Learning Analysis: Examining Reenactments
Why Reenactment matters today:
When I sign up for this course, I did not know that the main focus of this course was reenactments. Reenactment is a word I never acknowledge or used in my daily day vocabulary. When I was asked to explained “what is reenactment?” and “What counts as reenactment?” I was baffled because when I think of reenactment I imagine someone dress in army clothes and reenacting the war. Reenacting to count because viewers are able to see how things were in the past. As you can see my thoughts were very naïve and “simple.” In the second class when we had to view these websites or find reenacting groups in our local community I began to get a good understanding of reenactments and its different forms. My first research on reenactment begin of the internet (of course), I googled the word reenactments and received several hits and most were on war reenactments. One of the first websites I found that was useful was on Wikipedia, which provided a whole article on reenactments and how it is used. The article begins by defining historical reenactments, which is basically people or a group of participants that reenact some aspects of a historical event or period. The article continues by looking at different reenactment groups, and the period of time in which they choose to reenact. Most current reenactments are of different historical wars that occurred in the United States, and of course there is Colonial Williamsburg (we will discuss later). It mentions the idea of authenticity in clothing, equipments, and especially the event that is being reenacted. Authenticity plays a huge role in any forms of reenactment. One of the main purposes of reenactment is to bring authenticity into the work that is being reenacted. For example, in Colonial Williamsburg when people visit it they are expecting to feel and live the life during that period, and understand the people of that period in time. This article provided me with some great insights into understanding what reenactment is. The readings and class discussion allow me to understand why reenactment matters today. In the syllabus Katie King states that “Reenactments are both fantasy practices and realities under globalize transformations of knowledge of which one version might be called today “academic capitalism.” And I believe that’s what I have come to understand why reenactment matters today. It can be fantasy practices and reality. We live in a world where we are constantly searching for the truth, and making up different truth about the world, people, and social groups. Reenactment is a perfect gateway into find not the truth, but our truth in the life that we live, and the world around us. Reenactment matters because it provides and alternative knowledge of the past and the present. Taking advantage of that knowledge allow us the freedom to live the world that is authentic and real to us.
What is the argument of this course?
The argument of this course is to understand how reenactment is used and are daily social, educational, and political life. In understanding this argument as a student you have a choice of how you are will to question your previous learning and thoughts into the new materials that are being introduced to you at the same time. The argument of this class is to also understand why reenactment mattes today; the syllabus was design of open our views to the different connection of reenactments. By looking at the syllabus as a book it brings together the concepts and understanding of reenactment. The first week (or chapters) of the syllabus focused on understanding reenactment, and why it matters today. Then we get the opportunity to find reenactments in our local community, and read the book “everything bad is good for you.” I did not enjoy reading this book, because to wording was too complex for me and I had NO interest in understanding video games or its affect. It was hard for me to connect with this book. Two books that were huge assets to understanding reenactments was Handler & Roth, both authors give you a different perspective on historic sites and museums. I enjoyed Roth’s book better because I thought it was precise and to the point in defining the different terms in reenactments and Colonial Williamsburg. I like the fact that she made reenactment significant to anybody that wanted needed to know the basis of these things. Handlers book was more technical for me, and I didn’t enjoy reading it much either. Handler and Gable’s book focused more on the actual sites themselves and the whole idea of authenticity. I enjoyed the connection and the emphasis they made on the authenticity of museums as arenas for political and culture purposes. Both book are different and are geared towards different type of audiences. They both provided the readers of the significance and importance of understanding the history of these museums and how important reenactment is in maintaining this work. Through out the course we discuss the idea of reenactment as an alternative knowledge. This process was hard for me to comprehend but I learned to understand it the way that made since to me. Alternative knowledge to me provided me with the opportunity to control my learning and question what I think I already know. Alternative knowledge was discussed beyond the ideas of reenactment. For example, we discuss how alternative knowledge can explain or allow us to understand our violated assumptions. We choose to be active learners, and in doing so we control what we learn. To continue our discussion in the idea of the pass present we looked at some videos or documentaries that focus on the pass and present and the role of reenactment in these videos. For example, the DVD on African American lives is a huge documentary of the pass and present of the lives and struggles of African Americans. The history of African American is so important to American history that historian don’t focus on the lives of these group of people. This documentary takes these African Americans back to a time period that they would never image and understand their history with more clarity. Understanding their pass and connecting with their ancestor tree gave them a since of identity that a lot of African Americans are still searching for. Speaking of identity the rest of the syllabus continue to discuss the whole idea of finding ones identity through our pass and things we interact with such as, dogs. The whole syllabus uses reading, websites, and audio to connect the importance of reenactment not only through movies and but in our daily lives.
Put yourself into the Story
I am part of the argument with this course because, as a young African American women much that is discuss in this class concerns and affects me in a lot of ways. For example, as mentioned above when it comes to the past the lives of African American women in today’s society have a lot to do with their current situation or place in today’s society. This course also allows me to challenges my thoughts about certain things that I thought I understand. After watching the DVD on African American lives, it really makes me think about how important it is to connect to the past, so one can understands their identity. Different things were going on with me when discussing the different readings, and movies that we viewed in class. As mentioned in my introduction the beginning of this course was a mind blower for me. I was confused because I was looking at reenactment as one way with one simplistic definition. As the semester progress I began developing questions that allowed me to look at reenactment with an opened mind. To acknowledge the reality and importance of reenactment we first need to determine the purpose of reenactment. Do we need reenactment? Why do we depend on reenactment? Is reenactment an authoritative or alternative knowledge? These are questions that went through my mind as the course was developing and writing the paper on television reenactment. Focusing on the topic of reenactment is difficult for me because my definition of reenactment is simplistic. That simplicity I believe was constructed into my mind because of my lack of acknowledgement of the term. Working on the television reenactment paper was the hardest for me because I went into the paper exploring everything and looking at several shows that I felt used reenactment. In the world of television and media reenactment matter because it is our gateway into the past and a directive to understanding our present. Television reenactment is essential because television has become a teaching tool in society. In her essay “Historiography as reenactment: Metaphors and literalization of TV documentaries” Katie King states “I think of pastpresents as quite palpable evidences that the past and the present cannot be purified each from the other.” Through this research I learned that reenactment is a combo of both past and the present; and concluded that reenactment is important because the past makes up the present and they are interchangeable. Reenactment on television matters because it is through reenactment of historical events we learn and understand the history of our existence. We depend on reenactment because it speaks the truth to us in a time period that we didn’t exist. The truth can sometimes be question because of the authenticity of the history that is being reenacted, but it is our only way through time.
