Author Topic: Fantasy Rifles  (Read 20338 times)

Daryl

  • Guest
Re: Fantasy Rifles
« Reply #25 on: July 15, 2010, 04:31:31 PM »
This "Fantasy Gun" managed 9 out of 12 clays at our local rondy for 1st place, 1 1/8oz reclaimed shot 70gr. of 2F. I like it.



I don't mind THIS fantasy gun, either.


Offline Dr. Tim-Boone

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6538
  • I Like this hat!!
Re: Fantasy Rifles
« Reply #26 on: July 15, 2010, 04:36:21 PM »
Yeah Daryl, I suspect even Dan would approve!!  ;D ;D :D ;)
De Oppresso Liber
Marietta, GA

Liberty is the only thing you cannot have unless you are willing to give it to others. – William Allen White

Learning is not compulsory...........neither is survival! - W. Edwards Deming

northmn

  • Guest
Re: Fantasy Rifles
« Reply #27 on: July 15, 2010, 05:44:34 PM »
That top one is a nice gun but can you fantasize and "elbow hole" in it like Tim showed.  Might lighten it for carrying ::)

DP

Offline Acer Saccharum

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19311
    • Thomas  A Curran
Re: Fantasy Rifles
« Reply #28 on: July 15, 2010, 08:40:23 PM »
That top one is a nice gun but can you fantasize and "elbow hole" in it like Tim showed.  Might lighten it for carrying ::)

DP

May be a handle to pull out of a scabbard?
Tom Curran's web site : http://monstermachineshop.net
Ramrod scrapers are all sold out.

northmn

  • Guest
Re: Fantasy Rifles
« Reply #29 on: July 15, 2010, 10:14:20 PM »
Also would be handy as it would not need sling swivels, just a loop in the butstock.  Could not see any hinges on it to see if it was a folding stock  tactical flintlock.

DP

Offline RifleResearcher

  • Starting Member
  • *
  • Posts: 39
Re: Fantasy Rifles
« Reply #30 on: July 16, 2010, 09:46:41 AM »
As the person who actually “coined” the term “fantasy rifle”, I feel somewhat justified in wading into this discussion, mostly to clarify the actual origin and definition of the phrase once, and hopefully, for all.  For those who took up Gary’s offer to go to his website, the origin is basically covered there, but I will make a few minor clarifications. 

At the time I was hired at Colonial Williamsburg in the late 80’s, Gary, Richard Frazier and I, in particular, had a lot of discussions about what making authentic longrifles really meant.  We kicked a lot of ideas around as we sought to sort through the definitions of words like “authentic”, “replica”, “reproduction”, “historic” and others, and how these words might honestly be used to describe the variety of different longrifles being produced by contemporary makers, including ourselves.

In the midst of all of that, one day I picked up an Atlanta Cutlery catalog that someone had left in the break room.  While thumbing through, I found what I thought was something significant.   They sold a variety of “historic” sword replicas, such as CW swords, samurai swords, Rev War swords, etc..  In another section, they had a different variety of swords.  These were the kind that were common in the “Conan the Barbarian” and other “Swords and Sorcery” kind of films that were popular in the 80’s.  These were sold under the heading of “Fantasy Swords”.    It struck me that here was honest term that could be used to divide contemporary longrifles into two initial categories, those which were historically based, and those whose design origins were mostly the modern creation of their builders. 

On the surface, the two types of swords were remarkably similar.  They all had polished steel blades and decorative hilts.  They sold for roughly the same prices likely even were made in the same factories.  The differences were in their inspiration and intent.  The “historic” swords followed the patterns of swords made in specific times and places.  The “fantasy” ones used the same basic types of parts and configurations, but their designs were not limited by time and place.  Their designers clearly had a knowledge of historic examples, but the swords were composites of historic traits and designs, freely intermixed with 20th century inspirations.   If you showed a picture of a “fantasy” sword to a collector of antique swords, even at a glance they would have been able to identify them as such.  They simply were not tied into the historic timeline.   But most important, they did not claim to be.  Atlanta Cutlery had correctly and honestly categorized them. 

I should say that in some cases, they even looked cooler than the “historic” examples.  They appeared to be of equal, if not superior, finish to the “historic” examples.  The term “Fantasy” was not applied to them as pejorative or insult by Atlanta Cutlery.  It was merely an acknowledgement that if you were looking for a sword to carry as a Confederate cavalryman, you were in the wrong section.  If you were looking for a pretty thing to hang on the wall, impress your friends, or battle Orcs, you had hit the jackpot.

