In a message dated 1/24/06 9:44:07 AM, [log in to unmask] writes:


> I haven't yet seen it, but from what I gather it's more of a lyrical,
> poetical interpretation of the Smith/Pocahontas story and the founding of
> Jamestown than it is intended to be hard historical truth.
>
> I find myself wondering if the same folks that are upset at Malick's "The
> New World" hold Longfellow's poem "Paul Revere's Ride" or Benjamin West's
> painting "The Death of Lord Nelson" in the same disregard for their
> historical inaccuracies.
>
> It's interesting to me that film, for whatever reason, seems to evoke more
> distress or contempt among historians than other artistic media (poetry,
> painting, even fiction) when it comes to portraying historical subject
> matter--anybody have a sense for why this may be?
>
> Cheers,
>
> --Eric
>

Dear Eric:

I think historians and living historians like myself get heartburn watching
Hollywood's attempts at historical interpretations is that they have such a
wide audience and a lot of people take look at what appears on film as the truth!
  Also so many people will go to movies rather than read poetry or go to the
National Gallery of Art or MOMA, sad to say.   Many people start to really
learn about history as children by watching tv or movies with historical themes.
 I know by personal experience that watching historical films got me
interested in history specifically Civil War, Western and WW II.    From watching
film, I wanted to learn more so I started to read about it and got more detailed
and accurate information.    We as living historians get bent out of shape when
there is no obvious attempt to get it right historically or evidence they
really just don't give a damn--all they are concerned about is their art and
story exclusively to the detriment of the history.   Because people believe film
to be accurate, it leads to a   misinformed public.   We do appreciate those
filmmakers who are anal enough to go the extra mile and the get the details,
minutiae and history right in historical films.   Unfortunately there are not
enough good directors to go around but several come to mine:  Ridley Scott does
an exceptional job interpreting war/military conflict from "THe Duellists" to
"Black Hawk Down" to "Kingdom of Heaven".   James Cameron did excellent
research on his movie "The Titanic".   Speilberg did a good job in "Schindlers' List"
and with coproducer Tom Hanks in the awesome HBO miniseries "Band of
Brothers".   Peter Weir did a superb job with "Master and Commander."    Other
excellent historical films that did a good job with clothing, hairstyles, horse
furniture, props and weapons include   Tombstone, Wyatt Earp and the recent Into
the West Miniseries, I am blanking on the directors.   Martin Scorsese's sets
and men's clothing were excellent in "Gangs of New York".  The lower class
women's clothing however looked like the costume designer decided to get artsy
rather than accurate ;-(!!   They all looked like gypsies.   The upper class women
were quite accurate though.   Just some of my reflections on the matter.

Anita L. Henderson
                                                      Atlantic Guard Soldiers
Aid Society

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html