. It means understanding the past, and even admitting what we don’t understand, and seek still to learn.

* Here’s an interesting and tough take on Cromwell’s work destroying the church.

Generation Gap

On By kittycalashIn History, Living History, Philosophy, Reenacting, Thanks5 Comments
Early gal trooping. I insisted on a frock coat and actual breeches.
Early gal trooping: Sam Adams, pre-beer.

Historiann has an interesting take on the scholarly study of the American Revolution:

I think it will take a fresh generation with no memories of the 1970s to revolutionize studies of the American Revolution. What do the rest of you think, those of you who remember the 1970s as well as those of you who don’t?

Historiann is riffing on a piece over at the Junto, on whether cultural historians have lost the American Revolution.

You know what this reminds me of?

Why, yes: The Progressive Movement and Various Backlashes in Revolutionary War Reenacting. (Supply caps and fonts as you like).

Now, Drunk Tailor is not specifically saying the same thing here but he is making a generational point.

They are half my age and already exceed me in sewing skill. They find new cultural nuggets I have never seen before.

I’ll see your camp kitchen and raise it a malnourished goat and acorns. (image from Drunk Tailor)

And that– younger people are finding new things–reminds me of Historiann’s post.

I could say we’re all standing on the shoulders of giants, but it is more about perspective, different ways of looking, and openness. The schisms are not just generational, but philosophical.

None of these breaks fall neatly, of course, but crack and splinter along desires and motivations. As long as you are willing to keep learning and changing (i.e. researching and making) then you’ll keep pushing at the edge of the interpretive envelope and that can only help push understanding of all kinds forward.

Not a Label but a Mindset

On By kittycalashIn Living History, personal, Philosophy, Reenacting4 Comments
I dislike spinning wheels in military camps.
My pet peeve: spinning wheels in military camps.

Progressive. Hard-core. Uber. Elite. Authentic. Accurate.

Numerous labels are fly around the interwebs and out of people’s mouths as they encounter reenactors/living history practitioners/interpreters like and unlike them. In the right mind frame, I could argue that the ultra-authentic folks in their perfectly sewn clothes with perfect accouterments who cannot and do not interact meaningfully with the public are closer to historical costumers than historical reenactors and then watch the fur fly.

Without pasting on a label, I can say that what I like best is always learning more, and that I enjoy playing with other people who also enjoy doing research and evolving interpretation. Not, We’ve already done that, dismissively but, We did that once; how can we do it better?

But what about those folks who we know aren’t doing that? By their Nikes ye shall know them, and their riding habits worn without stays. How is it that some people are interested in change, and others reach a place from which they never move, clothing or research-wise?

Because kittehs do not make good officers
Kitteh says, My melee weapon

What about you, gentle reader? I know you’re not all reenactors; some of you are more on the costume end of the spectrum, but from reading around, I know there are costumers motivated not just by new dresses or character ensembles but by better new dresses and character presentations. What motivates you to change and improve, and what keeps your hobby fresh for you?

We Need to Talk

On By kittycalashIn Fail, Living History, personal, Philosophy, Reenacting8 Comments

If you’re reading this, you probably spend enough time on the interwebs to have picked up news about, oh, Bill Cosby and various Roman Catholic priests, and to know that sexual harassment and assault is both prevalent and under-reported in America. I don’t want to argue either of those topics, but I want to set the context for you, because sexual harassment, assault, and predation happen everywhere, even in reenacting circles; it certainly happens in cosplay: see here and here.

To be clear: I’ve only had issues with the public, not fellow reenactors, and the issues with the public involve non-sexual touching and drunken stupidity which I can avoid by never being alone in kit–which means I skip some events (Tower Park, I’m looking at you).

Most of us think of reenacting and reenactments as safe places and spaces: we do not expect to encounter predators at the museum or historic site, and I want to emphasize that, as far as I know, the visitors are not the ones being preyed upon. It’s mostly younger reenactors, and it’s rare, but it happens. And I think there are several pieces to the “why” of this.

Sometimes people are completely different away from their homes and families. Whatever secret obsessions they have may be indulged when they’re engaged in fantasy play far away from their homes. These guys (and they are usually guys) are pretty rare, and they are identifiable. The best defense against them is to monitor the vulnerable; young people who have a safety net around them are much less attractive. Once this kind of predator is identified, they have to be confronted.

Men will sometimes act more aggressively masculine (macho) in the presence of other men. There’s a defensiveness that comes to fore when women want to play in that sphere, and men will sexually harass or even assault women in an attempt to maintain dominance over what they perceive as their turf. Think of the firehouse sexual harassment cases, or what we’ve heard about at the military academies or even in some art school departments.This may be what’s behind a couple of the other stories I’ve heard.

Here’s the EEOC’s definition of sexual harassment:

It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.

  • Harassment does not have to be of a sexual nature, however, and can include offensive remarks about a person’s sex. For example, it is illegal to harass a woman by making offensive comments about women in general.
  • Both victim and the harasser can be either a woman or a man, and the victim and harasser can be the same sex.
  • Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted).
  • The harasser can be the victim’s supervisor, a supervisor in another area, a co-worker, or someone who is not an employee of the employer, such as a client or customer.
  • Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment.

And in case you’re thinking, “Well, these folks are volunteers! That’s different,” in Illinois, at least, it is not. An Illinois ruling found that a volunteer can be considered an employee, and is therefore covered under Title VII.

How do we stop this? If the best defense is a good offense, what do we do?

  • Name the behaviour. Call the harasser out on his behaviour, state it to him, be specific.
  • Insist that women are equal to men, even in this masculine and militarized context.
  • Make clear the behavior is the issue. Say what you have to say, and repeat it if he persists. (If you are being harassed by a woman, kindly switch the pronouns; yes, it can happen. The incidents I have in mind involve male harassers.)
  • Listen to the people who tell you they have been harassed or assaulted. Don’t judge them.
  • Report harassment to your unit commander, or another trusted person, in case it’s your commander harassing you. Report harassment to a board member or your unit, umbrella organization or museum/site.

Want more information on sexual harassment? Here’s a fact sheet for you.

To be clear: not every guy is guilty. Not every unit has a problem. There’s more good than bad. But I’m hearing about incidents large and small, and it behooves us to be certain we are behaving appropriately and legally.  That said, I’m not a lawyer, I’m a blogger, so see the disclaimer.

 

DISCLAIMER:

The information and materials on this site have been provided for general informational purposes only, are not comprehensive, not complete and are not legal advice. The information contained in the site is general information about sexual harassment and should not be construed as legal advice to be applied to any specific factual situation. None of the information is intended to constitute, nor does it constitute, legal advice. For information about your legal rights you should consult an attorney.