There were two themes that ran through my mind during the whole duration of this class. First was the concept of identity, and why it matters. And the second theme is the whole idea of authenticity and how important it is not only to reenactment but to the individual self. I feel like both theme are a component of each other. For example, when I think about what identity means to me? To me identity is a collective of behavioral, culture, and personal characteristics by which an individual identify with. My identity reflects my culture, faith and beliefs. In one of the readings I did for a previous class Kathryn Woodward believes that identity “gives us an idea of who we are and how we relate to others and to the world in which we live in.” It also shows how we are different from each other and how we are alike in many ways. Some of the readings and lecture we saw this semester shows how important it is for us as a human being to have an identity. For example, the lecture with Bettina F. Aptheker was mostly based on identity and finding her true self, either with the communist party, or as a lesbian. Her true identity was hidden from her father and partners because of the sexual abuse that she experienced as a child, which affected the way, she lived her adult life. Her story made me thought a lot about my cousin who I discussed in class is a lesbian, but she is not “out” yet. She hides her sexual identity from her family but shows her true self around me and her friends. This also brings me to the idea of authenticity and the “true” self. What is the “true self?” And when is it ok to show our true self? I believe that the concept of the true self is part of our authentic self. Do we have more than one true self? If so when is it ok to show one or the other? In his book “The trouble with Normal,” Michael Warner discus the obsession with “normality” and what is “normal?” when it comes to sexuality. In my opinion normality in our society is the enemy of identity; because how can you show your true identity if that identity is not classified as “normal?” this will in terms of homosexuality this will always be battle that can only be solved if one is accepting of the other.
I don’t think that anything could have been better for me in the way I was introduced to the class, because I appreciated and learned from the materials that I was introduced too. I only missed the beginning of the class, but I felt like everything that I learned was very detrimental to my learning process.
In the context of Women Studies
This course connected with several women studies class that I have taken while attending Maryland. My Women and Caribbean class this semester kind of go hand and hand with this course and the things I learned from this course. Since the Caribbean was colonized by the British, and French influences a whole group of Africans was displaced into a culture that was not there own. In describing the whole idea of normality, identity, and authenticity Caribbean women lost most of that when they were ruled by these colonizers. The authenticity of their culture was taken from them and replaced with a culture that had no meaning or connection to them. Even after most of the Caribbean gained their independence neo-colonism was apparent in most part of the islands. This course connects well with this course because both focused on the idea of assimilation, identity, and authenticity. In the African American Lives DVD is very similar to the lives of women in the Caribbean. The difference with this class and my other women studies classes is the fact that this class focuses on reenactment, which can connect all the classes together because the history of women is reenactment within itself. The history of women is essential to the understanding of the struggle that women experience in the world. This class allows us to look at the pass present and how important it is to our perceptive of the lives of women and their place in society.
This class did provide me with the tool to continue my education in feminism, politics and life because this class gave me an alternative knowledge to my learning. This class challenges the way I think so much that I felt sometimes I was thinking too far out. I have always felt like women roles in society have always been constructed and minority women are still trying to find a place for themselves in a world that is filled with racism, discrimination, and prejudice. As a young Black women, I found myself struggling to find a place for myself and at the same time not assimilating to a culture that’s not my own. Even thought its 2007 I experience racism, and discrimination in school and at my work force. This class provided me with the perspective of how knowing my history better equipped me for the ignorance that I experience in my daily life. In terms of my own future this class has allowed me to envision the capacity of my knowledge and my willingness to want to learn more about my social status in my world and the world around me.
Readings from the Course
There are two readings that met a lot to me and one video that connected close to my heart. The two books that I felt fit part of the argument for this class was Michael Warner’s Book “The trouble with Normal” and Chauncey “Why Marriage?” I felt like these two books focused on a topic that I have been passionate about since I started Maryland. I grew up in a catholic home, and sexuality is not something that was openly discussed. I grew thinking that the “normal” relationship is between a man and a woman. I wasn’t introduced to homosexuality until I was in college when I learned that my cousin is gay. I didn’t understand it, but knew that it was not accept in my religion, culture, and apparently in today’s society. I grew a strong interest in learning about homosexuality, the history, and the controversies. In my country even though homosexuality existed it was also not discuss publicly in social setting. In the United States gay men and women are persecuted for their sexuality. A couple semesters ago I took a class called “Lesbian Communities,” this class made me more passionate to advocate for gay rights and to learn more about the community itself. After finding out about my cousin sexuality I also made a lot of friends who are gay, and I ask them this question, “Why choose a lifestyle that brings many challenges and struggle?” They all would respond back to me by saying, “this is who we are.” That response would stay in my mind constantly. My friends who are African American I felt dealt with the biggest struggles, since homosexuality in the black community is silent. I remember my friend’s grandmother who is an African American told us that Homosexuality is a “white” disease; she continue by saying that African Americans were not raised with that type of lifestyle. I felt like this course and other course that I have taken over the years answered these questions, and false beliefs that were instilled in my mind. In the beginning of the class we saw a lecture by Jeffrey McCune which focused on homosexuality in the African American community and the whole idea of the “down low.” The fact that people are forced to hide their sexual identity because of society’s beliefs about “morality,” “normalcy,” and identity is wrong in my eyes. Chauncey book connect well with the argument of the class but also brings a great understanding into the right that LGBT groups are fighting for. This book looks at the past of gay marriages to the present situation about the topic. Since part of this class focuses on past and present this book provides great insight on the history of gay marriages in America. By looking at the past laws, and controversy Chauncey is posing the question whether things have change? How can things change? Or do they need to change? By looking at the history of gay marriages in American we can be better prepare for the future of gay marriages.
