HISTORICAL FILM RECEPTION: AN ETHNOGRAPHIC FOCUS BEYOND
ENTERTAINMENT
by
VINCENT J. BISSON
A THESIS
Presented to the Interdisciplinary Studies Program:
Individualized Program
and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
Master of Arts
June 2010
11
"Ilisiorical I,'ilm Reception: An Ethnographic ,,"oeus beyond I~ntertainrnent," a thesis
pn.:pared by Vincent.l. Bisson ill partial fulfillment of tile reqllircrllcnts 1'01' the Master or
Arts degree in 1I11~ Inh,~l'disciplinary Studies Progl'lllll: Individualized Progralll. This thesis
Date
Committee in Charge:
Accepted by:
Ik Daniel Wojcik, Chair
Dr. Jeffrey Hanes
Dr. Bish Sen
Dean of the Graduate School
An Abstract of the Thesis of
Vincent J. Bisson for the degree of
in the Interdisciplinary Studies Program: Individualized Program
to be taken
111
Master of Arts
June 2010
Title: HISTORICAL FILM RECEPTION: AN ETHNOGRAPHIC FOCUS BEYOND
ENTERTAINMENT
Approved: _
Dr. Daniel Wojcik, chair
Approved: -,------ _
Dr. Jeffrey Hanes
Approved: _
Dr. Bish Sen
Drawing upon theories from folkloristics, history, and audience studies, this thesis
analyzes historical films, their reception, and the importance of history and film in
everyday life. Using an interdisciplinary approach, I demonstrate how a folkloric
perspective may contribute to and strengthen the study ofhistorical films by emphasizing
the attributes of narrative and belief at the vernacular level of reception. With an
ethnographic and qualitative focus on the informal, common, and everyday film viewing
habits of specific individuals in relation to historical belief, this project provides
empirical evidence that is necessary for a more accurate understanding of the function
and reception of historical films. This study also re-examines the formal aspects of
historical films in relation to historical re-construction, the definition and categorization
of such films, their reception, their function beyond entertainment, and the need for an
integration of new research in both audience studies and folklore studies.
IV
CURRICULUM VITAE
NAME OF AUTHOR: Vincent J. Bisson
PLACE OF BIRTH: Detroit, Michigan
DATE OF BIRTH: April 27, 1984
GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE SCHOOLS ATTENDED:
University of Oregon, Eugene
Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne
DEGREES AWARDED:
Master of Arts, IS: Folklore, 2010, University of Oregon
Bachelor of Arts, Humanities, 2006, Florida Institute of Technology
AREAS OF SPECIAL INTEREST:
Historical Films
Audience Studies
Qualitative Interviews
Public History
Historical Consciousness
The Function of History
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE:
Composition Graduate Teaching Fellow, University of Oregon, August 2009 -
June 2010
Research Support Technician, Educational Policy Improvement Center,
September 2008 - August 2009
v
Randall V. Mills Archives ofNorthwest Folklore Data Entry Project, University
of Oregon, August - December 2008
Grader, University of Oregon, August - December 2008
Adjunct Faculty, Florida Institute of Technology, August 2006 - May 2007
GRANTS, AWARDS AND HONORS:
Outstanding Senior in Humanities, Florida Institute of Technology, 2006
Member, Phi Beta Delta International Honor Society, Since 2006
Oxford Study Abroad Scholarship, Florida Institute of Technology, 2005
VI
Vll
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I wish to express sincere gratitude to Dr. Daniel Wojcik, Dr. Jeffrey Hanes, and Dr.
Bish Sen for their support and service in the creation of this manuscript. In addition,
special thanks are due to Dr. Lisa Gilman, whose expertise in fieldwork was invaluable
during the initial phase of this enterprise. I also wish to thank Dr. Robert Taylor, Dr.
Gordon Patterson, and Mr. Matthew Ruane for their initial support of my research interests.
And lastly, I would like to thank the Gray family for their willingness to participate in this
study.
For my sister Donna, simply the strongest person I know.
