Pat Ware Interview...

[Jack]

It is a pleasure to let you know that Pat gave in to the pressure and gave us a great interview.

 

He makes some very interesting points, it is always nice to see some forward thinking.

 

.........I hope it creates some debate.

 

Many thanks Pat.

 

Jack.

[Guest matt]

I agree totally with Pat's answers to questions 4,5 and 9.

 

I'm afraid the wannabe's do nothing for the historic MV movement and I feel they can in fact harm it.

 

Matt.

[Pete Ashby]

Intersting point Matt and one that always produces debate.

 

I have always been motivated by the trucks however I have worn an appropriate uniform when the occasion required it, but never carried any form of fire arm or edged weapon, drivers on the whole didn't except under front line conditions. A pair of cut off jeans with slogan T shirt, long hair and nose stud can be just as inappropriate.

 

I've never been into re-enactment and in the early days is could be badly and inappropriately executed.

I have to say that now on the whole there are some excellet displays but I'm still left feeling just a bit uneasy about the whole thing for reasons that are for me complicated. Some will hold the view that one is a natural progression from the other and this is what we are seeing more of on the show fields of the UK these days.

 

To explore this a little further let me pose a question, do MVs need the presence of re-enactors at events to complete the scene?, in other words is there a symbiotic relationship between the two?.

 

I think there is but it is not a prerequisite and there is a danger that the public and regulatory bodies may not differentiate between the different motivations of both bodies.

Do I like the mock battles? no makes me feel uneasy, it is undoubtedly exciting for the public and provides a crowd draw but that is the problem for me it starts to become a just that..... a spectacle..... For me Living History has a place but not always part and parcel of the MV scene.

 

The emotive nature and period of history that re enactors and MV collectors deal with make the need for sensitive management key this is and always has been a fine balance and one I would urge both camps to seek

 

Pete

[ArtistsRifles]

Nicely put!

[Guest matt]

Hi Pete,

 

Basically I agree with everything you say. I don't see a problem with an MV owner wearing kit appropriate to the vehicle he is driving,for instance when driving a CCKW a set of fatigue coveralls,field jacket,boots and cap/helmet. My problem is with folks who dress as combat troops,carry weapons,wear rank insignia/medal ribbons/unit insignia to which they are not entitled.

 

There is certainly a place for "living history" but from what I have seen many of those involved are on something of an ego trip,to my mind this is proven,to a degree at least,by the number of reenactors who choose to portray "crack" troops,ie Airborne,SS,Special Forces etc. some vehicle owners are guilty of this too going by the number of trucks painted in the markings of the 82nd and 101st Airborne. It would be good to see more attention paid to the role of less "glamorous" units such as Engineers,Maintenance,Laundry,Graves Registration etc.

 

My concern is that the public don't differentiate between vehicle owners and reenactors and I can see the day coming when some weekend warrior does something stupid at a show,someone gets injured or worse,and we all get tared with the same brush by the media.

 

I too am uneasy with mock battles and I feel that playing soldiers in this way is disrespectful towards who had to do it for real.

 

Let the flaming begin!

 

Matt.

[ghasp!]

I got interested in Military Vehicles when I started WWII re-enactment about 8 years ago so I'm probably biased. Let me tell you why I do it.

 

At my first event at Beltring with the 1st Airborne Reconnaissance unit (part of WWII LHA), I was met by a couple of Arnhem veterans. When they introduced themselves, I was a bit concerned about what their reaction would be, but they told me how much they appreciated the effort that we'd gone to and how pleased they were to see us. It’s a scenario that’s been repeated many times over the years and I’ve never had a bad reaction.

 

In fact, while taking part in the Arnhem march we've had groups of veterans standing to attention and saluting us as we marched past. We tried to explain that we were there to remember them and it should be the other way round but they would have nothing of it. “You’re helping keep the memory alive, thank you” was one of the replies I remember as I was shaken warmly by the hand. I think that’s what we’re all trying to do, just in different ways.

 

Lest we forget…

 

 

 

 

[Spood]

That's a good point Ghasp, but I suppose as with all things there is another side and there are probably veterans who think you shouldn't be trying to "play soldiers".

Personally I can see no problem with re-enactors showing an accurate representation of dress, equipment and so on, after all this is what most owners do with their vehicles, showing how it might have looked and how it would have been equipped. What in my view puts a fly in the ointment are the re-enactment groups, and we've probably all seen them, who have a "we won the war aren't we tough" attitude, these are the ones that will tarnish the movement eventually.

Not being a dresser upper myself this is just my 2 penneth worth as a vehicle owner. I do like to see vehicle owners who make the effort though as it does tend to set the vehicle off nicely.

There is plenty of room for this branch of the hobby but the time has come to be careful how they/we present themselves/ourselves to an increasingly PC public, do we want history or Hollywood has to be asked.

