Gary Gutting: Learning History at the MoviesRoundup: Talking About History
Gary Gutting is a professor of philosophy at the University of Notre Dame, and an editor of Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. He is the author of, most recently, “Thinking the Impossible: French Philosophy since 1960,” and writes regularly for The Stone.
Movies are the source of much of what we know — or think we know — about history. Currently, Steven Spielberg’s “Lincoln” is being recommended as a source of knowledge not just about Lincoln and the Civil War but also about politics in general. For example, Ruth Marcus, writing in The Washington Post, has praised the “instructional value” of the film for both President Obama and the current lame-duck Congress. “It presents,” she says, “useful lessons in the subtle arts of presidential leadership and the practice of politics, at once grimy and sublime.” David Brooks has similarly endorsed the film, and in a post in the Civil War series Disunion, the historian Philip Zelikow explains how the film may have actually put forward its own plausible interpretation of the events surrounding the passage of the 13th Amendment. But there are limits to the extent that we can rely on movies to convey historical truth.
Like most popular historical movies, “Lincoln” is not a documentary, but a dramatic presentation. It tells an engaging story, depicts fascinating characters, and has sets and costumes that seem to take us back to Washington in 1865. But to what extent can we trust “Lincoln” (or any other dramatization of history for popular entertainment) as a source of historical fact and understanding? A film drama can present historical events, vividly and movingly perhaps, but it has no place for evidence supporting the truth of the presentation. As a result, simply looking at the movie, we have no way of knowing to what extent “Lincoln” is accurate. This applies to particular details (did Thaddeus Stephens actually wear a wig and have a black mistress?) but most important to the overall interpretation: was Lincoln really a noble politician, reluctantly using patronage and countenancing bribery to achieve a greater good?...
comments powered by Disqus
- Rubio Surges Into Second In New Hampshire
- Branstad Says Cruz Ran ‘Unethical’ Campaign
- Christie Highlights Santorum’s Endorsement of Rubio
- Portman Comes Out Against Trade Deal
- Megyn Kelly Gets a Book Deal
- A Big List of the Bad Things Clinton Has Done
- An Unambiguous Sign Sanders Won Last Night’s Debate
- Still Friends at the End
- Quote of the Day
- Trump Still Leads as Clinton Slips
- Clinton Can’t Shake Image as Wall Street’s Friend
- Maddow Doesn’t See Sanders Winning
- Why Does the Media Still Shield Chelsea Clinton?
- Bush Jokes His Mother May Have Abused Him
- Rubio Closes the Gap in New Hampshire
- Humans Hard-Wired to Teach, Anthropologist Says
- Parents outraged after students shown ‘white guilt’ cartoon for Black History Month
- Maryland is once again considering retiring its state song
- One of the last remaining Nazis goes on trial in Germany
- Inside story finally told of the young US diplomat who cracked the case of the murder of 4 nuns in El Salvador in 1980
- A historian’s advice to students thinking of getting a PhD in a tough economic climate
- German historian Heinz Richter cleared of charges
- English professor uses literature to help cure historical amnesia
- WSJ features an article by a conservative calling for the abolition of Black History Month
- Mary Beard, herself a bestselling author, wonders why more women historians aren't