Vlll
IX
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
I. INTRODUCTION 1
Notes 8
II. FOLKLORE AND FILM....................................................................................... 9
Folkloristics: History, Reputation, Importance..................................................... 9
From Folklore in Film to Film as Folklore 14
Folklore: Narratives, Genre, Belief....................................................................... 18
Notes 24
III. HISTORICAL FILMS 26
From Historiography to Historiophoty 26
Historical Films and Public History........ 31
Historical Films: Analysis of a Genre................................................................... 38
"Re-constructing" I-listory 45
Notes 54
IV. AUDIENCE STUDIES, REALISM, METHODOLOGy.................................... 59
Audience Studies: A Brief Survey........................................................................ 59
Realism "Rules" 72
Methodology: Media Ethnography and Historical Films 77
Notes 83
Chapter
V. A "MOVIE FAMILY" AND HISTORICAL FILMS .
A "Movie Fa.Illily" ..
Dyads and Dyadic Traditions .
A "Movie Fa.Illily's" Historical Reception ..
Historical Accuracy: Do We Care? ..
Notes .
VI. A CASE STUDY: THE LAST SAMURAI ..
The Last Samurai: The Period ..
The Last Samurai: An Overview ..
The Last Samurai: An Evaluation .
The Last Samurai: Perceived .
Notes .
VII. CONCLUSION .
Notes .
BIBLIOGRAPHY .
x
Page
87
87
102
105
124
130
131
131
137
141
150
165
167
173
174
Xl
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. Continuum ofhistorical subgenres from most fictional to most factual. 40
2. Subgenres ofhistorical films and their relation to realism. 76
1CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
In the media saturated culture of the United States, it is crucial to study the impact
of historical films since such films have become a pervasive and influential medium for
attaining historical knowledge and multicultural awareness. In addition to historical
films, television programs including the various history channels, PBS specials, or even
cable miniseries (e.g., Band ofBrothers, The Pacific, The Tudors, Rome) are popular and
appealing alternates to the historical monograph. In recent years, scholarship has
increased regarding historical films and their re-construction and representation of
history. Leading this charge are a few academics, mostly historians, across disciplines
who attempt to take such films as serious cultural artifacts, yet the examination of
historical films is currently more of a pastime to history scholars than a field or subfield.
The scholarship on historical films convolutes the genre with variously defined tenus:
cinematic history, historical films, docudramas, biopics, heritage films, epics, nationals.
Although few historians acknowledge the function films may have for audiences beyond
a level of mere entertainment, this is not the general view among scholars. Obscured by
the common assumption that historical films are merely entertainment is the fact that
historical films are a type of entertainment that attracts audiences through historical
content and various elements of realism.
2Most importantly, current scholarship rarely considers historical films' reception
beyond textual analysis, popular reviews, or simple speculation. The research that does
exist often states that historical films manipulate the facts, present stereotypes ofpast
cultures, or serve as propaganda. Although films may clearly promote nationalistic
agendas, propaganda, or misconstrued history, the current scholarship presumes the
viewers' reception of these agendas without delving into the ability of audiences to
accept, negotiate, or resist these presentations. Moreover, while some historians note the
importance of audience reception studies, no method has been proposed to distinguish
just how much impact historical films have on audiences' historical consciousness or to
determine how individuals use such films to satisfy their historical or multicultural
curiosity.
In this study I re-examine the formal aspects ofhistorical films in relation to
historical re-construction, the definition and categorization of such films, the reception of
historical films, and their function beyond entertainment in order to expand our
understanding of the reception and function of such films at the vernacular level. In
contrast to the majority of scholarship on historical films noted above, I claim that
historical films should be divided into four subgenres based on their use of fiction: 1)
historical entertainment films (A Knight's Tale [2001] , Timeline [2003}); 2) period
films (The Last Samurai [2003], Saving Private Ryan [1998]); 3)faction films
(Gladiator [2000], The Patriot [2000]); and 4) biopic/eventpic films (Alexander [2004],
Miracle [2004]). By using these subgenres in conjunction with a framework I have
developed for audience ethnography, it appears that representative audiences distinguish
3between historical films' various uses of history. Not only are individuals aware of these
various degrees of history, but more importantly, they seek out informative historical
films for thoughts on temporality, causality, and multicultural awareness. This last fact
introduces an overarching theme of this study and the overall connection between
folklore studies and public/popular history: the meaning and uses ofhistory in moving
images at the vernacular level and the ways in which individuals seek informative
materials through entertainment to fulfill what folklorist William Wilson might call one
of humanity's "deeper necessities."]
