Article Summary: An opinion piece on the fact that the hobby does not have a universally recognized proper name (Movie Props? Screen-Used Props? Prop Collecting?), and my view of what terms do and don’t make sense, to varying degrees, and why. This state of the hobby is reflective of its early development stage.
The Hobby Without a Name…
One thing I’ve always been fascinated about is the fact that “the hobby” has not yet been formerly designated with a name that is universally recognized or predominantly used.
Many of us collectors refer to the hobby in a variety of ways:
- Prop Collecting
- Props and Costumes
- Screen-Used Props
- Original Movie Props
- Prop Hobby
- Movie Props & Wardrobe
- Movie Memorabilia
- Prop Memorabilia
The word choice and combinations in current use seem endless.
My opinions on this…
I had come to my own personal conclusion about this predicament some time ago, and have referred to the hobby in a very specific way, using very specific words. I hoped, as a result, it would “catch on” if you will, on its own. Call it a personal experiment. So this is a subject I’ve never really broached as a specific topic on any online discussion forum, in that I’ve in many ways tried to have an influence on it solely via open use and practice, rather than through direct expression of opinion or lobbying of any kind.
A Process of Elimination
I found the most logical path in coming to the most appropriate selection and combination of words began as a process of elimination, in that so many words and combinations were already in use that, I felt, weren’t the correct ones
Identifying the words that do not work (for me, anyway!) made finding the correct words and combinations obvious. What follows are a few of the most commonly used words that I think are not the best in describing the hobby.
Memorabilia
First off, any use of the term “memorabilia”, in my view, is not optimal, in that it is not specific enough.
Everyone that collects anything has a notion of what “memorabilia” is – it is, essentially, any collectible related to the object of attraction itself. So, in the case of film and television, it could be posters, action figures, collector plates… In fact, there is already a notion of “movie memorabilia”, in the minds of most, and I think many other types of specific collectibles would come to mind before props and costumes.
In fact, leveraging the opinion of the grand daddy of categorization – eBay – the is a “Memorabilia” subset that include a large selection of very different items – all that is required is some tie to Film or Television.
“Memorabilia” allows for things that are not part of the hobby to be included along with props and wardrobe.
Movie
Another word commonly associated with the hobby is “Movie”. Personally, I like the word “Film” better myself, but that is neither here nor there (though “Movie” seems to be a much more popular choice).
The problem I have with the use of “Movie” is that, in contrast to the first example (“Memorabilia” being too general), “Movie” is too specific. Many in the hobby collect props and wardrobe from television as well, so calling the hobby the “Movie Prop Hobby” or “Movie Props” is too specific to refer to the hobby as a whole.
“Movie” leaves things out, by definition, that are very much part of the hobby.
Prop: A Great Term That Can No Longer Stand Alone
Which brings us to the most commonly used word in referring to the hobby: “Prop”.
This is a great word, in that it is specific to the actual item we collect. It also is the accepted industry term, which is defined as “any movable articles or objects used on the set of a play or movie”.
Therefore, upon initial consideration, “Prop Hobby” or “Prop Collecting” is great!
However, there are two problems:
My first issue is that another hobby has usurped the word “Prop” and adopted as their own. The red-headed step child (or is it the cousin?) of this hobby is the replica prop hobby, which involves the collection of licensed and unlicensed (“fan made”) props and wardrobe (i.e. not from the actual production). So, as a result, “Prop Hobby” needs a qualifier to note which hobby we are talking about – real props from the production of the film or television program – or replica props – two very different pursuits and two very different collectibles. I will get back to the exploration of this issue in a moment…
My second issue with the word “Prop” is that it only covers half of the equation – we hobbyists also collect “Costumes” or “Wardrobe”. This, coincidentally, is really the one component of this exercise I have yet to neatly come to terms with, in that throwing that added word into the mix (“Costume” or “Wardrobe”) makes it quite a mouthful… So I’d like to think (and hope) that “Prop” covers it all, and I think in many ways it does it well enough, though it’s not as neat and tidy a solution as I’d like it to be. But I’ll survive…
Getting back to my first issue with the word “Prop” – replica vs. real – and that sought after qualifier that is required to convey that difference, and truly define what this hobby is about.
Screen-Used? Screen-Matched?
One word that was commonly used as a qualifier, when I came on the scene, is the term “Screen-Used”. My first problem with the word, coming from a background of being formally educated in writing, is that it should be hyphenated, but is most often not (and is expressed as “screenused”, as though it is an actual word).