“A gay man, feeling the embarrassment of stigma, feeling cut off from the heterosexual world (in person of Mom), and feeling that this stigma is something he does not deserve by his actions.” (43)
I loved reading Michael Warner’s book because it covers the basis of what I feel society needs to know about what is wrong with being “normal.” He discusses the whole idea of stigma and heterosexual relationships towards homosexuality. In one of his chapters he uses the concepts of “Stigmaphile” and “Stigmaphobe” to explain “what is wrong with normal.” “Stigmaphile- is where we find a commonality with those who suffer from stigma, and in this alternative real learn to value the very things the rest of the world despises- not just because the world despises them, but because the world’s pseudo-morality is a phobic and inauthentic way of life.” (43) “Stigmaphobe- world is the dominant culture, where conformity is ensured through fear of stigma. Political organizations and public institutions like magazines find it necessary to spack in both directions, in ways that can be understood by both audiences at once.” (43) These two concepts puts into perspective on how things our viewed in our society by hetero/homosexual relationships. In class we previously talked about morality and defining what is moral and what is immoral since society views on everything is based on morality. The hierarchies are the ones that put the concept of moral and immoral in order to keep control and classify certain groups of people. These two books have not changed my views but better my knowledge of what I see the problems is, and understanding the different shapes it has taken. I would like to further my writing about this concept but this assignment does not allow me too because of time. Homosexuality is something that exists in America and everywhere around the world. It may constantly change, but is not something that is going to disappear. Since we live in a society that is so socially constructed, and full of binaries, it will always be a constant struggle to accept differences and change. “We are stronger when we stand together, then alone.” This class and my friends gave me a reason to fight for justice for ALL. Different or not, we are all still human.
Conclusion
Is reenactment an authoritative or alternative knowledge? Reenactments can be both authoritative and alternative knowledge. Reenactment is authoritative because what is reenacted is constructed and reenacted the way they want the audience to understand it. At the same token reenactment can be an alternative knowledge because we choose what we learn through reenactment; our choice is our alternative to that knowledge.
“Reenactments appear to authorize academic capitalism’s fantasy that knowledge can be simultaneously newly produced, transmitted and its use taught in a single commodified form: simple, accessible, and democratized.” Katie King
Shows such as Frontier House allow us to simulate the mentalities of the past. It allows us to live and learn about a time period that essential to out history.
To conclude, I would say that reenactment is a term that cannot be used lucidly. It has several components and parts that are beneficial to understand a story. Reenactment is a story within itself.
Wednesday, May 9, 2007
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Television Reenactment
Before i post the my paper, i want to say that this is the hardest and worse paper i have written. I have NEVER be so challenge in writing a paper then this one. This is not my best work and i can't say i am confident or satisfied with it.
Television Reenactment
Reenactment is defined as “any presentation or other event held for the purpose of re-enacting an event from the past or of illustrating conduct from a particular time period in the past” (Wikipedia, “reenactment”). The basic function of reenactment is the recreation of the past, today, and the future. Reenactment creates a room for people to make important connections and an alternative between the present and the past. Reenactment can be authentic and it can be playful, but the main focus is to bring authenticity to what is being reenacted. There are different forms of reenactment, but the focus for this paper is to focus on television reenactments such as, reality TV, documentaries or “docudramas,” and historical documentaries. “Television is a powerful and persuasive teacher; it has the potential to influence perceptions, knowledge, beliefs, and behaviors” (Byrd-Bredbnner). Some of these shows main focus is to bring knowledge or awareness about an event in the past, or a prediction into the future. The shows may be scripted or impromptu. I am examining these shows to show how they use reenactment and the skills of re-enactors to bring knowledge and understanding to the viewers. Through this research I have learned that there are two driven factor in the representation of these shows. The first factor is to bring authenticity into the presentation of the programs. Second factor is for the participants and viewers of these shows to gain authoritive or alternative knowledge about history. I picked ten shows to examine and show the different reenactment on television today. Most of these shows are classified as “reality TV,” which has become huge in western society. As mention above some of the shows are documentaries, which case the whole show is reenactment; other shows are mini-reenactments, meaning part of the show is a reenactment to show or prove evidence about something or someone. At the end of the paper I will pose several questions and thoughts about the reality or purpose of television Reenactment.
