|
Post by Guv on Feb 7, 2005 7:35:33 GMT -5
Reality vs Practicality in re-enactment. The two faces of Tommy Atkins.
After a cursory examination of various British Infantry re-enactors at a recent event, it became evident that two schools of thought exist on the controversial topic of ‘authenticity’.
The first is a ‘by the book’ approach, where the soldier has a complete set of fighting order equipment, plus all added ‘extras’. This, for my money is better suited for living history displays and certain historical re-enactments for the public.
The second is a ‘practical’ approach, where the soldier has modified his equipment to suit specific battlefield conditions, commonly referred to by veterans as ‘light scales’. Perfect for private battles.
Ideally we are trying to portray the rule rather than the exception. As most re-enactors can justify their choice of equipment by providing us with that all important photograph from a history book or military publication. In my eyes, this is just an excuse to ‘do your own thing’. This may be acceptable for ‘special’ forces and the US troops, who had less strict guidelines. But the British Tommy has always had that strict Regimental doctrine drummed into him from the cradle. So he may have gotten away with it in the field under combat conditions, but God help him if he wasn’t “all present and correct” at O.C.’s inspection!
Looking at this from the other side of the fence, it was common during the Normandy campaign of June & July ’44 for the average Commonwealth & British infantry soldier to adjust his personal equipment to suit the situation at hand.
No point in carrying a shovel and a small pack if you are skirmishing with SS troopers in the bombed out rubble waste of Caen, but those same items would be invaluable if you were on a 36 hr fighting patrol with no other support in the Bocage areas of France. Experience is the greatest teacher of them all, especially in combat.
I guess it takes us back to the beginning – one mans meat is another mans poison! So don’t get downhearted when a member of the public or another re-enactment group tells you that you are “doing it wrong”, it’s all a matter of perspective.
Just by putting on the serge battledress and giving up your free time to honour those brave men who fought and died for us 60 years ago should be authentic enough for anybody.
Guv.
|
|
Max
Full Member
"What the Funk's that?" "It's my bren gun"
Posts: 156
|
Post by Max on Feb 7, 2005 13:27:46 GMT -5
We're lucky that there is so much evidence of WW2, but like Guv say's just because theres a odd photo of something different doesn't mean everyone did it or could do it. In Medieval reenactment there is a rule that to do something you need three pieces of evidence, usually two writen and one picture.
What do you chaps think to this rule? If you use it atleast if you are wrong no one can really blame you for it.
|
|
|
Post by Guv on Feb 7, 2005 13:56:21 GMT -5
It's good to have examples from other areas of Re-enactment and as always Max is a veritable goldmine of information (and he's the only one who can get fires going in the rain).
We DO break our own rules though - for the sake of continuity and identification.
For example - we wear the classic 'tommy' helmet instead of the correct 'turtle' assault helmet, because the average MOP thinks that is correct.
In many books and memoirs of infantry life in late '44 and early '45 it is stated that windproofs were in common use for infantry units. Methinks they look too much like Dennisons for my money - so that's another rule that I choose to ignore. I will stick to my Jerkin and Greatcoat for public events and only break out the Windproof for private events and training.
Can any of you other guys think of any instance where we break the 'Authenticity' rule for our own convenience, or if not perhaps any where we should?
Worms - Can Of...........................
|
|
Ian
New Member
Posts: 30
|
Post by Ian on Feb 7, 2005 14:32:10 GMT -5
I did not realise that the helmet the Tigers wore in 44 was the Turtle, do you have a token tommy with one for your displays, or do you think every one should have one for extra authentic displays.
I do take your point about what the public expect, in my Roman guise I wear a blue tunic, many people expect Romans to wear red, Hollywood Romans wear red, and all this on one piece of evidence.
BUT how authentic do you want to be, as 2005 re-enactors
|
|
|
Post by Guv on Feb 7, 2005 15:13:41 GMT -5
The classic tale of an airborne red-devil re-enactor who spent an arm and a leg on a MK5 Sten and was then told by an Arnhem veteran "we never had them mate, ours had a metal 'T' stock and no wooden grips......."
