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.
1 comment:
Hey Jay, I enjoyed reading your paper. Don't be so hard on yourself. You [and MJ] know more than you think you know. ~Clarisse :)
Post a Comment