 

Don

 

[biscuits_brown]

There's no way I can express myself on this issue without coming over as plain insulting, which I don't intend to do.

 

Suffice to say I feel the entire re-enactment hobby takes itself too seriously in many respects, while comfortably ignoring some inconvenient facts.

 

Sadly, in recent years the Walter Mitty element have come to outnumber those with a genuine interest in history and it's portrayal to the public. To the point at which the latter are actually ridiculed by the former as being "not dedicated" or "authentic" enough.

 

 

[Jack]

There's no way I can express myself on this issue without coming over as plain insulting, which I don't intend to do.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Go for it, just go steady.

 

Cheers

 

Jack.

[Pete Ashby]

When they introduced themselves, I was a bit concerned about what their reaction would be, but they told me how much they appreciated the effort that we'd gone to and how pleased they were to see us. It’s a scenario that’s been repeated many times over the years and I’ve never had a bad reaction.

 

In fact, while taking part in the Arnhem march we've had groups of veterans standing to attention and saluting us as we marched past. We tried to explain that we were there to remember them and it should be the other way round but they would have nothing of it. “You’re helping keep the memory alive, thank you” was one of the replies I remember as I was shaken warmly by the hand. I think that’s what we’re all trying to do, just in different ways.

 

Lest we forget…

 

 

 

 

 

 

You make some intresting points here and I agree whole heartedly with your last point, there has to be some collective memory and that needs to be communicated. By accepting this point there also comes with it a responsibility to do the memory justice in all respects otherwise it becomes a demeaning parody. A number of living history groups I believe understand this and maintain the balance, but it is a very narrow line to tread.

 

There are small factions within both MV owners and Living History groups who take part because it permits them to dislay some form of ultra ego to a wider public.

Fortunately experience shows that this type tends to move on to the next ego rush in a short space of time, however they can leave behind them considerable ca lateral damage to both image and credibility that have taken in many cases years to build.

 

Pete

[79x100]

I have some reservations about dressing up, although because my vehicle is a motorcycle, I'm very aware that the wrong outfit would completely destroy any sense of period. Nothing looks worse than a "full face" helmet or fluorescent tabard. So far I haven't gone further than the acquisition of a Mk11 helmet to hang over the headlamp to disguise a lack of black-out precautions.

 

Somehow WW2 just seems a bit too recent to me as well. I can just imagine the reaction of my late, ex RSM Grandfather if he saw me in battledress. It would certainly involve "daft" and "bugger" and he was a man whom I respected enormously. My "Duration of Emergency" Dad is still around and I think he would have a good piss-take as well. That said, he is quitely amused that my favourite winter coat is still his post-war Civil Defence greatcoat.

 

There certainly is a sub-community within reenacting who take their research and levels of authenticity as seriously as most of us do with our vehicles but I suspect that it is a minority amongst the "Walts".

 

I find mock battles completely pointless. I stopped going to the Biggin Hill airshows when they started pretending that Harvards painted as "Jap Zeros" were bombing the runway.

 

I do believe though that vehicles are made to be used (and worn out). Some of the Beltring shots of Carriers being thrashed through the dust look great.

 

Rich.

 

 

[Guest matt]

As Pete said some very good points here so far. I have met former servicemen who don't mind reenactors but I have also met those who find it insulting and see it as trivializing the losses and hardships suffered by combat troops.

 

Rich,I agree with what you say about WW2 being too recent,but there are those who reenact more recent conflicts such as Vietnam,The Falklands and even the Gulf. I have worked with several Falklands and Gulf vets and without exception they regard anyone who dresses up to play soldier as a "F***ing prat"!.

 

Another point,is there actually a difference between "reenacting" and "living history"? to me reenacting would refer to reconstructing a specific event such as a battle,and living history would refer to portraying how the kit/equipment was worn/used without actually charging around,gun in hand,or am I missing something?

 

I have to admit I haven't been to many events where reenactors have been present,maybe ten or so,but at several the mock battles have taken on a rather farcical nature and I have also seen some reenactors using weapons which are obviously pushing the boundaries when it come to the law,for instance one group who had a 30 caliber Browning machine gun which fired brass,linked blanks and vented through the muzzle. Going back to what I said earlier about it only takes one idiot to get us all tared with the same brush,if someone is injured or killed at a show or event where a reenactment is taking place the PC mad press will have a field day.

 

Matt.

[Pete Ashby]

 

Another point,is there actually a difference between "reenacting" and "living history"? to me reenacting would refer to reconstructing a specific event such as a battle,and living history would refer to portraying how the kit/equipment was worn/used without actually charging around,gun in hand,or am I missing something?

Matt.