The term, in spite of its misapplication in the 20 plus years that followed by well meaning others, is not about if the barrels are forged of wrought iron or made of steel by Getz, or if the finish is 18th century or poly, or if the gun was precarved, or made with hand tools, or if it were sanded or scraped or with any other issue related to those.  It was not about if it were funky, folky or sophisticated, plain or fancy or how many barrels or oddities.  It is merely a way to divide contemporary longrifles with the same initial honesty that Atlanta Cutlery used.  The simplest test of the difference between a “fantasy” rifle and a “historic” rifle is the same as I described for “fantasy” swords.  If a knowledgeable antique collector or student took a look at your rifle, would they truly think for a moment that it could have existed in the period it purports to be from?  This is not about if it is aged, cloroxed, rusted and is dripping with faux patina.  It is about if the “look” and “feel” of the mounts, the lock, the stock, the decoration, the whole package, fits within the historic timeline that the maker claims.   

I have been shown rifles by contemporary makers that were self described as “fantasy” rifles, that I would have actually categorized as “historic”.   They were not exact copies of original rifles, but their “feel”, their “look” as well as their components and decoration were so firmly rooted in historic American riflemaking schools, that if it were tossed into Mr. Peabody’s “Way Back” machine and transported to the 18th century, they would fit right in.  I have also observed rifles that were purported by their makers to be “historic replicas” that dripped with modern features, designs, innovations, etc..  It was clear from 20 feet away that these were completely modern interpretations that could not have existed in the 18th or 19th centuries and would only be at home in the 20th or 21st centuries.  In other words, a modern "fantasy".  I have also seen rifles that I myself could not fully categorize as historic or fantasy as they sat firmly on the fence between the two.  But there are not many of these.  Most contemporary work can very quickly and easily be divided between "historic" and "fantasy" pieces if you don't have a dog in the fight.

Ironically, I am the first to admit that fantasy rifles, unfettered by time and place, when executed by good smiths who have a feel for design, can be some of the most artistic, beautiful and well crafted rifles anyone would want to see or own.  I actually have a notebook with patchbox and carving designs for fantasy rifles I intend one day to build. 

So why even pick about the difference between fantasy and historic contemporary longrifles?  My concern about the terminology than and now is specifically related to the market for our rifles.  If a maker is creating for collectors and shooters, then if the gun is a fantasy or historic is a matter between the builder and his customer to negotiate.  If, however, the intended customer is a historical reenactor, or the product is created in a museum setting and purported to be representative of a specific time and place, then I think we, as builders, need to be more up front about what we build and what we call it.  I believe rifles made for historical reenactors or other historically based purposes need to be defined differently than work for shooters or collectors or those simply made after our own whim. 

The term “fantasy rifle” is not a judgement of validity, quality, or value.  It is not even about technique or material or most of the other things it has been "fantasized" to be.  It is merely a way to broadly categorize one particular type of contemporary longrifle expression from another particular type of contemporary longrifle expression, inspired by terminology found in an Atlanta Cutlery catalog about 1989.  If anyone tells you any differently, I am pretty sure they are wrong. 

And I think I should know…  ;D

Alan
"Sarcasm: The last refuge of modest and chaste-souled people when the privacy of their soul is coarsely and intrusively invaded."
- Fyodor Dostoevsky

Offline Luke MacGillie

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 245
Re: Fantasy Rifles
« Reply #31 on: July 16, 2010, 12:36:07 PM »
Howdy Alan,

Nice to see you here,

Fled Rucus

northmn

  • Guest
Re: Fantasy Rifles
« Reply #32 on: July 16, 2010, 03:28:17 PM »
Ok we got off track a bit, but we are close.  You can buy a kit from TOW as designed by John Bivens.  Its a nice rifle and would fit into what is being talked about, but Bivens was not contemporary to Isaac Haines.  Most of us, even scratch builders, are somewhat limited to what is available as buttplates and triggerguards.  While I can saw out my own patchboxes and toe plates, etc I really cannot see a desire to set up a foundary.  There were a lot of gunsmiths back then such that a fantasy rifle is an interpretation of what someone might have built (TOW cliams Bivens used Haines as an inspiration for the Bivens kit) or a slight mixture of schools, whcih could be done by someone with a good eye.  I have seen a picture of an original Bucks CO. rifle with a daisy patchbox which looks fine.  The caveat that one should not mix parts from different schools has always been a strong one and as a rule collectors especially will condemn such actions.
A lot of individuality is probably in the use of the enhancements, such as carving and engraving.  One kind of likes to individualize the carving and I am sure engravers do the same.  Not all of the early creations have survived,  I would not even guess at what fraction has.  Most of our fantasy is in creating something that "may have" been built.  As of yet I cannot quite picture a longrifle as used in Cimmeria or Middle Earth but it could be interesting.

