Mindset.

Trudging around in the pissing rain at CR was certainly atmospheric, i'll give it that.

For me though, i think it was probably Op Husky, the Brit side seemed to work together as a functioning unit, the Germans were a great, cohesive opponent and the site just seemed to fit the game so well, i felt like i could almost have been in Sicily in '43.

Good question. It's been a gradual process, but I feel much more like a reenactor than an airsofter now. And the transformation for many others on here also appears to be evident. Joining AFRA focussed my mind too.

First game - Battle of the Bulge. Put the airsoft mindset away and got a tingle from seeing a distant group of yanks combing through the woods. Hmmm, that's looks real! Noticed the immense difference in those that were blatting airsofters and those that were getting more out of it.

Churchills put the seal on it though - miserable as it was. No enemy contact for three quarters of an hour or more, piss wet through, hardly a shot fired all weekend. Just a tempting glimpse at what it might have felt like. In a safe ghey way, nothing like reality of course, but in your mind that's how it might be.

Emphasised at Bryansk. Sat in a vehicle convoy - no place to go except to do our job - with that tightening of the stomach, sweat down the back, way - knowing that at any second we could be blasted by an unseen ambush and that would be the end of everything.

Id definately have to say Bryansk/Husky, the realism factor of a coherant unit and the amazing sites just made it seem all the more real also the quality of kit was superb far beyond the standard SISK and the effort put in by players to "look the part" was truly superb, looking over my shoulder in that forest for Bryansk seing the amazing site that truly looked the part then seing Barrie and Anne in there soviet kit behind me and turning around to see the imaculately dressed peadot clad germans storming down the hill brought on the realisation that this was beyond anything I had ever dreamed I would have experienced.

Mine changed when i started attending re-enactment events and shows.

And by that i mean that the two co-existed seperatley for some time.

I was airsofting at open days and themed events but attending re-enactment shows entirely seperatley for some time before we did clash of eagles.

Combing the two just became the best idea really as i could flog the wardrobes full of DPM and flecktarn to get some lovley antique stuff!

Ummmm, perhaps my mind will change when I goto Crich in a few weeks time.

I've never really thought of changing the term wwii airsoft in my vocab to "re-enactment". I understand that in the most cases we are re-enacting engagements that may or may not have happened during the war. When people see my pictures (and stupidly enough ask me whether I'm in the army) I say "I do wwii re-enactment through airsoft...." usually followed by an explanation of what airsoft is and how it usually doesnt hurt all that much.

I think perhaps I have this mind set because I still attend modern day games in the mantle of Catterick games, local open day sites, so shooting people with plastic pellets whichever the scenario is still airsoft. The fact that I'm an AFRA member wasn't purely to buy guns, infact, I have actually not bought a new gun in about 2 years, so haven't needed it for that purpose. My AFRA card enables me to explain to PC plod if stopped that I am licensed for using the ones I have, to goto a wwi Airsoft re-enactment.

What is the difference between "us and them" short answer is,... after the years of us doing this,.... not a whole lot infact, as mentioned before many airsofters now call themselves re-enactors... perhaps the definition of what a re-enactor is has changed for some of us, the front of "its a bunch of f-ing stitch counting nazis who pick apart kit and fire blank firing guns" that maybe a few of us thought in the past is more like probably what it's always been, but we've never seen it as such...

To call myself a re-enactor after cinically thinking the above statement once upon a time, is probably a bit hypacritical. However as soon as I go into the garage to pick up my stuff, I know that I'm going to have a crack with the boys and girls of CiA. It'll still be an airsoft game to me, but if I use that to re-enact, surely doesnt that make me a re-enactor, and the definitions and bounderies would cease to divide what has the potential to break bonds and cause ill feeling amongst friends.

From Wikipedia
"Historical reenactment is a type of roleplay in which participants attempt to recreate some aspects of a historical event or period. This may be as narrow as a specific moment from a battle, such as the reenactment of Pickett's Charge at the Great Reunion of 1913, or as broad as an entire period."

Other definitions:

performing a role in an event that occurred at an earlier time; "the reenactment of the battle of Princeton"

The repetition of an earlier (usually historic) event, as a performance or social event

reenact - enact or perform again; "They reenacted the battle of Princeton"

reenact - enact: act out; represent or perform as if in a play; "She reenacted what had happened earlier that day"

reenact - to enact again; to recreate an event, especially an historical battle

I think I'd have to go with Steiner and say its probably been more of a gradual process rather than just one moment of realisation. Although it has become more obvious to me in recent months with a change in attitude towards kit and the way I approach each event. I'm no longer happy making do with look a like kit and I actually want to be able to sleep in a period tent and eat the right food.

It probably started with Bryansk, being a few events in so I'd gotten over the OMG! moments that Kermit mentioned plus the nature of the site and event just ment it felt like more than just a game. Each successive game then built on that with greater emphasis on coherent units and a 'wartime' attitude to the point where I do consider myself a reenactor depsite never having been to a 'proper' reenacting event.

I'm quite happy with the Wikipedia definition as it seems very clear.
Therefore players at CiA/PBI events clearly come under the definition of reenacting. In fact I know it DOES. What we do is private battles using bb guns instead of black firers - niether of which have any bearing on the term 'reenactment'. On the other hand, attending an open day (no matter what you are wearing) is clearly airsoft skirmishing.

Are Roundhead/Cavalier reenactors any different if they use metal pikestaffs or rubber ones? (Heh, they probably don't use pikestaffs but just and illustration!)