I use an interdisciplinary approach that clarifies and establishes how a folkloric
perspective strengthens audience studies and the recent historiography surrounding
historical films. A folkloric approach provides a humanistic and ethnographic
perspective to audience studies, which often is dominated by somewhat abstract
discourses of power, social struggles, resistance, economics, and dominant ideology. A
folkloric perspective acknowledges and engages these concerns, yet it also emphasizes
the everyday and informal contexts of public history and individuals' uses of history
outside formal educational and political contexts. It complements social theories by
examining what cornmon, informal, and everyday phenomena mean to the individuals
within a society. As a vernacular or "people's" perspective, a folkloric study documents
those customs, beliefs, traditions, actions, and aesthetics that are central to individuals in
their everyday lives; it depicts the experiences and opinions of representative audience
members emically and ethically. This study investigates individuals naturally engaging
4in the viewing ofhistorical films within certain social settings, specifically the family and
horne, and analyzes the function and reception of these films at this vernacular level.
After this introductory chapter, Chapter 2 begins with a discussion of the
historical development of folklore studies in order to illustrate how the field can
contribute to other disciplines. This opening chapter also covers current folklore research
on film, new avenues within the field of folklore and film, and discusses how folklore
studies of narrative and belief can complement studies ofhistorical narrative reception.
The third chapter surveys the historiography of historical films as well as the
relationship between public/popular history and a folkloric perspective. More
specifically, Chapter 3 discusses the definition of historical films, the four subgenres I
have identified (historical-entertainment, period, faction, biopic/eventpic), and the ways
in which film re-constructs history. After having presented the attitudes surrounding
historical films, their classification as a genre of film, their formal re-construction of
history, and a guide for evaluating them based on their classification as one of the
subgenres, the focus turns from the form of the medium and its message to the audience
and reception.
Chapter 4 offers a framework for examining audiences' reception of historical
films. In this chapter I give a brief overview of audience studies and note some relevant
findings in order to formulate a model for the qualitative study of film audiences within
the horne. I begin with a survey of general theories ofmass culture and then examine the
recent ethnographic tum in audience studies, as well as the importance of realism to
popular texts, generally, and historical films, specifically. This chapter concludes with a
5discussion of my methodology and an introduction to my research participants. The
representational audience that I am investigating is a small family that defines itself as a
"movie family."
The fifth chapter offers a cultural and topical discussion of my research [mdings.
I explore the "movie culture" of this family to in order to demonstrate the impact that
films can have both during and long after viewing events. This exploration includes the
family member's appropriation of film quotes for "quote challenges" and "quote
speaking" and argues for the relevance of dyad theory to the social function and uses of
film between individuals and within small groups. This chapter then focuses on an in
depth assessment of this family's reception and use of historical films. The viewers'
responses in this field study provide evidence for the continuing use and calibration of the
four subgemes as tools for examining the reception and uses of historical films.
With the theoretical exploration of historical films, a guide for judging historical
films, a sound methodology for performing fieldwork, and a discussion of the family's
general viewing habits, I conclude by providing a case study (Chapter 6) that examines
and evaluates the film The Last Samurai, its use of history, and its reception by the
research participants. This film was selected in part because each of the research
participants owns the film, and also because a film covering Japan and its samurai during
the 1870's provides an intriguing case study due to the positioning, or lack thereof, of the
historical topic in American culture and consciousness.