DP

Offline smshea

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 592
    • www.scottshearifles.com
Re: Fantasy Rifles
« Reply #33 on: July 16, 2010, 03:36:28 PM »
Well said Alan! That really helps clear things up (for me at least). I like that definition.  It would seem that using that definition most of what I do, including the gun I'm planing fit well into the Historical category.
 A few years back I had a guy ask me if I could carve his motorcycle on the buttstock and engrave the Harley Davidson emblem on the Patch box....he was serious....I said NO! I would think that to be an extream example of "Fantasy."

RifleBarrelGun

  • Guest
Re: Fantasy Rifles
« Reply #34 on: July 16, 2010, 03:55:24 PM »

AMFGAD

All My Favorite Gunsmiths Are Dead

jwh1947

  • Guest
Re: Fantasy Rifles
« Reply #35 on: July 16, 2010, 04:13:55 PM »
RifleBarrelMaker...mine,too, all but one.  :D

Scotty...send those Harley heads up to me.  I'll have one of the girls put that logo in  and add the inscription, "Live to ride and just shoot all the others."  I recommend a 30" barrel; should look really tacky hanging out of a rhinestone-studded saddle bag on a soft tail with monkey bars.  Dolly Parton said it best.  "It takes a lot of money to look really cheap."  Who knows, the judges at Dixon's might like really like it...you know...contemporary class.  ::)

Rifle Researcher...where you been, bro?  It is always uplifting to read material from a true professional.  Incidentally, KRA slow to learn.  Does that surprise you?  Claptrap about poem/song "Hunters of Kentucky" being etymologically significant still appears in the new roster, in spite of your best recent efforts.   ??? ??? 

Offline Captchee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 768
Re: Fantasy Rifles
« Reply #36 on: July 16, 2010, 04:29:13 PM »
  Some years back  I decided to start sand casting some of  my own  hardware
 For ¼ of the cost of a parts assembly a person can buy or make everything needed  to  be able to  cast material all the way up to iron .
 Frankly I got tiered of looking through cataloged after cataloged and see basically the same parts availability , over and over    .
 I also saw the price for those parts going up and up . While at the same time the quality going down and down
 Granted it would probably not be  cost effective for someone who is  only going to do one or two rifles . Myself I consider it to be just another  skill added to  the total scheme of things

 Allen .  Thank you , very well said .
 I think to often we try to conform to a given set of  peer pressures. especially when w deviate from the accepted norm .
 In reality though  all to often , if one truly digs , a person can find reference’s if not examples of  un common period  pieces . The odd thing is that all to often even  examples that were produced  in greater numbers then just one or two , get thrown into  the fantasy category . When in fact they are period   and in some case produced in far larger numbers then many folks  want to accept .
As such the ‘what is and what is not fantasy “ waters get muddied  up considerably .
 One thing  I would agree with Dpharis on is that we should build to the best of our abilities , regardless of what is being made .
 This doesn’t mean there will not be flaws . One should learn  and be able to see a progression as they grow in experience .

 I also think its often harder for some folks to  take the step  into making an  piece original to themselves , then it is to settle into doing only what is the norm. OR what is accepted as the norm .
 That being said . I would also agree with you that there should be a clear line  that’s dictated by the customer as to what they want . If the piece is to be used for re-enacting …… then we owe  it to that customer to produce a product within their guidelines . If not then turn the job down .

 Speaking for myself though . I rather enjoy it when a customer  doesn’t draw a line . When thy say . Do what  you want , be artistic . I don’t care if it follows a strict  line of Period  documentation .

Again Allen sir . Very good and interesting post

Offline Dr. Tim-Boone

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6538
  • I Like this hat!!
Re: Fantasy Rifles
« Reply #37 on: July 16, 2010, 07:50:04 PM »
Thanks Alan, sanity is always helpful!!  I like and build historical guns, not bench copies, but my interpretations. ............ I might like to build a fantasy gun for Hobbit!!
De Oppresso Liber
Marietta, GA

Liberty is the only thing you cannot have unless you are willing to give it to others. – William Allen White

Learning is not compulsory...........neither is survival! - W. Edwards Deming