“Televised reenactments set out not to dramatize a past that is already known, but to learn something new about the past through the activity of reenactment itself and to communicate those to a wider audience “Alexander Cook
There are several shows that are currently being broadcast that focuses on educating the viewers and its participant on the importance of “re-living” history in order to understand and appreciate the present and better the future. One of the most popular show that allows modern day volunteers to go back in time and experience the lifestyle during that time period is a show called “Frontier House,” which airs on PBS as a series. The concept of the show came from a previous show called “1900 House,” which share similar concept. The producers of the show pick three family groups traveled back in time to the days of the Wild West, living as settlers did in on the frontier back in the 1880s. The filming is about six to seven months, during that time participants are observe immersion into the lifestyle of the 1880s from building their own house, tending their livestock, planting food, and catching fish everything without the assistance of modern technology (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/frontierhouse/project/series.html). In order to re-live history the creators of the show create an environment identical to that of the 1880s, and rules for the participants to follow in order to maintain authenticity. For example some of the rules are, No communicating with the outside world only through the use of the postal service, which will be inspected for all outgoing and incoming mail. Contestants are allowed visitors, but all visitors upon arrival must dress and practice the lifestyle of the 1880s. Every family have to work for themselves, collective work with other families is not encourage or allowed. All children must be supervised. The last rule is an interesting one because to me it questions the authenticity of the project; the last rule is the use of what they refer to as the “Emergency Box,” which contains medical supplies, emergency communication radio, fire extinguisher, bear repellent “pepper Spray,” and emergency lighting. I understand the purpose of the emergency box, but it disconnect with the realism of the 1880s. It would be better if the emergency boxes were removed from each family’s house and was only allowed in the hands of producers or filming personnel’s. Creators of this show are hoping to enlighten both the public and the participant as to the conditions of life in the past and to show how far we have come since that time period. In his book “The New History in an Old Museum,” Richard Handler and Eric Gable define history as “a story with a moral, with a meaning that cannot be adduced from the facts alone.”
There is a saying that “the past determines the future.” Reenactment does not only focus on the past, it can also predict the future. There have been several movies that use reenactment of the past to predict or understand the future. A popular movie in the eighties is “Back to the Future.” In the movie a teenage boy accidentally travels into the past and jeopardizes his won future existence. Movies allow viewers to have the thought of “what if” and create a gateway to the future. PBS has a new show that aired on January of 2007 called “22nd Century.” The show is about how technological advances taking place today that within our lifetimes will significantly change the way humans live and interact. The series is hosted by Robin Robinson, a Chicago-based journalist, who is joined by two virtual co-hosts, each with insightful and often conflicting viewpoints about the merits of this new technology. One is an actor playing Aldous Huxley, the late author of Brave New World, who worried about the dehumanizing consequences of scientific discoveries. The other is Orlanda Bell, a time-traveling visitor from the future, who represents the best-case scenario of these technological advancements (http://www.pbs.org/22ndcentury/). This show is a scientific drama that uses current technologies to reenact future technologies. This show can be a new form reenactment that instead of reenacting the past it is reenacting the future. Reenacting an earlier journey may those be a gesture of utopianism as well as one of witnessing and mourning. (Vanessa Agnew)
“There are two kinds of characters: factual, an individual who once actually existed, or fictional composite, a representative based on selected biographical, cultural, occupational, and other characteristics.” Stacy Roth pg.57
The Next couple of shows I will be discussing are shows that use reenactments to understanding and solve a certain event that happen in the past. These types of shows are real life historical and biographical shows to reenact events for the sole purpose of bringing knowledge and awareness about a certain situation or person.
The history channel main focus is to provide viewers with the history and knowledge about events that happen in the pass. It is apparent that most of the shows focus on history. I picked three of their shows that have the highest rating, which uses reenactments and re-enactors to re-live history. The first show is “Infamous Murders.” Explore stories, events and legends that have intrigued people for generation and started debate in countless time periods. In discussing these different cases producers use re-enactors to reenact what actually happen when these murders took place. It is up to the re-enactors to bring these stories alive so viewers can understand what this person went through before her life was tragically ended. This shows main focus is to tell a story that is unforgettable and gruesome so people won’t forget how some people were affected by these murders.
Another show is a Docu-drama on the Discovery Chanel called “A Haunting.” A Haunting is a chills-filled, six-part series, chronicling the terrifying true stories of the paranormal told by those who experienced real-life horror tales. In this docu-drama, the actual people who have experienced the paranormal recount their stories on-camera, as the frightening events of their stories are re-enacted. (Fearing ridicule, some of the witnesses are shown only in silhouette.) Filmed in a very cinematic style, "A Haunting" sets out to frighten, providing a few genuine chills in most episodes. I watched a clip of this show online and I have to admit that it is very spooky. I can see how this show may leave the viewer mind boggle about the truth of the after life. The re-enactors in this show are very authentic when it comes to recreating the paranormal experience that the actual people experienced. Many of the stories on this show, where people have moved into a house where someone died and their ghost attach themselves to young children or adults. The question of authenticity is not questioned, but the reality of the events is questionable to me as a viewer.
In class when I heard the term reenactment on television the first show that came to mind was “America’s Most Wanted” on FOX. The show use mini-reenactments of a crime to show the viewers what happen and help authorities catch the criminals. The show sometimes hires re-enactors that closely resemble the criminal to reenact the crime that has been committed. The reenactments are an essential part of the show because it allows the viewers to visually watch the crime and to know the capability and mental state of this individual. I learned that if the reenactments are evidence from the crimes scene from police reports. The authenticity of the story is told in second person, which can leave room for bias and dramatization.
The last docu-drama is another Discovery Channel show called “I shouldn’t be Alive.” The show tells the stories of normal people in incredible circumstances. The subjects of the show narrate their life-threatening experiences while actors re-enact their experiences. The show is a similar concept to “A Haunting” because the stories are being told by the people who actually experience these life-threatening experiences. Again the re-enactors are in responsible for showing the viewers the danger in these situations that the people actually experienced.