The frequency and success of historical films illustrates the importance of this
study. Historian Robert Toplin notices that at least one film nominated for Best Picture
6from 1986 to 2001 dealt with historical content; twelve times these films won Best
Picture: Platoon (1986), The Last Emperor (1987), Driving Miss Daisy (1989), Dances
with Wolves (1990), Unforgiven (1992), Schindler's List (1993), Braveheart (1995), The
English Patient (1996), Titanic (1997), Shakespeare in Love (1998), Gladiator (2000),
and A Beautiful Mind (2001),2 Furthermore, in 1998 when Shakespeare in Love won best
picture, the other four nominations for best picture were historically related pieces-
Saving Private Ryan, The Thin Red Line, Life Is Beautiful, and Elizabeth,3 Further
examinations of recent Academy Awards also show that recent nominations for Best
Picture have not forgotten the historical film. History is a popular film genre.
In addition, outside ofthe academy and across the Atlantic, Scottish National
Party Leader Alex Salmond MP gave an inspirational speech to commemorate the seven
hundredth anniversary of the execution of Sir William Wallace. On August 23rd, 2005,
he touted Mel Gibson's epic film Braveheart (1995) for its new inspirational and
supporting role in Scottish nationalism, "When the film Braveheart was produced, ten
years ago, most of the establishment were horrified but the film went on to triumph to
popular and international acclaim-and the story of Wallace was restored to a new
generation of ScotS.,,4 Braveheart is not the cause of Scottish nationalism, but it has been
appropriated by its proponents. Its influence can be found in an eclectic medium of
articles, speeches, and everyday discussions of Scottish nationalism in the post-
Braveheart world. Braveheart is an example of the power of historical films and is a
paradigm that illuminates the possibility of broad public uses ofhistorical cinema.
7Historical film's production can also have an impact on a historian's
understanding ofthe past. In his book titled, The Making ofAlexander (2004), Oxford
historian Robin Lane Fox outlines the production ofAlexander (2004) along with his role
in the complicated process ofprojecting history on the big screen. Fox served as the
film's historical consultant. After several discussions over one of the drafts, director
Oliver Stone asked Fox one ofthe most amazing things, "Can you send me some script
for this? I'm open to any suggestions: you send them, I'll harvest anything we can use.,,5
Fox had gone from interviewed consultant and evening phone calls to writing script for
the film.
The film profited from the role Fox was allowed to play in its creation, but more
interesting is the fact that Fox himselfprofited from the overall experience of discussing
history, writing history, and "speaking to history." For instance, after a discussion with
Oliver Stone concerning how the ancient Greeks would curse, Fox stated, "How did
Macedonians swear at each other?,,6 He continued, "Quite often, Oliver brought out the
gaps in my own hazy notions of'daily life.'"7
One of the most intriguing experiences of Fox's role as historical aid occurred in a
conversation with Alexander himself, actor Colin Farrell. One conversation covered the
role of Homer and Achilles over Alexander's personality. Farrell stated, "If there had
been no Achilles, he would still have behaved like Achilles. Macedonia formed him, not
Homer....,,8 Fox contemplated the conversation, "I began to feel I should have talked
more to this film-Alexander before writing my history.,,9 Colin Farrell further pressed
Fox's notion of Alexander, "Your book's not right, Robin. You argue that in fact,
8Alexander was still surrounded by friends and drinking-companions and was not lonely at
all. Believe me, you can be lonely, even with people around yoU...."lO Robin Fox
entered the film world expecting to help depict Alexander, a man he thought he knew
very well. However, through this experience, Fox expanded his own knowledge by
questioning and strengthening his own understanding of Alexander. Overall, historical
films may have an impact at the societal, professional, and everyday level. I I This study
focuses on the everyday uses offilm, and the next chapter introduces folklore studies and
its importance to this investigation.
Notes
I William Wilson, "The Deeper Necessity: Folklore and the Humanities," Journal ofAmerican Folklore
101 (1998): 156-167.
2 Robert Toplin, Reel History: In Defense ofHollywood (Lawrence: Univ. Press ofKansas, 2002), 6.
3 Ibid.
4 Peter Murrell, "Wallace Commemoration," Scottish Nationalist Party
http,!/www.snp.org/snpnews/2005/snp_ pressJelease.2005-08-
24. 1451923475/view?searchterm=braveheart (accessed August 24, 2005).
5 Robin Lane Fox, The Making ofAlexander (Oxford: R&L, 2004), 42.
6 Ibid., 31.
7 Ibid., 33.
8 Ibid., 54.
9 Ibid.
10 Colin Farrell quoted in Robin Lane Fox, The Making ofAlexander, 55.
II For a broader discussion ofhistorical films influence, see Robert Toplin, "Impact," in Reel History: In
Defense ofHollywood (Lawrence: Univ. Press ofKansas, 2002), 178 - 196.
CHAPTER II
FOLKLORE AND FILM
Folkloristics: History, Reputation, Importance
As noted in the introduction, this study uses an interdisciplinary approach that
clarifies how a folkloric perspective can strengthen and influence popular culture theory,
audience studies, and the recent historiography surrounding historical films. In addition
to presenting new data and a new perspective to audience ethnography and
historiography, I discuss fields of research in audience studies that are often overlooked
in the discipline of folklore itself. I start by briefly discussing folklore studies' historical
conception and its reputation in order to both conceptualize folkloristics and discuss the
benefits a folkloric perspective can bring to other disciplines.
Folklore studies' reputation as a discipline devoted to the study of marginal
cultures or peoples as well as a survival discipline is pervasive in academia. It has even
been named the "the champion of conservation" by some folklorists themselves. 1 This
reputation is a result of the discipline's own social and historical development. Elliott
Oring's survey of the origin and growth of folkloristics illustrates how concepts such as
marginality, survival, and conservation still influence folklore studies' reputation within
the academy.2
Orality and folktales are often a key element in the discussion and reputation of
folklore studies. This is not surprising as the original poster boys for the field are Jacob
9
10
and Wilhelm Grimm for their early nineteenth century work Kinder- und Hausmarchen,
also known as Children's and Household Tales. While the Grimm brothers hoped to
keep German tradition alive, they influenced the idea ofromantic nationalism for one's
home country by collecting traditions among those believed to be the heart of their
country, the peasantry. Among the significance of their original work, their
characterization of folktales as artifacts with long histories and their desire to "save"
these tales in order to document German nationality greatly influenced folklore studies'
development. The Grimms and other early folklore collectors turned their focus partly
toward "survivals" following Edward B. Tyler's notion of cultural evolution. Dring
explains:
In 1846 William John Thoms proposed that these popular antiquities be described
by the term 'Folk-Lore.' He modeled his suggested program for the study of
folklore directly upon the work of the Grimms. Thus the term 'folklore' was
defined to designate materials believed to survive primarily among the rural
peasantry who reflected life in the distant past. Although the term "folklore"
would be redefined and qualified many times over, these associations would
never be eradicated entirely [emphasis added].3
Folklore was consistently tied to both the peasantry and popular antiquities until the first
editor of the Journal ofAmerican Folklore (1888), William Wells Newell, coined a
newer and seemingly more appropriate definition for folklore in the United States.4 This
defmition was based on one key element: oral tradition.
According to Dring, this new defmition helped allow for the examination of the
lore ofthe American people who, as new settlers, were lacking the ancient "survivals"
normally found in the European peasantry. This new definition moved away from the
romantic or cultural evolutionist focus on primitiveness and the ancient to a focus
11
concerned with "orality" (non writing) and "traditions" (generation to generation
communication). This new definition expanded the boundary of "lore" to be studied to
anything that could be passed down traditionally. Gring clarifies, "But the definition also
contained within it the seeds for change--ehange in the kinds of forms that could be
regarded as folklore as well as the kinds of questions that could be asked about them.,,5 In
time, folklore began to connote folk life and folk society as well. In Europe, "a tradition
of peasant ethnography arose which was devoted to the study of the whole of peasant
life.,,6 With modernization and technological advances, folklore communities were seen
as homogenous cultures living within and amongst these new, modem societies; in other
words, folklore communities were examined as a new type of survival. With this new
additional focus on homogenous groups within modem life, the concept of marginality
can be added to the consistent elements of folklore's reputation: survival, ancient,
traditional, and oral.
While folklore studies' status as marginal and conservative is colored by its social
and historical development, contemporary folklorists tend to stress its ubiquitous and
informal aspects. Gring writes, "[folklore] cannot be legislated, scripted, published,
packaged, or marketed ... It must be touched and transformed by common experience-
ordinary humans living their everyday lives."? Most importantly, a folkloric perspective,
as a people's perspective, covers those customs, beliefs, traditions, actions, and aesthetics
that are central to individuals in their everyday lives. In "The End of Folklore: The 1998
Archer Taylor Memorial Lecture," Barre Toelken discusses the popular reputation of
folkloristics as the study of cultural loss and the dying traditions of marginal peoples;
12
however, he argues that folkloristics serves as the field which studies people and
traditions central to living culture, not marginal to it. For example, contemporary
folklore studies examine current issues that are clearly central to today's living cultures-
including, but not limited to, children's folklore; contemporary jokes and argot; politics
and social justice; health and medicine; modem subcultures; issues regarding
homosexuality, gender, and identity; fan art; and even folklore and its expression on the
internet.8 And this does not include the recent studies regarding the integration and
confluence of folklore studies and popular culture that will be discussed in detail below.
It is important to understand how folklore concepts motivate the research and
reputation of folklore studies. For Dring, folklore research generally contains a focus on
two or more of the following concepts: communal, common, informal, marginal,
personal, traditional, aesthetic, and ideological.9 I would add the idea ofbeliefto the
concepts listed by Dring. My study focuses on certain aspects of culture noted by Dring:
the common, the informal, the personal, the ideological (beliefs), and the marginal. Let
me clarify what I mean by "the marginal." I use the concept to refer to the extent that
historical film audiences have yet to be examined by mainstream academics and that their
viewing habits and expressive culture have been largely neglected. I am not saying that
the watching of moving images is marginal or that studies covering audiences are
marginal; if anything, moving images are central in some societies and there is clearly an
abundance of audience studies covering various topics. Also, I use the concept of belief
in this study because folklorists study the informal and personal beliefs of individuals or
societies, such as religious beliefs. I focus on individual beliefs pertaining to history as
13
experienced through film watching. I agree with folklorist William Wilson when he
states, "To ignore the present-to value the people still doing the old things over those
doing the new-would be to deny the humanity of our contemporaries."l0 In other
words, the new can become traditional or replace older traditions, and I partially explore
how families and other small groups may have traditions that concern moving images in a
key way.
Folklorists assert that their theories and research can aid in creating a more
holistic view of societies and cultural expression by adding the perspective of the lived
experiences ofpeople. As Dring argues:
There are people, behaviors, and expressions that will not be examined, or even
observed, by those who are focused on cultural commodification, computer-
mediated communication, and transnational exchange. Cultural studies
practitioners will never know what challenges these communities and their
expressions raise to their own comfortable theorizing, unless there are folklorists
to tell them. 11
Furthermore, when Dring writes, "[Folklore] materials are employed as critical counter-
examples to grand and not-so-grand theories broadcast from disciplinary centers," he is
expressing the view that folkloric research and its perspective on the common, the
everyday, and the informal both critiques unwise theory and makes wise theory wiser.12
Because the study of folklore is based on fieldwork, interviews, and people's perceptions,
the data may at times seem trivial or like an attack against abstract theory. Dring makes a
final note of the trivial or trivia that folklorists may be accused of studying, "Trivia
originally meant the 'joining of three roads' (tri + via). It designated a crossroad, a public
space of great importance-both feared and respected-by which all travelers must
14
eventually pass.,,13 This study aims to meet at such a public space, where the roads of
everyday experience, history, and moving images meet.
