Where do we draw the line for realism?

War is offensive and these days you are practically assured someone will be upset at about anything. You did stipulate it has to be G rated and creativity is the primary criteria. IMHO, simply showing people being slaughtered or focusing on blood and gore doesn't sound very creative or informative.

Tom

With faver beans....

I am almost ashamed to admit that I am a history major and had not heard of thi. Let him do it... and let him amaze you with how clever he will depict it in a tasteful way. I am sure he will understand the need for discretion without limits being placed on him. And be sure to get pictures to post on ABMS.

rich

I think you start with the idea that it's preferrable to teach kids to tell the truth...

And then speread that idea amongst your collegues.

Back around 1970 or so a guy came to our local IPMS meeting with a hughe R/C tank.

Aside from all of the obvious features it had a fully functioning gun, modified from a .22 automatic.

That may come under the "going too far" catagory.

Tom

I agree entirely. The fact is, war isn't pretty. If your going to allow a depiction of an actual event, then stand aside and allow him to proceed with the project.

In this day and age there is someone out there that would be offended by an empty box of air. They'll learn something about history that might just open their eyes up to the reality of life, War is Hell, let it be shown that way!!

Good day, Francis Marion

I have a feeling I know what this diorama is...

A young man who fits your description posted some pictures of just such a diorama on the Missing Lynx

Constructive Comments forum a couple of weeks ago. It started quite a firestorm of controversy, and the entire thread was removed by the forum moderators soon thereafter (though not because of the content of the diorama, but rather the discussion devolved into heated politics and historical revisionism).

The diorama portrayed a German soldier in a snowy field, leveling his MG at an American soldier who was pleading for his life. Next to him was a dead GI in a pool of bright red blood. In no way could it be construed as G-rated.

I wrote:

Easy solution-

If one of the stipulations is its suppose to be G rated and it isn't, they haven't met the terms of the assignment and it should be rejected or should be downgraded accordingly.

Tom

Personally, I'm amazed and pleased to learn that Malmedy has not been forgotten. Too much history has been forgotten or white washed. The student's diorama could and should educate the other kids and adults into what actually happened there. The truth of it is brutal; POWs were murdered. I'd say give the student your blessings, but he or she has a tough row to hoe with this subject if a G-Rating is to be adhered.

One rule of thumb I've always used is to keep the blood and gore to a minimum. It's one thing to model men falling like logs before the muzzle of a cycling MG42, it's an entirely another matter to litter the diorama with blown apart bodies and blood soaked snow. The brutality can be conveyed without all that business. Just tell the student to tone it down. A soldier armed with a MP40 aimed at a running captive pretty much says what needs to be said without modeling exit wounds.

WmB

To reply, get the HECK out of there snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.net

I guess the real question is, what are you trying to teach these children? Are you teaching a class in political correctness, or are you trying to teach concepts like truth, honesty and objectivity in their historical investigations? Which of those values do you think will better prepare them for adult life in the 21st century?

Bill

those offended by history have no future. i suspect the kid is not a gore hound and will have a sense of decorum. and perhaps a discreetword to him in that vein will work. "history ain't pretty, bub."

-kieth laumer

did he threaten the judges? that would be too far.

The "significance" of the event can be depicted without going into "the gory details". Imagine a diorama showing shocked family members reading of the massacre (such as family gathered around Grandpa, who is prominently holding up a newspaper, featuring a headline about the event). The looks on their faces, as well as their body language; reflects the shock, horror, and sorrow; about losing a family member. In the background, on the living room wall, hangs a portrait of that now-fallen family member, standing proudly in his uniform. A calendar hangs on the wall, showing that the date is soon after the event. A window, looking out into the yard beyond, has a "star" pasted on it. Diplayed along with the diorama, perhaps being incorporated into the base; is a reproduction of a period newspaper account, of the event. (Preferably, the same newspaper account that the Grandpa is holding...)

Historically 100% accurate? Probably not.... Use of artistic license? Definitely...that being the point.

Let the viewers' own imagination create the "horror".

No, but he did arrive unannounced driving the beast down the stairs to the bank's meeting room.

IIRC he had to fork over a few $ for some minor damage caused by the tank to the woodwork.

It took two guys to load the thing into his pickup truck.

I have heard of a N.California group that do this on weekends, actually knocking out each other's tanks.

Australia has a great group doing this with surface ships in 1/72 scale.

Tom

I'd have no problem with the diorama,he can do it without the blood and gore...hell he could even do it as a depiction of some sort of memorial service on the site after the war. What I can't figure out is...how does 9/11/01 count as 20th century history,as it happened 9 months into the 21st?And why hasn't anyone else noticed this?

Hi:

I disagree massively with Ron.

I got my WWII history in the grade school library reading the Landmark books. Depicted in these book were artist drawings of massive Battle of Britain air battles and battleships firing guns at each other. Then there were the Dave Dawson series of fiction books. "D.D. in the RAF," "D.D. in the FAA," and "D.D. in the USA Air Corp." His copilot and turret gunner was a bloke named Freddy Farmer. The good guys always won.

The purpose of all this, besides it just being plain interesting, was to motivate me to read. Actually, when I discovered the Landmark books, I was in a remedial reading program where they pulled me out of class and plunked me in the library. This was totally unnecessary since I could read just fine. I just needed interesting material.

Anyhow, this level of material is enough to spark the imagination of a kid without going overboard on the gore. I say let kids be kids. There is plenty of time left in life to be shocked at adult material.

I also midly object to "model projects" as class material, unless it is an art class. Kids need to read, and spell, and write, and think, and debate, and study democracy, and learn foreign languages, and develop social skills. I say, make them read "Democracy in America" by Alexis DeTocqueville. I had to read that book and it was dreadful. But at least I learned enough not to be snookered into voting for George Bush.

So Ron. Haven't you heard about Columbine?

...../Vess Estes Park, Colorado

I did not even touch on that aspect; as I was simply trying to illustrate that it was possible to convey the "horrors of war" without actually depicting the gore. I used his Malmede reference as an example.

the sea battles must be fun to watch. i bet it isn't too easy to get hits,