I went to the renaissance festival. It was awesome.
Unsurprisingly though it got me thinking. A lot of people thought that being a medievalist, I would hate it. It is historically inaccurate, people look ridiculous and they insist on talking in the worst "British" accents you can imagine, despite the fact that there is no such thing as a British accent. (We are four separate countries, we all sound different and the regions within the countries sound different too, very few people talk like HM Queen Elizabeth II - rant over) Someone did in fact ask me how I got my accent so good - 27 years of practice, clearly.
So, yes on paper, a day for me to put my sunglasses on and glare sardonically whilst muttering about foolish xenophobes, but as I said, I loved it.
If you take the festival for what it is, it's just great fun. It is silly by definition, how can you not enjoy seeing a small child shoot a ballista way off target and then run off screaming "Yeeeeaaah, Immma Vikinnng!"? He may have his history all confused but at least he is interested and not sat at home playing Call of Duty.
I think that sometimes, people who come from places that are rich in history consider themselves a bit superior to those from younger countries - as if, because we have a landscape littered with castles, we care more, or have a natural appreciation for our heritage. That's clearly fallacy, just look at the policies of the Lib-Con coalition (what do you mean you have no interest in UK Government policy? - They basically hate preserving old things despite being mostly Conservative *sighs*) One of the major problems with the way history is often interpreted in my homeland is that we seem to feel we have to take it very seriously, people must be learning all the time to make it worth the entrance fee.
I think learning should be fun. If someone goes to an event like the renaissance festival and it then encourages them to pick up a book and learn something accurate about the Medieval or Tudor period then I think that is fantastic, it's done more than the job it set out to do. Then when that person goes next year they can direct a withering glare at the nearest kilt wearer and shout "You, sir are living a Victorian lie, a LIE I say!" Then flounce off dramatically - what could be more fun than that?
I wanted to write this post because whilst we were eating lunch we were watching two small boys fight with plastic swords. It reminded me of watching the exact same thing at Richmond Castle in North Yorkshire some years ago. Those children were thousands of miles apart but doing exactly the same thing. I don't think it matters that two of them were in a field in Ohio and two were in one of the best preserved Norman buildings in the world. They were all engaging with and enjoying history on their own terms.
So, huzzah for the renaissance festival, huzzah for fun, huzzah for Americans being American and as Bill Shakespeare wrote "Cry God for Harry, England and St. George!"
This is a great take on the Ren Fair, from someone with every right to be dismayed by such inaccurate a festival, thanks Karis. I want to consider something critically, as we should as historians, though. As a pacifist, I have to wonder if, other than the obvious difference of action vs. sitting, how far off is playing Call of Duty from the festivals of yore that modern Ren Fairs are based on? My answer is that it's not that far off, what does everyone else think?
ReplyDeleteI like your take on Renaissance Festivals, Karis, but I fear you've got me in rant mode now. Even within sword fighting there is additional room for education and increased awareness. Chris, I think there is some distinction between styles of sword-fighting-- stage combat, slash-and-hack-"I-want-to-be-Errol-Flynn," different historical styles, and sport.
ReplyDeleteAs a fencer, I am constantly bombarded with (once the fact is revealed), "Oh cool! I love [swashbuckler film here]!" or "Yeah! I got a broadsword at a Renaissance Festival!" While it is a smaller subset, it is a sport with a history of its own separate from slashing and hacking away at someone-- something that is sometimes difficult to explain to people raised on Pirates of the Caribbean, or Errol Flynn films for that matter. The weapons are not particularly dangerous unless someone is really screwing around, which is bad. In fact, someone is probably more likely to hurt themselves (putting out a knee, pulling a muscle, tripping, slipping, etc.) than they are to hurt someone else. Sadly, it is this very fact that bothers me so much about Renaissance Festivals and assumptions about sword fighting; so many people automatically assume that it is some kind of mindless violence or some sort of poorly fleshed-out historical reenactment (or kids just playing around), rather than actually bothering to fill gaps in their knowledge (not by any fault of their own necessarily, however.). There are some people at Ren Fests that are well-educated and others that are... not so much to put it gently. Different genres have their own very distinct roots, styles, and weapons. So while I could liken some aspects of sword fighting to modern video games, others, I am afraid I must say that it depends on the circumstances.
On the Call of Duty vs. Ren Faire activities, Call of Duty can make combat and violence seem very easy and casual. Kids pick up a controller, shoot some people and blow things up, then set down the controller to do something else. The two kids at the Ren Faire, however, demonstrated to themselves how much different real fighting is from a video game. In their crude flailing away with plastic swords, they now have some level of appreciation for the time and discipline "real" sword fighting would require. Swordplay, even the choreographed version at the Fair, requires focus, determination, and long time spent training. It wasn't a game. It was real. That is what I feel is the difference between a video game and the Ren Fair.
ReplyDelete