 

 

From my perspective there is a very real difference between Living History and Re-enactment but I don't do either so I'd like to hear from someone who does..............

 

over to you Chaps

 

Pete

[Marmite!!]

when it come to the law,for instance one group who had a 30 caliber Browning machine gun which fired brass,linked blanks and vented through the muzzle.

Matt.

 

 

Matt,

 

that was probably a live .30cal hired from an on-site armourer as is common practise at Detling & Beltring..

[79x100]

I think that a number of us find it a bit difficult to say precisely what we feel "uneasy" about. Sadly, those who saw action in WW2 won't be around for much longer, but for me it will still be a personal thing.

 

On the other hand, perhaps we shouldn't forget how the British army dressed up for the Aldershot Tattoos of the 1930s! Were they insulting anyones memory ?

 

The Battledress remains (for me at least) a very emotionally loaded image. Somehow pre-war Service Dress isn't, so I'm not being logical.

 

There must be a fine line between playing at soldiers and historical display. I know there are groups who give museum talks and things but on the other hand here in Belgium there are those that turn up on armistice day in Hotchkiss Jeeps dressed in a mixture of Vietnam era kit and pretend they've just liberated the village. They usually drive off with sirens on....Congenital Mast*******s ! (wonder if that gets past the censor) NO

 

And as for battle scenarios...when we were kids, we used to have "Gat Wars" in the woods. The only difference is that we drunk Corona lemonade instead of Special brew!

 

I think that I've just talked myself into sticking with a Barbour Trials jacket and a "pudding basin" helmet ! (Unless someone can tell me where I could get a nice set of 1930s style belted overalls with no zips or velcro.

 

Rich.

[Richard Farrant]

I think that I've just talked myself into sticking with a Barbour Trials jacket and a "pudding basin" helmet ! (Unless someone can tell me where I could get a nice set of 1930s style belted overalls with no zips or velcro.

 

 

Rich,

 

When I used to ride my M20 to shows, it was a civilian pudding basin helmet (legal with BS mark inside) painted olive drab, DR full length coat and DR boots. Not really a uniform as thousands of motorcyclists in the post war era, dressed in the same practical kit.

 

Richard

[Mark]

I think all the sacrifices made by these people in the wars has allowed us to do what we can when we can, if it was the other way around we would not have a hobby like this and no debates as to who is wrong or right about it.

Everyone to his or her own providing it is done tastefully and does not hurt anyone, but saying that there will always be the few that do not like anything to do with "war" as someone said in the Kent Messenger the other week regarding the War and Peace show "I liked the show, but they could promote the peace side of it more", what can you do that bloke probably has a hobby that we would frown upon.

[Pete Ashby]

From my perspective there is a very real difference between Living History and Re-enactment but I don't do either so I'd like to hear from someone who does..............

 

over to you Chaps

 

Pete

 

 

Is there anybody out there who would like to join the debate ?

 

Pete :tup:

[M8Greyhound]

Right chaps..been following this thread with some interest...being a militaria collector/ living historian and re enactor for the last 25 years and a vehicle owner for the last 3 what do you guys want to hear ?

 

my first point will be this...IF re enacting/ living history is done well and authentic then its a good way to stop history being distorted.

 

If its done BADLY..its a good way to wind up the public and give all Re enactors a bad name

 

and still there are vehicle owners that stand in their "ivory towers" and look down thier nose with distaste at Living historians and re enactors

 

you vehicle owners who have the vehicles of war still have the same standards to keep up as people who wear and display the clothes of war and in my opinion a badly turned out vehicle and badly dressed owner has the same bad taste as badly turned out and bad acted re enactors.

 

so i personally think there is NO difference.

 

INCOMING

 

Regards

 

LLoyd

[Jack]

 

 

 

It has always amazed me that this should even be a question. There are many members here on HMVF who are currently serving soilders and many who are ex services.

 

So it may be interesting to seek their thoughts. I did have that chat with a chum of mine yesterday and some interesting points were made.

 

I have always put military vehicles owners under the same umbrella as re-enactors. Surely MV owners are presenting their vehicles from a certain time in our history by doing so, we are re-enacting, I cannot see the dividing line.

 

Are we all completely clear on the definition of re-enacting? What is the difference between that and living history? When I drive my truck down the road aren’t I re-enacting or par taking in living history?

 

No matter what movement you belong to you will always get a wonderful cross section of society. When I was a woodsman, I started The Dorset Coppice Group http://www.dorsetcoppicegroup.co.uk which is going strong and doing some great work. The woodland world, has, historically, always attracted the hippy element. You know what I mean by ‘hippy’ element, I know this first hand as my brother is one. The woodlands are a brutal way to earn a living and I adore our ancient woodland and I have study it for many many years and my readings have always been woodlands so you can imagine my passion for them.