“For the Foreseeable future reenactment is here to stay as a form of public history.” Alex Cook
Since reenactment is dealing with history and the past some shows are created to examine and discover things in the past that have not been discovered. A show in the Discovery Channel called “Myth Busters,” who use the skills of two expertises to test the validity of various rumors and urban legends in popular culture. In the show the two experts in the show recreate whatever myth they are trying to prove and at the end of the show the myth sometimes may prove to be true or just a myth. The concept of the show is weird and dangerous because some of the myth requires that these two men put their life in danger in order to prove these myths. The reenactment part of the show occurs when these men take inventions or myth from the past and recreating it to prove their point. The recreation is the reenactment, which brings the idea that reenactment can also be seen as a creation of something.
The following show deal with Man, Machine, and history. The History channel created a show called “Man, Moment, Machine.” A good summary of the show in Wikipedia states, “MAN MOMENT MACHINE brings some of history's most remarkable stories to life through fascinating accounts of action, adventure and creative invention - told in a highly compelling style with rare archival footage, first person perspective, expert interviews, vivid re-reenactments, and state-of-the-art computer imagery.” I have not had the opportunity to view this show but from reading the reviews the show provide the viewers with knowledge about different inventors and their inventions. The rare archival footage is the perfect gateway to the past and seeing how these things were created before they became part of our daily use.
The next show explores things in history too, but more like ancient history. This show also comes from History channel titled “Ancient Discoveries.” Through clips and historians the show examines how our ancestor’s grandest ideas mirror those of modern society. For example, upcoming episodes go back and learn that the Chinese were the one who first created gun powder that we use now for warfare. Again the idea of traveling back into time and examining history is the historical reenactment that keeps viewers aware of their history.
The final show that I will discuss that show reenactment is very interesting. It is a show from the Discovery channel, which puts a new spend on re-living the crime. The name of the show is “It takes a Thief,” a reality TV show that puts a new spin on catching the burglar. Jon Douglas Rainey and Matt Johnston "real" ex burglars are the show's hosts. With permission from their intended "victims," they stage a full-fledged burglary, after which the security challenged homeowners watch how it happened on closed circuit television. The thefts usually occur in suburban homes, although businesses, college houses, and even a police station have been burglarized (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_Takes_a_Thief_%282005_TV_series%29). This show is a perfect example of reenacting the present. The reality or euthenics of the show puts the victims or participants who are being burglarized to watch how they were rob through a reenactment of the act; I don’t think it can get more real then that.
After discussing and researching these different shows, I am going to make an attempt to answer a question that was asked in the beginning of class:
Why does reenactment matter?
“Historically dramas today cannot help but be co-opted by the painful pleasures of what we might call heritage culture, and recuperated histories are mixed; real, hyper real, imagined and pastiche.” Katie King
To acknowledge the reality and importance of reenactment we first need to determine the purpose of reenactment. Do we need reenactment? Why do we depend on reenactment? Is reenactment an authoritative or alternative knowledge? These are questions that I feel like I will not be able to completely answer until the end of the class, but in this paper I am going to address these questions in regards to television shows reenactment. Focusing on the topic of reenactment is difficult for me because my definition of reenactment is simplistic. That simplicity I believe was constructed into my mind because of my lack of acknowledgement of the term.
Why does reenactment matter? In the world of television and media reenactment matter because it is our gateway into the past and a directive to understanding our present. Television reenactment is essential because television has become a teaching tool in society. In her essay “Historiography as reenactment: Metaphors and literalization of TV documentaries” Katie King states “I think of pastpresents as quite palpable evidences that the past and the present cannot be purified each from the other.” Through this research I learned that reenactment is a combo of both past and the present; and concluded that reenactment is important because the past makes up the present and they are interchangeable. Reenactment on television matters because it is through reenactment of historical events we learn and understand the history of our existence. We depend on reenactment because it speaks the truth to us in a time period that we didn’t exist. The truth can sometimes be question because of the authenticity of the history that is being reenacted, but it is our only way through time.
Is reenactment an authoritative or alternative knowledge? Reenactments can be both authoritative and alternative knowledge. Reenactment is authoritative because what is reenacted is constructed and reenacted the way they want the audience to understand it. At the same token reenactment can be an alternative knowledge because we choose what we learn through reenactment; our choice is our alternative to that knowledge.
“Reenactments appear to authorize academic capitalism’s fantasy that knowledge can be simultaneously newly produced, transmitted and its use taught in a single commodified form: simple, accessible, and democratized.” Katie King
Shows such as Frontier House allow us to simulate the mentalities of the past. It allows us to live and learn about a time period that essential to out history.
To conclude, I would say that reenactment is a term that cannot be used lucidly. It has several components and parts that are beneficial to understand a story. Reenactment is a story within itself. Television reenactment is huge in today’s media because it tells our story.
Reenactment is defined as “any presentation or other event held for the purpose of re-enacting an event from the past or of illustrating conduct from a particular time period in the past” (Wikipedia, “reenactment”). The basic function of reenactment is the recreation of the past, today, and the future. Reenactment creates a room for people to make important connections and an alternative between the present and the past. Reenactment can be authentic and it can be playful, but the main focus is to bring authenticity to what is being reenacted. There are different forms of reenactment, but the focus for this paper is to focus on television reenactments such as, reality TV, documentaries or “docudramas,” and historical documentaries. “Television is a powerful and persuasive teacher; it has the potential to influence perceptions, knowledge, beliefs, and behaviors” (Byrd-Bredbnner). Some of these shows main focus is to bring knowledge or awareness about an event in the past, or a prediction into the future. The shows may be scripted or impromptu. I am examining these shows to show how they use reenactment and the skills of re-enactors to bring knowledge and understanding to the viewers. Through this research I have learned that there are two driven factor in the representation of these shows. The first factor is to bring authenticity into the presentation of the programs. Second factor is for the participants and viewers of these shows to gain authoritive or alternative knowledge about history. I picked ten shows to examine and show the different reenactment on television today. Most of these shows are classified as “reality TV,” which has become huge in western society. As mention above some of the shows are documentaries, which case the whole show is reenactment; other shows are mini-reenactments, meaning part of the show is a reenactment to show or prove evidence about something or someone. At the end of the paper I will pose several questions and thoughts about the reality or purpose of television Reenactment.