Don't ya just love it?
|
|
|
Post by Whizz_Bang on Feb 7, 2005 17:24:51 GMT -5
Tricky subject, If a veteran tells you he used / wore it is it correct ?? 60 years distorts memory. I've recently had experience of a 49th vet who told me 147th brigade was made up of Leicesters, Lincolns & Hallams (RSF, Leicesters & Dukes in fact). I've removed insignia when told it was wrong to find out later it was right..... moral of the story is always get a 2nd/3rd/4th opinion. The mk3 helmet issue is still open to debate, assualt troops we're issued with them, therefore Tigers at Nijmegen should've had em but i've photographs of the Waal crossing in Mk2's, perhaps only the replacements where equiped with them ? Have any of you seen a war dated brown enamel mug ? but we all use them...
|
|
|
Post by Whizz_Bang on Feb 7, 2005 17:29:49 GMT -5
I do take your point about what the public expect, in my Roman guise I wear a blue tunic, many people expect Romans to wear red, Hollywood Romans wear red, and all this on one piece of evidence. Hollywood...... Incredible how many people believe it as the truth.
|
|
|
Post by Guv on Feb 8, 2005 7:56:01 GMT -5
There was a 1945 (Post war?) brown mug on sale at Stoneleigh for £18.00 - a tad pricey methinks Chris?
|
|
Max
Full Member
"What the Funk's that?" "It's my bren gun"
Posts: 156
|
Post by Max on Feb 8, 2005 13:23:52 GMT -5
It's like the 44 pattern webbing was never used during WW2, it became theatre issue, mostly airborne and parachute formations operating in the Far East and the Korean war.
Also there are no end of photo's of soldiers who haven't any netting/camouflarge on their helmets.
|
|
|
Post by Guv on Feb 8, 2005 13:27:08 GMT -5
White mugs everywhere too mate.
|
|
|
Post by Whizz_Bang on Feb 8, 2005 14:51:31 GMT -5
Also there are no end of photo's of soldiers who haven't any netting/camouflarge on their helmets. I think hessian / net is a soldiers trick Max, it takes the shine off the helmet, the desert lads would paint it then dip it in the sand to dull it down, possibly against Kings regs but it could well save your life. Just jumping back to thread briefly, Mk3 helmets are associated with post war (untrue i know) but for the sake of recognition mk2's are easily identifiable.... my tuppence worth anyway..... as someone whos now with us once told me as long as you all look the same you'll look fine....
|
|
|
Post by Guv on Feb 8, 2005 16:57:04 GMT -5
Spot on mate - uniformity is the watchword. Mister average.
Guv.
|
|
OLL
Full Member
Here's a picture of me before the war.... Handsome eh!
Posts: 181
|
Post by OLL on Feb 10, 2005 19:22:45 GMT -5
Agree with everything Guv, Whizz and Max. What I find interesting is the personal identity everyone adds to the overall theme. We all wear battle dress, 37 webbing etc but we all look slightly different. When you look at old photos of tommies they all seem to have distinctive personalities don't they. I think we portray this really well!!!
|
|
|
Post by rupert on Mar 7, 2005 8:51:33 GMT -5
As far as reenactment goes, most of us wear repro kit. Is this sufficient to be totally historically acurate?
If you want to view totally authentic articles there is a big museum in London and a great gun display in leeds.
Of course it has to be up to scratch, There are those aspects that have to LOOK right ie repro kit and brown mugs( mines white I dont think theres a picture of a marine with a brown one)
And then theres the bits that have to be the real deal and by dint of there nature this is usually weapons and ancillary kit (wash kit, webbing ect).
What we often tend to forget is the main thing that we as reenactors bring to the show is ourselves. We are as a whole a fantasticaly well versed resource of anectdotes, historical fact and practical first hand knowledge.
Ive often been asked how heavy the kit is or if its uncomfortable and itchy, what my role in the unit would have been or if the gun is cumbersome and I'm guessing that most of us have had this experience.
What we as reenactors do is bring static museum pieces to life. We not only get the kit on, but Im guessing that most of us get into character to a certain extent, and it is this that really shines through.
I know Ive kind of gone off the point a little, what Im trying to say is that: yes accuracy is important, we have to look the part and uniformity is important But its what we bring to the kit that sets us apart and makes the experience better for both us and the public....I think.
|
|
|
Post by Guv on Mar 7, 2005 11:02:03 GMT -5
Spot on dude.
Repro kit - a definate yes if it's an accurate representation of the original item. The largest size BD Jacket manufactured was a 44" chest, so that leaves me out If we only use authentic items.
Having an accurate persona to share with MOPs, is in my opinion a must.
These help to put across the basic question/answer phase of any weekend event. Who Where When Why What
For my money, sitiing with MOPs & Veterans, going through your 'small kit' and personal items, using them as a bridge for communication on the whole WW2 topic beats the hell out of any other phase of this fantastic hobby/lifestyle we have chosen. I guess I just love talking to people.
If we just run around muddy fields and try to impress our re-enactment peers, then for my money, it's just a waste of time, money and effort.
A good point Rupert.............. anyone else to add to what I hope will be an absorbing thread to this post?
Guv.
|
|