Frequently Asked Questions:Who is the IHI aimed at?Academic historians, heritage professionals, educators, re-enactors and live interpreters are all being invited to become involved. Anyone with an interest in heritage, public history, academic history, living history and re-enactment is encouraged to attend to include their ideas and opinions about the future of live interpretation at historic sites.Within the heritage industry various papers have been written on the role of live interpretation, mainly by those running professional interpretation companies, or employing interpreters. Currently they all tend to be detrimental to re-enactment, basically saying that if you want a good display employ professionals as you can control them. If re-enactment groups are employed, although they are cheaper, don't expect to get as good a display, or get exactly what you want. Re-enactors are generally thought to re-enact for themselves, with little thought for the public. As Jane Malcolm-Davis wrote, their primary concern is "the enjoyment of their members", with little regard to historical accuracy or the presentation from the public's point of view. These are the views that we would like changed. Re-enactment has got a lot to offer, but we need to be talking to heritage people generally, to write articles for their journals, to change their perceptions. At the beginning of September I attended a heritage conference where a talk entitled "Re-creation or recreation: the use and abuse of live interpretation" trashed re-enactment in front of the heritage and academic audience, and promoted to use of professionals only. Currently academic historians do not see that re-enactment has anything to do with their subject area. We believe that re-enactment has more control over the general public's view of history, then they have.
Can I have an information pack?Information packs have not been produced yet. Membership details, objectives and the way forward should all be discussed and agreed upon at the meeting in November.
How do you see the IHI in relation to bodies like NAReS, Is it intended to complement some or all of these, or as a replacement for some or all, or what?The Institute is not placing itself in competition with NAReS, as it has different aims. Membership will be available both for individuals and for groups, so it will be accessible to everyone. The IHI was conceived by a small group consisting of ordinary members of re-enactment societies, historians and heritage professionals.Re-enactment and live interpretation are powerful communication tools, with the capacity to change people's perceptions on history or to perpetuate myth. The Institute is a forum in which academic historians and heritage professionals, can exchange views with individual re-enactors and live interpreters. It should allow the opportunity for heritage professionals and historians to influence the type and content of historical live interpretation currently being presented to the public. It gives live interpreters access to current historical thinking, and an informal medium in which to discuss future requirements with potential sponsors. There are a lot of people from various re-enactment groups discussing the future of re-enactment, and it would be nice to pull all these discussions together.
You wish to see a "kite mark" for quality presentations. I'm a little mystified by this, on the grounds that it will be difficult to persuade many people of the need for such a scheme, and also difficult to administer in a rational manner. Can you explain what exactly you are aiming at here, and how you see it being achieved?A categorised kitemark is one way forward to show quality of performance and professionalism in attitude. The word "categorised" is the important one. Groups should not be forced to try to meet standards which do not suit them, and which they really do not want. If all groups met the same standard then potentially there would be little variety. The idea is that sponsors have a guarantee about the type of group that they are employing, whether it be 1st person highly accurate living history, (with the potential to have less interaction with the viewing public), military drill display, (with drums, colours and spectacle) or pure pageant, (large and lots of fun but with little reference to small details of historical accuracy). Different types of display potentially attract different sponsors and different audiences. Currently sponsors get little say in what re-enactment groups offer. It would be nice to know what they would actually like, to see if they have any ideas, (especially with the National Curriculum). If we want to be seen to educate we need to develop standards by consensus before they are imposed upon us. All this needs to be discussed, and maybe other methods of quality assurance proposed. Obviously this is a sensitive issue and needs to be debated fully, and implemented slowly and carefully. The kitemark, or other method of quality assurance is a long term objective, and not one to be implemented lightly.
What do you see as being the main output of the IHI? I presume that the journal will be the main deliverable, and that this will be of an academic nature - is your intention to publish original research, or feature articles, or what?As a starting point the Institute is producing a biannual journal. It is aimed at a more academic audience than the current re-enactment magazines and hopes to promote discussion amongst all interested parties. Potentially it may give history, heritage and archaeology students the opportunity to be published for the first time, as well as publishing papers from academics, live interpreters and heritage professionals. The first issue includes articles from re-enactors and historians, reviews, news of conferences, courses and other events, and an item on research resources. All articles submitted for publication are reviewed by a board made up of experienced re-enactors, academic historians and heritage professionals.In addition a quarterly newsletter may be produced. The Institute also hopes to run seminars, workshops and conferences to promote communication between all interested parties. We have already been offered web space, in order to start up discussion pages. Once again, this should all be discussed at the inaugural meeting. In addition, the Institute hopes to promote training, firstly by giving visibility to relevant training courses already being run by colleges, rural life institutions etc. and later by organising it's own courses. In addition to learning historical techniques, health and safety, visitor management, marketing, and customer care, all show professionalism. It is hoped that single period, multi-group living history training weekends can be organised, where individual members meet and train with others interested in the same period of history, but not in their re-enactment group. Historians and Heritage professionals could also be involved, to help understand the problems associated with undertaking living history. It has been suggested that we produce a directory of relevant training courses currently available, and maybe develop an NVQ or similar. Suggested deliverables will have to be ratified at the November meeting, and hopefully some timescales set.
Are you aware of a couple of other organisations in the UK that also exist to define the different forms of interpretation and set standards - these are the Association of Heritage Interpretation (AHI) and IMTAL Europe. I wonder, do we really need another organisation?Yes we are aware of AHI, but don't think that it is the right forum for re-enactors, it is mainly for heritage professionals and professional interpreters, as it deals with other methods of interpretation as well as live interpretation, and other subjects as well as history. The IHI is aimed at mainly the re-enactment community, hoping to offer training and to provide a forum in which academic historians, (not included in the AHI), re-enactors (not included in the AHI) and live interpreters, and heritage professionals can talk and exchange views and ideas. We already have people from all three areas involved. The IHI grew out of a need identified at the workshop last November.
I feel that what you are trying to achieve could be worthwhile providing it is used to further the aims and awareness of the work carried out by varies groups around the country, and not tie everyone down in more bureaucracy.We are also very nervous of bureaucracy and hope to limit it as much as possible. We hope that ordinary re-enactors will become involved with the IHI, giving them a voice. How the IHI is to be run, cost and structure of membership will all be discussed at the inaugural meeting.
Why do we not let our "presentations" decide for us ie, do we get invited back next season.….!We hope to include all relevant heritage professionals, both independent and national organisations. Yes, we could depend on each group independently being invited back to a site the following year, but what about opening up new opportunities for all. Two organisations which are noticeably reluctant to use re-enactors are the National Trust, and English Heritage Education. It would be interesting to find out why, and to try to fulfil their needs. As an aside, members of the National Trust Education Dept. have already shown an interest in the Institute.
Where and when is this first meeting taking place?Saturday 13th Nov 1999 between 12 noon and 3.00pm, at The Re-enactor's Market, Blackbird Leys Leisure Centre, Oxford.Directions: From the A34 Oxford ring road, take the B480 heading out of town. At the traffic lights with the Bull Nose Morris Public House on the right, turn right. Take a left hand turn into Pegasus Road, the Leisure Centre is on the right. Directions to the relevant room within the Leisure Centre will be posted at the Leisure Centre on the day. Be included in discussions about the future of live historical interpretation and re-enactment. Support the Institute and attend the inaugural meeting. |