Kerridwen Harvey <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>I am interested in hearing points of view/experiences with various forms
>of living history interpretation, specifically, costumed interpretation,
>first-person, and third-person.  What type(s) does your site or museum
>use?  Why have you chosen one over the other?  What advantages do you
>see in using costumed interpreters, first-person, or third-person?   Do
>you feel the use of costumed interpreters is declining or increasing?
>How about first-person interpretation?

>I have been doing a fair bit of reading in this area but would like some
>human input in this research.

>Thanks.
>--
>Kerridwen Harvey
>Harvey Heritage Services
>(819) 827-0762 (tel)         (819) 827-5613 (fax)
>[log in to unmask]

Kerridwen, et. al.;

At Fort Langley National Historic Site in beautiful Fort Langley,
British Columbia (near Vancouver), we continue to use costumed
interpreters (Heritage Communicators) in a third person mode.  We find
that the visitors enjoy the colour of the costume while feeling
comfortable talking with the staff and making correlations between old
and new.

The site is located next to the Canadian National Railroad mainline to
Vancouver, a grass airstrip and float plane base, as well as waterways
and roadways with lots of boat, car and truck traffic.  There are MANY
modern distractions located around the site so that suspending time
and reality are quite difficult.  Also, we feel that the one-on-one
contact helps the visitor to understand the site messages of national
significance.

The costumed interpreter is easily identified as a site member
(whether staff or volunteer) and visitors can ask them questions about
what they see, participate in various activities, enquire about
amenities, etc.

In using a third-person approach, staff and volunteers still have to
know the basic story, but they do not need to spend large amounts of
time researching specific individuals, their intricate role in the
site, or portray only one, unique character, but they can experience a
variety of opportunities, occupations,  and personages that have been
identified with the historic site.

True, certain people are better suited to certain roles (i.e. Native
interpreters telling the Native story, etc.), however, more variety in
work experience is available if one is not tied to being one
individual.  And the experience can be quite different from hour to
hour.  In the morning, one could be of the Gentleman class, while a
little while later, be pounding iron in the blacksmith's shop.  Early
in the afternoon, you could be panning for gold and sharing the
excitement of the goldrush and then end up making barrels in the
cooperage or leaning on a hoe in the garden.

In each location, telling the story of the site in third-person, and
giving the messages of significance are more easily done, with less
study and personal research (especially for short-time staff or
anxious volunteers) than what is usually considered necessary for a
similar presentation using the first-person mode.  Personally, I love
first-person interpretation, but have been strongly advised that that
is not our method or mandate.

I trust this has given you some material upon which to chew.  Best
wishes in your continuing search.

Gerry


Gerry Borden
[log in to unmask] * http://users.uniserve.com/~gborden/welcome.htm
Lead, Gentlemen of Fortune Barbershop Harmony Chorus
Heritage Communicator, Fort Langley National Historic Site
"If it ain't Harmony.. it's History!"