So, following on from Webby's thoughtful thread - the 'am I a reenactor?' angst (as covered on previous threads) seems to stem either from a concern about kit standards (and what others might think) or a narrow concept of what a reenactor IS (standing behind a rope at a railway event, maybe).

a narrow concept of what a reenactor IS (standing behind a rope at a railway event, maybe).

I think it's more to do with the concept of what a reenactor WAS, which has (only quite recently) distinctly changed into what it is now, thanks to more and more crossover of people and culture, and now certainly includes ww2 airsoft skirmishing.

A very broad definition.

Kits a hard one to clarify isnt it.

I mean someone has to make a subjective decision as to someones commitment.

Using the wiki definition if i put on a flecktarn jacket, my dads old grey suit trousers and some wellies am i still a re-enactor re-eancting an SS soldier if that is my whole hearted intention to honestly portray the events that man woudl have taken part in with the best of my abilities and limited budget.

Again i'm taking that to a ludicrous degree but my point being is that while we all agree that having a great set of kit means jack if your mind is set in 2009 and you'd rather be playing 'ghost recon', equally at what point does a 're-eancting' set of clothes become incredulous?

Purely for speculation and devils argument, i personally really like the definition and agree I'm just trying to further the deabte.

Perhaps its more of a realisation, by definition I am a re-enactor, but by my own standards of kit in certain aspects, I wouldn't class myself as a re-enactor. Like I wouldnt know what the difference between a '39 and a '40 pattern BD blouse would be (other than looks) or when it was used etc.

See, I think of Yith as being a re-enactor, everything is precisely right, he re-enacts things to the Nth degree and is dissapointed with himself if something isn't correct and strives to put it right. I wouldn't consider myself that passionate (for lack of a better word) about getting kit right, although some would say I do try with my US stuff. Now do you consider different levels of what it means to think you are / or being defined as a re-enactor.... no... not really, like CW pointed out, we're all doing re-enactment, and as lardy said, the levels of kit are phenominal, but there may still be those who don't Feel like they're a re-enactor, whether it be from their impression of what a re-enactor is (my opinion used to be those who'd goto War and Peace and shoot at eachother with blank firers) or whether they believe their level of kit and perhaps attitude towards our 'games' means that they are not at a re-enacting level. -- attachment is not available --

but there may still be those who don't Feel like they're a re-enactor, whether it be from their impression of what a re-enactor is (my opinion used to be those who'd goto War and Peace and shoot at eachother with blank firers) or whether they believe their level of kit and perhaps attitude towards our 'games' means that they are not at a re-enacting level.

Yes, that's it Matt. Silly really - feeling you are not a 'proper' reenactor when you really are one. That's Jay's question isn't it? The mindset.
Frankly there is a misguided perception that reenactor's kit has to be perfect (whatever perfect is). When the reality (as anyone who knows anything about kit realises) is that kit levels vary greatly at shows. No different to 'our side' of things. PBI and 16th SS have gone to shows and been embraced with open arms, regardless of their origins. And why shouldn't it be so? Just as perfect (and imperfect) as anyone else. And yet there is still the nagging fear of being picked up on some dodgy detail or other. Still, I have found the worse culprits for that are the visiting public who delight in telling you when you have some wrong!

I think that once upon a time, not too far in the past, considering ourselves as re-enactors, may have been considered a bit elitest to some eyes.

I believe the mindset of "my kit is better / more accurate than yours is a thing long since dead though. I think narrowing down 'acceptable' kit for games has killed that one off. *cue memories of me wanting to wear my marine gear for Wotan game* I'm my own culprit on that one, feeling a bit hard done by because I couldn't wear my new Marine kit I'd just spent a lot of money on. Reality is, if you're re-enacting, wearing something that would take away from the feel of the game is quite selfish (unless it obviously couldnt be helped i.e. new players wearing lookalike stuff) A notion outlined by Gadge to me a number of weeks back, when I considered going to the Mall in Reading in wwii kit, I would have been taking away some of the realism for all the Multicam sporting players out there who want to kill terrorists. Each to their own, much like you wouldn't want sombody turning up in Molle gear to one of ours.

* nods *

Aye Rich and i could have gone in 40s kit to the mall but it would have been a bit inappropriate really in my eyes.

Suspension of disbelief is quite important to me and it only take s afew jarringly out of place things to take me out of a 40s mindset.A good example thought not 1940s is the first striling services 'all out war' event. The brief for thsi was north koreans were fighting nato.

Nato had to wear UK DPM or US Woodland... simple enough yeah.

North koreans could wear 'any other camo' Now most of us decided this meant to look generically military and preferably with a slightly soviet/ak look etc. Some total divs turned up as UK armed response unit in black kit with 'police' all over it.

While this was indeed 'any other camo' the mindset clearly was not there, they were there to pretend to be rozzers regardless of whetrer it faffed up the immersion for everybody else.

I must admit, I do feel reenactors are getting more open/loose in their desire to have exact kit for themselves and others around them. I mean, at Beltring, I saw loads of Brit 'reenactors' wearing post-war grey elasticated braces (only saw two chaps with the correct white cotton type), quite a bit of black hardware webbing, non-blanco'd webbing with BD (i.e: they weren't the guys portraying Africa/Italy etc) was rife and I didn't hear a word against it, all were just having a good time trying the best they could with what they had.

No... I don't think anyone is getting more open/loose.

There's always been variation in the quality of kit worn by re-enactors, just as with airsofters.

It's not a recent change.

Personally I like to strive for a very high level, and try to do the same with PBI. We are actually more strict with ourselves than some other groups. (When re-enacting in front of the public at least).

However those groups who don't concentrate on kit quality, often excel in other areas.