“Televised reenactments set out not to dramatize a past that is already known, but to learn something new about the past through the activity of reenactment itself and to communicate those to a wider audience “Alexander Cook
There are several shows that are currently being broadcast that focuses on educating the viewers and its participant on the importance of “re-living” history in order to understand and appreciate the present and better the future. One of the most popular show that allows modern day volunteers to go back in time and experience the lifestyle during that time period is a show called “Frontier House,” which airs on PBS as a series. The concept of the show came from a previous show called “1900 House,” which share similar concept. The producers of the show pick three family groups traveled back in time to the days of the Wild West, living as settlers did in on the frontier back in the 1880s. The filming is about six to seven months, during that time participants are observe immersion into the lifestyle of the 1880s from building their own house, tending their livestock, planting food, and catching fish everything without the assistance of modern technology (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/frontierhouse/project/series.html). In order to re-live history the creators of the show create an environment identical to that of the 1880s, and rules for the participants to follow in order to maintain authenticity. For example some of the rules are, No communicating with the outside world only through the use of the postal service, which will be inspected for all outgoing and incoming mail. Contestants are allowed visitors, but all visitors upon arrival must dress and practice the lifestyle of the 1880s. Every family have to work for themselves, collective work with other families is not encourage or allowed. All children must be supervised. The last rule is an interesting one because to me it questions the authenticity of the project; the last rule is the use of what they refer to as the “Emergency Box,” which contains medical supplies, emergency communication radio, fire extinguisher, bear repellent “pepper Spray,” and emergency lighting. I understand the purpose of the emergency box, but it disconnect with the realism of the 1880s. It would be better if the emergency boxes were removed from each family’s house and was only allowed in the hands of producers or filming personnel’s. Creators of this show are hoping to enlighten both the public and the participant as to the conditions of life in the past and to show how far we have come since that time period. In his book “The New History in an Old Museum,” Richard Handler and Eric Gable define history as “a story with a moral, with a meaning that cannot be adduced from the facts alone.”
There is a saying that “the past determines the future.” Reenactment does not only focus on the past, it can also predict the future. There have been several movies that use reenactment of the past to predict or understand the future. A popular movie in the eighties is “Back to the Future.” In the movie a teenage boy accidentally travels into the past and jeopardizes his won future existence. Movies allow viewers to have the thought of “what if” and create a gateway to the future. PBS has a new show that aired on January of 2007 called “22nd Century.” The show is about how technological advances taking place today that within our lifetimes will significantly change the way humans live and interact. The series is hosted by Robin Robinson, a Chicago-based journalist, who is joined by two virtual co-hosts, each with insightful and often conflicting viewpoints about the merits of this new technology. One is an actor playing Aldous Huxley, the late author of Brave New World, who worried about the dehumanizing consequences of scientific discoveries. The other is Orlanda Bell, a time-traveling visitor from the future, who represents the best-case scenario of these technological advancements (http://www.pbs.org/22ndcentury/). This show is a scientific drama that uses current technologies to reenact future technologies. This show can be a new form reenactment that instead of reenacting the past it is reenacting the future. Reenacting an earlier journey may those be a gesture of utopianism as well as one of witnessing and mourning. (Vanessa Agnew)
“There are two kinds of characters: factual, an individual who once actually existed, or fictional composite, a representative based on selected biographical, cultural, occupational, and other characteristics.” Stacy Roth pg.57
The Next couple of shows I will be discussing are shows that use reenactments to understanding and solve a certain event that happen in the past. These types of shows are real life historical and biographical shows to reenact events for the sole purpose of bringing knowledge and awareness about a certain situation or person.
The history channel main focus is to provide viewers with the history and knowledge about events that happen in the pass. It is apparent that most of the shows focus on history. I picked three of their shows that have the highest rating, which uses reenactments and re-enactors to re-live history. The first show is “Infamous Murders.” Explore stories, events and legends that have intrigued people for generation and started debate in countless time periods. In discussing these different cases producers use re-enactors to reenact what actually happen when these murders took place. It is up to the re-enactors to bring these stories alive so viewers can understand what this person went through before her life was tragically ended. This shows main focus is to tell a story that is unforgettable and gruesome so people won’t forget how some people were affected by these murders.
Another show is a Docu-drama on the Discovery Chanel called “A Haunting.” A Haunting is a chills-filled, six-part series, chronicling the terrifying true stories of the paranormal told by those who experienced real-life horror tales. In this docu-drama, the actual people who have experienced the paranormal recount their stories on-camera, as the frightening events of their stories are re-enacted. (Fearing ridicule, some of the witnesses are shown only in silhouette.) Filmed in a very cinematic style, "A Haunting" sets out to frighten, providing a few genuine chills in most episodes. I watched a clip of this show online and I have to admit that it is very spooky. I can see how this show may leave the viewer mind boggle about the truth of the after life. The re-enactors in this show are very authentic when it comes to recreating the paranormal experience that the actual people experienced. Many of the stories on this show, where people have moved into a house where someone died and their ghost attach themselves to young children or adults. The question of authenticity is not questioned, but the reality of the events is questionable to me as a viewer.
