The critics presumably resented a government heritage department supporting bad re-enactment in undermining good teaching and research. If we can acquire a reputation amongst museum curator, historians and archaeologists for well presented and historically accurate re-enactments then we will have plenty of interesting events and a healthy cash flow. In my opinion we should maintain the same high standards. As I have said, if the audience does not appreciate the accuracy, it will not detract from their opinion either, all other things being equal. However, there is always the outside chance that the curator of a prestigious museum will be visiting the fete.
Reputation spreads slowly and unpredictably.
If we are excellent all the time, we will have more chance of getting the breaks, and less chance of taking critical knocks. An archery target consists of five concentric rings. The inner are red and gold. The gold is the bull's eye. I see the historical accuracy 'target' as being like an archery target 10 meters in diameter, with a tiny red only 10 cm in diameter, and a cloud of golds, each no more than a few millimeters in diameter, clustered around the centre of the red.