 

Because of the life style that woodlands project you will always get the ‘image freaks’ people looking for a label or an distinctiveness, my wife practices natural horsemanship, a form of horse whispering in you like and that world too, is full of ‘image freaks’ – see, we all have them.

 

I used to get furious with the image freaks in the woodland world, but one day it struck me that these guys don’t stay in the woods for long as it is just to hard, but for me, as long as they were out there raising the profile then it is no bad thing……..the same could be said for this movement.

 

 

Yes, this movement is full of image merchants and yes some get it wrong but then don’t we all? I, like most of us, talk to many veterans – from all conflicts and have friends serving in the currents ones. There are those who think that re-enacting is offensive and some that encourage it and are honored by it and I would say that the split is 50/50.

 

Historically, publicly honoring our war dead and our serving soldiers is relatively new and newer still, is re-enacting so the movement is incredibly young and will find its moral feet as it grows. It will need great debate and input for this to occur.

 

I do detect an under current of snobbery from all quarters and to a degree, these are just natural growing pains of a young industry, it may need to grow up, shake hands and get on with it – have we already lost site of the bigger picture, conserving history?? Note I said ‘conserving’ and not ‘preserving’.

 

I have lost count at how many shows I have attended in my Jimmy where people have asked if I would mind putting people/re-enactors in the back and going on a convoy or driving them into the ring as no one else will as they do not want their truck to get dirty. Yes, I might take a different view on it if my truck was a nut and bolt rebuild – but I doubt it. The pay back is three fold, re-enactors get to ride in the back of a WW2 truck, I get to have my truck loaded with men and the public get to see both parties in context. I can’t see how you can have one without the other.

 

I have seen on many occasion people from the MV world let the side down, and no one can use the excuse that it costs more to maintain a truck then it does to kit yourself out in re-enacting gear, the professionals spend thousands on their presentation. I more than happy to say that I belong to both camps, and I could be charged as being a blundering in mess in my dress and maybe in my vehicle too but with the right guidance, patience and advice I have the potential to be great example of both.

 

I do not like to see a wonderful vehicle being driven by someone in yellow jeans and pink T Shirt. Perhaps the MV movement needs to have a bit more confidence in the way it dress’s.

 

Re-enactment play a profound role in our history more so then perhaps any of us realise. We are in a wonderful position of being able to listen to oral history at first hand, the years a ticking away for some of our vets, we do not have the time for complacency and egos.

 

 

 

Everything we do should be able to tell a story, that way history will be kept alive.

 

[34ba37]

well put jack, totally agree.

keith

[79x100]

Coppicing eh, Jack ? Top man.

 

I've just planted hazel and oak at the bottom of my garden with a view to making my own small contribution. Because I'm in Belgium I've had to include a couple of pollarded willow as well :-)

 

What was the old "arb's" joke ? "How do you tell the age of a tree protester ?" -

 

-"Count the rings in his nose !" :-D

 

Apologies for drifting off topic.

 

Rich.

[Degsy]

A breath of common sense Jack, we have enough detractors and 'Big Brother' :evil: just waiting out there to put a spoke in things without squabbling amongst ourselves.

Divide and Rule!, enough said.

[ArtistsRifles]

Sticking my tuppence worth in as a "newbie" to the scene - I chose to look after an old M.V. because the engineering and history appealed to me. I also chose not to go the route of dressing in age-related uniform and carrying age-related weaponry because the age of the vehicle is roughly the time of my service. I know what an SLR/GPMG/Sten/Apache/Browning is, I know what it can do and - perhaps worse - I know what I can do/have done with each one of them. It took a goodly number of years for the nightmares to reach manageable levels and I'd rather like to keep it that way.

 

I have the greatest respect, though, for those who do choose to follow the age related uniform/weaponry path with their vehicles and for those who choose to go the living history route - sometimes they even combine to make a happy whole as was seen at Beltring this year :-)

 

If ever asked I would have no objection to loading Mauds back up with period re-enactors or veterans from her days in service - probably be quite a while before either of us qualify for that distinction though! :-) :-)

 

As I see it we all play a part to a greater or lesser degree in keeping history alive and so long as we do the history bboks cannot be rewritten!

 

The choice is ours, each and every one of us, to make though as to how far we want to go in our hobby (if thats the right word to use) and long may it continue that way without Politically Correct morons poking their nose in!!!

[Dougiebarder]

It would seem better to me, to display uniform on a tailors dummy(rather than an overweight 30-40 year old with a funny accent). The public can get a better look at the uniform that way, and there is no ego wanting to only be an American special forces-He man, or SS moron. Just think how good it would look at a place like Beltring, to have a marquee with every type of uniform on display.

(and we can send those who still want to dress up and play war to the local army training camp to act as opposition for real soldiers) :evil: