Judging Originals?

[Terry Lane]

BY-LAW 9: RULES and REGULATIONS

9-1.  All NCOWS shooting classes, as established by By-Law, must be made available to all shooters at each  National, Regional or Charter Posse Shoot.  These classes shall be:

Seems like all clubs would be required to offer "originals" at every shoot if the by-law is ratified.

Take care.

[French Jack]

Exactly--- if there is ANY person who wishes to shoot ANY category--- the posse must offer it.  If NOT---- they are not required to do so.  This applies to Originals as well as Seniors, Juniors, Ladies, Blackpowder Shootist, Pistoleer, et. al.  There is also a proposal to expand the categories to have separate Men's and Women's in each, as well as subdivide the Juniors and Seniors by age.  This alone would guarantee that each posse would be offering  ------ Horrors!----- more than DOUBLE the number of categories.... This would probably lead to nuclear meltdown at each and every shoot.

Just imagine, double the hand shakes and congratulations and double the awards.  Somehow zero plus zero still adds up to nothing. ?? Huhmmmmmm..

[Terry Lane]

So folks,
I have to admit I'm still a bit fuzzy about this. If a new shooter shows up at our Blue River Regulators shoot this Sunday and wants to shoot "originals" class (and is the only entrant), what do we do? How do we score him other than shooting? I guess I'm not opposed to the concept, would just like to get the details worked out for the club, cause if it will be required, then it will be required. Take care.

[French Jack]

Terry, perhaps you are aware there is also a proposal on the agenda to only offer a category if there are a minimum of three entries.  Don't know where this will go on the matter.  However, I am sending you a PM.

However, on the face of it, to reply to your question:  At this time you don't have to do anything.  If you wish to allow the entrant to do so, and have basis to believe that they have gone throulgh the "vetting" process, I guess they get to shoot against themselves.  If they haven't been approved by at least 3 "Originals" , they still don't get to enter as such.  If you by chance have the requisite number on hand, it is still your call.  The scoring is not a giant item, I can e-mail you the scoresheets we used at the Nationals.

[Big Hext]

Howdy,

This raises another question then.. how does an NCOWS member in the hinterlands get certified?
How can Joss and his pretty darn high-grade posse become Originals if it takes 3 to judge one fit?

Adios,

[French Jack]

Big Hext,
All that would be required is for anyone that wishes to be juried, submit their impression and documentation to any three of the present Originals.  I am certain that if someone were to submit their information to O.T. Buchanan, Bill Proctor, Jerry Everett, Dr. Bob, River City John, Trap, Books, Jerry Barnes, Steve Henry, Jerry Davenport, James Hunt, or myself, that we would be able to get it to at least two of the others and get it accomplished.  This could be done by PM, e-mail, or snail mail.

I believe that Marlan Ingram has covered it in an article in The Shootist.

[Big Hext]

So you send a book of documentation.  How can one judge clothing from documentation?

Maybe I don't get the whole idea.. I thought it was about looking and acting as if one has stepped out of the past.  That can only be experienced, in my opinion, in person.  The mannerisms, speech and such are part and parcel with a correct historical impression.

Adios,

[Black River Smith]

Hext

Acting is not a persona, it is an impersonation.  Jimmy Stewart impersonated a western character but his clothing an accoutrement were not always correct.  You will not catch me trying to talk or walk any different than I do in modern clothing except where weight differentials from guns come in to play.  We all  talk and act normal, we just research, document and record what we want to carry and use for the time period we want to live in.


It is appearances and actual attempts at portraying a person during a specific time period.  It is not just throwing together a pair of 501 jeans and western style shirt and hat like I did for my very first CAS shoot in 1990.  It is showing documented pictures or period writings that what you have represents the period your in.  Ex.  pocket knife I care is made in 'Pakistan' but it is a 'near' perfect copy of 1860 knife pictured on page 140 of the Peacemakers book.  That is it, it is documented by RLWilson that it was available from 1860 to ....   My other one is pictured on page 163 of same book,  (not exact but close enough) so I can use it for 1870's persona.

It is not hard,  but don't come with a case or schrade and call it an 1870's knife.  Don't use a money belt or 3" wide stamped belt and John Wayne holster or mexican double loop for late 1860's or 1870's persona.  Those are the way to think when putting thing together.  Don't use a 1892 Win or copy of one for an 1870's or 1880's impression.  They just don't fit the time line.

That is just one piece.

I believe that most everyone uses a similar thought pattern about how they want to look, some don't want to.  If you do or would like too then you fit into the Originals.  You do not need everything to be original manufacture to provide the appearance of authentic,  We still live in a limited controlled world.  I am sure some can afford the actual stuff but I can only appear to be authentic.  So I document and only buy those thing that I can find to fit.  For me the searching for and documenting is just as fun as the using.  I am still looking for a travel inkwell that I can afford.  I got the pen.

Just the way to look at it, it is not hard or excessive.  Just a way to be proud of what you have and the effort you have made to be accurate about your appearance and shooting.

Oh one thing I do have an original Win'73 and '86, some original knives, original eating utensils, etc... but have to supplement on other items.

Hope this helps you and others

Black River Smith

[US Scout]

This is a fascinating thread and I'm enjoying the discussion.

I came to CAS from a living history background (mostly colonial but some CW).  We weren't "juried" for the most part, but you'd best not drag out something that was later than the period you were protraying, especially in front of the public. 

When I started CAS, I knew that creating a persona was optional but given my background it was natural for me to want to create one, along with a history, suitable clothing and accoutrement.  I started off with one concept (a generic civilian scout), but over time this has evolved into a whole different persona than I originally envisioned (an Army officer in command of scouts).  Like my colonial self, I have more than one CAS persona, which allows me to explore, historically, other aspects of the time.

As I've refined my primary persona and developed my biography, I've focused my acquisitions on what I would have worn or carried in specific time periods (1867, 1872 and 1882) of my "life."  I even do it for the earlier years, though they fall outside the scope of CAS, because what my persona did or experienced prior to the selected time periods would have influenced or impacted on his later decisions.

Doing the research, for me, has been the fun part, but then I was trained as a historian and work in a related field.  However, I'm still not clear on what is required to "document" my persona for the Originals. 

Are we simply talking a reference in a contemporary document, or of a photograph showing a particular item being used or worn?  Or, is the justification more demanding, requiring at least two independent sources.  For example: Army officers had the option of carrying an issue sidearm, or one of their own purchase.  If I opt to carry a non-issue sidearm, must I find an example (or two) of an Army officer carrying that particular pistol in the time period (and place) I portray, or is it sufficient to say that because this pistol was available and officers could choose what they wanted, my character can carry it. 

Secondly, can I reference a secondary source?   Getting access to primary documents can be difficult, so is it permissable to take the word of a professional historian that certain things were used by a specific group of people (I would think not).  From my experience, most historians know very little about firearms or historical artifacts unless that is what they specialize in. 

Thanks to all for their input into this discussion.  It has been most informative and enlightening.

[Dr. Bob]

Howdy US Scout,

For your impression as an Army officer, the appropriate regualtion describing the required uniform would be needed.  If you depart from the reg., you would need documentation that it was done, either a picture or written documentation. 

For firearms, you can use any rifle and pistol that would have been available in the year that you portray.

I placed Dr. Bob in 1875 to allow him to have a Colt SAA and an 1873 Winchester.  I documented band collar shirts and 4 pocket vests without  lapels with a picture of Bill Hickock [died 1876] wearing both.  I also used a photo of a reunion of veterans of the battle of San Jacento[sp?] in 1871 where there were at least 4 men with band collar shirts, vests w/o lapels and brogands which were also part of my impression.  Wore a 3 piece sack suit and a bowler which can be found in numerous pictures and in clothing history books.  Had my Dr.'s bag to carry my ammo documented in a ACW medical equipment book.

I hope that this answere your question.

[Lars]

Like US Scout I am rather enjoying this discussion because I find it so informative in the breath of information.

For a while I was thinking that the "Originals" was just clothes and guns. Clearly, as some folks do it, it can include just about any item, including pocket knives -- I had not given that any consideration. The distinction between just looking like an "original" and actually behaving and speaking like one was also a pleasant surprise. Fortunately, for us, we can add the behavior and language(s). That could be fun!! It is also a real effort for those of us not professional actors.

Adding behavior and language is fun too. Some years ago I visited a "living history" site where the persons on display answered any and all questions as the person they were depicting would/could have. That was a big plus. I did the same a few times at the GAF Muster and got a slightly surprised response each time from the person asking the question.

One could even start thinking about 2-dimensional Originals (they look like it externally), 3-dimensional Originals ("all" the way to the skin), and, yea!!, 4-dimensional Originals (add behavior and language). Maybe the 4-dimensional Originals would qualify for Actor's Guild coverage.

Lars

[Books OToole]

Although I have not yet put it all down on paper;  I try to keep everything [visible] in my tent up to the same "Originals" standard.

The Bed and large table are out of Marcy's 1859 Prairie Traveler and the small table is from Galton's 1856 The Art of Travel etc. etc.

Books

[US Scout]

Adding behavior and language is fun too. Some years ago I visited a "living history" site where the persons on display answered any and all questions as the person they were depicting would/could have. That was a big plus. I did the same a few times at the GAF Muster and got a slightly surprised response each time from the person asking the question.
Lars

Lars,

I've done a lot of living history programs over the last 20 years or so.  In some programs I've done, I stayed in character at all times, even when the "visitor" asked a question using 20th century terminology.  If they mentioned driving in a car, I "heard" it as a wagon or carriage.  If they pointed out the airliner overhead, I couldn't see or hear it, so "wondered aloud" if perhaps they'd been in the sun a bit too long.  At another program I did, I enlisted site visitors into the militia.  I would ask their occupation and hear things like "computer programer" - which I would simply put down as "clerk."  Most of them got a kick out of this (and sometimes tried to "catch" me out), though there were a few who didn't quite understand what they were experiencing. 

For an adult program I did a few years ago, I addressed everyone as if they were new settlers to the area and they thoroughly enjoyed it.  For school programs, I usually start off in character, but then shift to third person since it easier to explain things in terms they understand.

I will say that staying in character can be hard work.  I'm usually exhausted after a few hours of it.  I expect the public enjoys it though and that makes it worthwhile.

I haven't tried this in my "old west" persona but expect I could do it if pressed.

[Lars]

  I try to keep everything [visible] in my tent up to the same "Originals" standard.

The Bed and large table are out of Marcy's 1859 Prairie Traveler and the small table is from Galton's 1856 The Art of Travel etc. etc.

Books

Books,

Sounds like you and a few others have created an "Extended" Originals class!! I will have to look at your stuff more carefully next time. Dr. Bob's too.

Lars

[US Scout]

Hey Books!

As an aside, I just received a copy of the "History of the Second Colorados" by Mrs. Williams, which I'd been looking for the last 4-5 years.  Seems there is a limited reprint edition.  Skimmed through it last night.  Lots of neat stuff to go into building the background on my persona.  There is some stuff in there about the 11th Kansas (did I get that right?).

[Books OToole]

The biggest difference in between my camp and Dr. Bob's is that most of what he has is original/antique.
    [That and sheer volume.  ]
I have very bad luck with originals items in the field, therefore nearly all of my stuff are reproductions.  

Like US Scout, Dr. Bob and I have been doing Living History Programs for many years.  And documenting clothing, guns, equipment, furniture, etc. is a lot easier in the post Civil War era.  Thank you, Matthew Brady, Soloman Butcher, T. H. O'Sullivan, John K. Hillers, William H. Jackson and many other early photographers.

That said is best not to get to dependent on pictures.  First hand journals are just as good if not better.  It just takes more time.

Books

[Big Hext]

Howdy,

Interesting discussion and I appreciate the insight.  I have done significant in-depth research in the past, albeit not in Western History.  I do find the academic nature a bit frustrating.  There must always be a place for common sense.  Delmonico likes to use the example of pregnant women. 

My question still remains about exporting the Originals concept..
Adios,

[Black River Smith]

Hext,

Maybe what is missing in a lot of the conversation is:  that your documentation of items and clothing and desired appearance also should or does have photo's of you in your outfits and photos of your items and where you found the original.  Most people, I believe do or could find a copy of submitters listed books to verify the statements and claims.  Not hard to acknowledge someone that has put the effort into it.  If a question did arise the communication lines are wide open.

If you look at most of the photos for people posting, you or I probably would not have a problem with general outfits/clothing.  It is just the justification for making things fit in a time frame.  All this truly is easy to do just off of paper.  Really it is not as difficult, to make this work, as some people are trying to make it appear.

We share information, we talk at the shoots, we go shoot at the range, we come back and go to the banquet just like all the other shooters.

Black River Smith

[Delmonico]

At first when this whole idea came up, I honestly shook my head and wondered why.  I honestly thought what was being attempted in a effort to keep from turning NCOWS from the so called SASS lite, to what might be termed Living History lite. 

I will say this, you most likely have a diamond here, but a very rough one yet.  What would be wrong with continuing as is for a couple years, polish the diamond, knock off the rough edges, test drive the dang thing for a while.  There is nothing to stop this from happening.  Show the rest of the clubs what it has to offer by example, not by forcing it on them.  Few like having something forced on them they don't want, convicing them that they need it is good salesmanship.


I was a bit surley earlier in the week and I'm sorry for it, there were reasons more than my friends here for that.  I consider you folks some of my best friends even if we don't agree all the time, I wouldn't waste my time pokin' a bit of fun at ya hopin' to make you think, if I didn't like you.  I ignore folks I don't like for the most part.

I will say though, once one documents everything don't think it's over, if you have never thought you had the answer and then months or years later found something else that meets the criteria for documention that conterdicts what you have already documented, then you haven't tried hard enough.  This is the reason for my little jokes about documenting the documention.  I'm very serious one this, one needs to study the very context of the documentaion.  It's that or you'll think that the stork brought the babies.

[O.T. Buchannan]

Wait a minute!  Wait a minute!  You mean to tell me the Stork DIDN'T bring the babies???..

Del, you are right, we can do our research and come to certain conclusions, but we should still CONTINUE to research and study the same things.  I've done research on a particular thing, and two or three years down the road learned something knew which changed my thinking....

THIS is one of the most fascinating aspects of studying history, at least to me.  There is always more information just around the corner......