My bigger issue with the term, as was the same with the use of the word “Movie”, is that it is too specific. The term has come to mean, for many, that the piece in question is, literally, seen on screen. For others, it simply means it is an item that has been filmed during the production – but in my opinion, it is still difficult to guarantee it has both been filmed and appears in the final cut of the film. Another bit of provenance is required to make such a claim, and it must be compelling. As an aside, it is possible in specific cases, such as with one of a kind items, to know something was “screen-used” – if it is the only one, it is certain to have been filmed and seen in the final cut.
Regardless, the use of this term, to globally describe and encapsulate the hobby at large, is obviously problematic on many fronts. One, if something is put forth as having been absolutely identified on screen, another term has come into use which is more accurate and specific: “screen-match”. Meaning, there is some method by which the piece in question has been literally matched to a screencap (a static frame captured from the film or television program). Usually, this is accomplished via matching up specific marks, damage, weathering/painting, etc.
So the term “Screen-Used”, I feel, is inherently challenging to use properly, in that if an item is “Screen-Matched”, it is also “Screen-Used” be default; if it is not “Screen-Matched”, it becomes more difficult to prove that it is positively seen on the screen (though this can be proven, as noted above, though it is certainly not a given in most situations).
My other (admittedly nit-picky) issue with the term “Screen-Used” is that it is of a somewhat clumsy construction, with a poor choice of words. I think “filmed” is a better word choice, in that “used” modifies “screen”, and it is a medium that is filmed. How it is ultimately viewed and displayed (on a movie screen, on a TV, on a monitor, etc.) is not that relevant.
In any event, I’m partial to the use of the terms “Filmed” and “Matched”, in terms of constructing a lexicon specific to the hobby, and in the pursuit of outlining the provenance of a specific piece; I am not a fan of “Screen-Used”, as it is often mistakenly used either as a global definition of the hobby, which is too broad, or is used in place of “Screen-Matched”, which is a better term for that meaning as most people understand it, in my opinion.
Keeping it Specific, Accurate, and Concise
Anyway, getting back to the matter at hand, the other opinion I have is that the hobby should be referred to in no more than three words, lest it becomes a mouthful (and, in turn, rarely used in practice, which defeats the whole purpose). Hence the (at this time) elimination of the word “wardrobe” or “costume” (which I already noted I’m not pleased about, but it is what it is – I think brevity trumps dotting every “i” and crossing every “t”).
Prop
In my opinion, one term is absolutely necessary, and that is the word “Prop”. As noted earlier, it is the technical, industry term used to refer to these items we collect (and, I believe, is often extended to wardrobe or some wardrobe pieces as well – ex. a hat is often a prop). I think “Prop” is the single best individual word with which to refer to the object of our desire in collecting. This is the foundational element and, I would argue, the one word that is absolutely required, regardless of other word choice.
Also, as noted, I feel strongly that this word needs to be qualified, so that it stands apart from “replica” collecting and the replica hobby. Other terms used – “Screen-Used”, “Screen-Matched”, etc., are specific to actual use and provenance and are, in short, too specific.
Original
The one word that I feel most strongly encompasses what this hobby about is “Original”, which to me is shorthand for “original to the production”. As I’ve discussed the hobby with fellow collectors over the years, the pieces under consideration that are valid are “original” props or “original” production pieces. As a side note, the word “Production” is often used as part of the hobby lexicon, but I feel it is not suited to be part of the name of the hobby as it requires too many qualifiers – it does not stand on its own in the way that “Original” does – “Original” requires no further explanation.
Another issue that crops up now and again is the introduction of replicas that come from “original molds”, and some people view such pieces as “original props”, or, at the very least, “not replica props”. In my opinion, a piece is either original or it is not original (and therefore is a replica by default).
The test for this (which will be explored in a future blog topic) is whether it was made for the production, at the time of the production. Hence, “original to the production”. Even if it is not literally used or filmed, or seen on screen, it can still be “original”.
Therefore, the personal conclusion I’ve come to regarding the name of the hobby is “Original Props” or “Original Prop Hobby” (the latter of which hits the three word limit).
I feel those two terms capture what is necessary to encompass what this hobby is about.
Also appropriate would be “Original Prop Collecting” or “Original Props and Wardrobe [or Costumes]”.
I like “Original Props” in that it is short and to the point (unlike this editorial).
Anyway, I have always been fascinated by the fact that I participate in a hobby without a globally recognized and used formal name. More so, that, to my knowledge, it’s something that has never even been brought up in a public forum. Having said that, I had personally adopted the paired term “original prop” some time ago.
So that is my opinion, and obviously the branding of this blog might have been a tip off to my conclusion, but I’d be interesting in hearing the views and opinions of others on this topic.
Perhaps someday everyone will be on the same page, and we’ll all call the hobby the same thing. But as it stands today, I think it is more likely the “Hobby with No Name” or the “Hobby with a Thousand Names”…
Jason De Bord