In class when I heard the term reenactment on television the first show that came to mind was “America’s Most Wanted” on FOX. The show use mini-reenactments of a crime to show the viewers what happen and help authorities catch the criminals. The show sometimes hires re-enactors that closely resemble the criminal to reenact the crime that has been committed. The reenactments are an essential part of the show because it allows the viewers to visually watch the crime and to know the capability and mental state of this individual. I learned that if the reenactments are evidence from the crimes scene from police reports. The authenticity of the story is told in second person, which can leave room for bias and dramatization.
The last docu-drama is another Discovery Channel show called “I shouldn’t be Alive.” The show tells the stories of normal people in incredible circumstances. The subjects of the show narrate their life-threatening experiences while actors re-enact their experiences. The show is a similar concept to “A Haunting” because the stories are being told by the people who actually experience these life-threatening experiences. Again the re-enactors are in responsible for showing the viewers the danger in these situations that the people actually experienced.
“For the Foreseeable future reenactment is here to stay as a form of public history.” Alex Cook
Since reenactment is dealing with history and the past some shows are created to examine and discover things in the past that have not been discovered. A show in the Discovery Channel called “Myth Busters,” who use the skills of two expertises to test the validity of various rumors and urban legends in popular culture. In the show the two experts in the show recreate whatever myth they are trying to prove and at the end of the show the myth sometimes may prove to be true or just a myth. The concept of the show is weird and dangerous because some of the myth requires that these two men put their life in danger in order to prove these myths. The reenactment part of the show occurs when these men take inventions or myth from the past and recreating it to prove their point. The recreation is the reenactment, which brings the idea that reenactment can also be seen as a creation of something.
The following show deal with Man, Machine, and history. The History channel created a show called “Man, Moment, Machine.” A good summary of the show in Wikipedia states, “MAN MOMENT MACHINE brings some of history's most remarkable stories to life through fascinating accounts of action, adventure and creative invention - told in a highly compelling style with rare archival footage, first person perspective, expert interviews, vivid re-reenactments, and state-of-the-art computer imagery.” I have not had the opportunity to view this show but from reading the reviews the show provide the viewers with knowledge about different inventors and their inventions. The rare archival footage is the perfect gateway to the past and seeing how these things were created before they became part of our daily use.
The next show explores things in history too, but more like ancient history. This show also comes from History channel titled “Ancient Discoveries.” Through clips and historians the show examines how our ancestor’s grandest ideas mirror those of modern society. For example, upcoming episodes go back and learn that the Chinese were the one who first created gun powder that we use now for warfare. Again the idea of traveling back into time and examining history is the historical reenactment that keeps viewers aware of their history.
The final show that I will discuss that show reenactment is very interesting. It is a show from the Discovery channel, which puts a new spend on re-living the crime. The name of the show is “It takes a Thief,” a reality TV show that puts a new spin on catching the burglar. Jon Douglas Rainey and Matt Johnston "real" ex burglars are the show's hosts. With permission from their intended "victims," they stage a full-fledged burglary, after which the security challenged homeowners watch how it happened on closed circuit television. The thefts usually occur in suburban homes, although businesses, college houses, and even a police station have been burglarized (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_Takes_a_Thief_%282005_TV_series%29). This show is a perfect example of reenacting the present. The reality or euthenics of the show puts the victims or participants who are being burglarized to watch how they were rob through a reenactment of the act; I don’t think it can get more real then that.
After discussing and researching these different shows, I am going to make an attempt to answer a question that was asked in the beginning of class:
Why does reenactment matter?
“Historically dramas today cannot help but be co-opted by the painful pleasures of what we might call heritage culture, and recuperated histories are mixed; real, hyper real, imagined and pastiche.” Katie King
To acknowledge the reality and importance of reenactment we first need to determine the purpose of reenactment. Do we need reenactment? Why do we depend on reenactment? Is reenactment an authoritative or alternative knowledge? These are questions that I feel like I will not be able to completely answer until the end of the class, but in this paper I am going to address these questions in regards to television shows reenactment. Focusing on the topic of reenactment is difficult for me because my definition of reenactment is simplistic. That simplicity I believe was constructed into my mind because of my lack of acknowledgement of the term.
Why does reenactment matter? In the world of television and media reenactment matter because it is our gateway into the past and a directive to understanding our present. Television reenactment is essential because television has become a teaching tool in society. In her essay “Historiography as reenactment: Metaphors and literalization of TV documentaries” Katie King states “I think of pastpresents as quite palpable evidences that the past and the present cannot be purified each from the other.” Through this research I learned that reenactment is a combo of both past and the present; and concluded that reenactment is important because the past makes up the present and they are interchangeable. Reenactment on television matters because it is through reenactment of historical events we learn and understand the history of our existence. We depend on reenactment because it speaks the truth to us in a time period that we didn’t exist. The truth can sometimes be question because of the authenticity of the history that is being reenacted, but it is our only way through time.
Is reenactment an authoritative or alternative knowledge? Reenactments can be both authoritative and alternative knowledge. Reenactment is authoritative because what is reenacted is constructed and reenacted the way they want the audience to understand it. At the same token reenactment can be an alternative knowledge because we choose what we learn through reenactment; our choice is our alternative to that knowledge.
“Reenactments appear to authorize academic capitalism’s fantasy that knowledge can be simultaneously newly produced, transmitted and its use taught in a single commodified form: simple, accessible, and democratized.” Katie King
Shows such as Frontier House allow us to simulate the mentalities of the past. It allows us to live and learn about a time period that essential to out history.
To conclude, I would say that reenactment is a term that cannot be used lucidly. It has several components and parts that are beneficial to understand a story. Reenactment is a story within itself. Television reenactment is huge in today’s media because it tells our story.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Insider, Outsider Perspective and Violated Assumptions
What can you tell about how different the approaches are in these two books?
From reading the fist chapters in these two books, it’s apparent that the authors use different approaches in describing the history overview of historic Colonial museums. In Roth’s chapter it provides in-depth explanation of what goes on in the way museums operate and the different methods they use to bring their visitors into the time that they might be viewing. It was also explicit in defining the different terms of interpretations that is use when showing an exhibit, or reenacting an event. Handler’s first chapter was more on the history of Colonial Williamsburg’s. It discussed the basic architecture and funding for the museums. Its focused more on what the purpose of the museum is, which is to provide an educational pathway to the past for educators and the public. Compare to Roth’s Chapter Handler briefly discuss the concept of an interpreter, and reenactments.
Why does it matter?
The different approaches in both books matter because each focused on two different aspects of Colonial Museums, which at the end will give the reader a great understanding of the way history is presented in the present. By reading both of these chapters together the reader understand a concept that he may not have gotten from reading one book. For example Roth focuses on interpretation, while Handler forces on giving the reader the technical concept in historical museums.
Who are the insiders, who are the outsiders? How do you know? What does this mean?
The insiders are the interpreters that guide the visitors to the history of the museums and the event that is presented to them. The outsiders are the visitors, and educators who visit this museum with little knowledge about the history of the work. I understand this information from the basic knowledge of reading the first chapters in both books. It was clear that the “workers” in the museum were part of the key that keeps the history alive. Since I have only read the first chapters of these books I am not quiet sure what it means; but I can guess that as readers we will gain the history and knowledge that a museum has to offer. You will also be able to have a better appreciation for the work that is done in keeping history alive.
From reading the fist chapters in these two books, it’s apparent that the authors use different approaches in describing the history overview of historic Colonial museums. In Roth’s chapter it provides in-depth explanation of what goes on in the way museums operate and the different methods they use to bring their visitors into the time that they might be viewing. It was also explicit in defining the different terms of interpretations that is use when showing an exhibit, or reenacting an event. Handler’s first chapter was more on the history of Colonial Williamsburg’s. It discussed the basic architecture and funding for the museums. Its focused more on what the purpose of the museum is, which is to provide an educational pathway to the past for educators and the public. Compare to Roth’s Chapter Handler briefly discuss the concept of an interpreter, and reenactments.
Why does it matter?
The different approaches in both books matter because each focused on two different aspects of Colonial Museums, which at the end will give the reader a great understanding of the way history is presented in the present. By reading both of these chapters together the reader understand a concept that he may not have gotten from reading one book. For example Roth focuses on interpretation, while Handler forces on giving the reader the technical concept in historical museums.
Who are the insiders, who are the outsiders? How do you know? What does this mean?
The insiders are the interpreters that guide the visitors to the history of the museums and the event that is presented to them. The outsiders are the visitors, and educators who visit this museum with little knowledge about the history of the work. I understand this information from the basic knowledge of reading the first chapters in both books. It was clear that the “workers” in the museum were part of the key that keeps the history alive. Since I have only read the first chapters of these books I am not quiet sure what it means; but I can guess that as readers we will gain the history and knowledge that a museum has to offer. You will also be able to have a better appreciation for the work that is done in keeping history alive.
Reenactments
Reenactments
When I think about the word “reenactments” I get the image of someone reliving an event in history by acting it out. Reenactment is all around us. I barely thought about the word reenactments until this class, so I was amaze to find all these different places that does reenactments. For example, I found a place in Alexandria Virginia called Fort Ward Museum and they do reenactments of the Revolutionary War. It was very interesting to see when I Googled the word reenactments, most of the results I received was about war reenactments; there was not much about other forms of reenactments. In DC there is also a reenactment about a group of soldiers from the war and they call themselves the “54th Massachusetts volunteer infantry.” In television most movies and some shows are based on reenactments of either a way of living during a period of time, or an era. Reenactment allows the viewer to live an event that is historic to a culture or a group of people. Movies such as “Roots” reenact the cruelty of slavery that African American experience during that time. Another example is the 2004-movie “Troy” starring Brad Pitt, which is a reenactment about an era where Greek rulers were at war with one another. For instance, a reenactment on the television show “America’s Most Wanted,” allows the viewers to see the event that occurred by hiring actors to reenact these events. So based on this brief research its safe to say that reenactments do not always involve historical events.
When I think about the word “reenactments” I get the image of someone reliving an event in history by acting it out. Reenactment is all around us. I barely thought about the word reenactments until this class, so I was amaze to find all these different places that does reenactments. For example, I found a place in Alexandria Virginia called Fort Ward Museum and they do reenactments of the Revolutionary War. It was very interesting to see when I Googled the word reenactments, most of the results I received was about war reenactments; there was not much about other forms of reenactments. In DC there is also a reenactment about a group of soldiers from the war and they call themselves the “54th Massachusetts volunteer infantry.” In television most movies and some shows are based on reenactments of either a way of living during a period of time, or an era. Reenactment allows the viewer to live an event that is historic to a culture or a group of people. Movies such as “Roots” reenact the cruelty of slavery that African American experience during that time. Another example is the 2004-movie “Troy” starring Brad Pitt, which is a reenactment about an era where Greek rulers were at war with one another. For instance, a reenactment on the television show “America’s Most Wanted,” allows the viewers to see the event that occurred by hiring actors to reenact these events. So based on this brief research its safe to say that reenactments do not always involve historical events.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)