From Folklore in Film to Film as Folklore
Although most folklorists have focused their efforts primarily on ethnographic
film, they do not necessarily treat fictional film as an object unworthy of study.i4 In his
article "Folklore Studies and Popular Film and Television: A Necessary Critical Survey,"
Michael Koven lists four ways folklorists have dealt with fictional film and folklore.
First, folklorists have engaged in "motif-spotting" in television and film. Motif-spotting
consists oflooking for folklore portrayed in film as well as analyzing how film may
change a particular form of folklore (e.g., Disney and its reproduction and
commodification of the Cinderella tale). Second, folklorists are increasingly studying fan
cultures through ethnography. Interestingly, in this article, the only folklorists Koven
mentions that do fan ethnography in either film or television are Camille Bacon-Smith,
who works on women, fan communities, and television, and James McClenon and Emily
Edward, who work on succubus/incubus films and belief. is The other scholars mentioned
that deal with recent studies of fan ethnography in television are media scholar Henry
Jenkins, sociologist John Tulloch, and anthropologist Elizabeth Bird. While these
scholars take ethnographic approaches that are similar to folkloric approaches, their
works listed by Koven are not folklore studies of popular film. Although folklorists are
investigating fan cultures, little of this research appears to be currently published. Third,
the technologies of film and video are not only disseminating folklore, but producing
narratives about film and television production as well. For example, the production of
15
The Wizard ofOZ (1939) spawned a legend that claims a munchkin who hanged
himlherself could be seen in one of the movie's scenes. Lastly, folklorists are beginning
to question the notion of films as "fixed" texts with the common release of Director's
Cuts, Unedited Versions, Restored Versions, and the fact that various national film
boards have different rating systems resulting in different filmic content.
While Koven states that folklorists would do well in advancing further into the
domain of film and television studies, he believes these studies are "tangential and
adjacent to the main tenants offolkloristics.,,16 Part of the reason for this "tangential and
adjacent" feeling is the fact that the majority of folklorists' work on fictional film deals
with textual analysis or "motif spotting," such as the edited volume Folklore/Cinema:
Popular Film as Vernacular Culture and Koven's recent work Film, Folklore, and Urban
Legends. 17
Folklore/Cinema: Popular Film as Vernacular Culture, edited by Sharon R.
Sherman and Mikel J. Koven, contains a collection of essays that investigate film's use of
folkloric content in relation to mass-media dissemination and the creation of multiple
variants. The essays are written by both film and folklore scholars, and the editors stress
the need to motivate interdisciplinary scholarship between the two fields. The overall
theme of the work investigates the use of folklore by film, or in other words, folklore in
film. In the introduction, Koven and Sherman discuss the definition of such folklore in
film as filmic folklore. Withfilmic folklore as the cornerstone of analysis, the essays then
branch out and examine filmic folklore in comparison to non-filmic folklore.
16
Herein lies the issue that my study addresses. Although the essays in this
important volume investigate the use of folklore in film, they do not investigate film as
folklore. The very term jilmic folklore stresses that folklore in film is not the same as
folklore outside film. While this claim is true, it constrains the research agenda to
folklore in film while not considering the folklore around or inspired by film, specifically
viewing events and the expressive culture created and shared by viewers.
The comparison ofjilmic folklore to folklore around film is often asserted through
a performance model, which focuses on storyteller, text, and audience interaction. The
argument against film as folklore claims that since the film is not itself a living-breathing
storyteller, there can be no folklore event. There are two key elements to this argument:
first, the story is not being created in space and time, and second, there is no storyteller-
audience interaction. Elizabeth Bird comments on cultural studies' recent discussion of
audiences' roles in the production of mass media, "If audience members are seen as
active in helping to shape the way popular culture is created, they become much more
comparable with folk 'audiences' .,,18 Although Bird and others are stressing a closer
examination of audiences in comparison to folk' audiences', this comparison confines the
inquiry to a performance paradigm, focused on audience-storyteller interaction. This
approach fails to recognize that, although there is no storyteller-audience interaction,
there is still audience interaction. The social situation surrounding the viewing event in
regards to interpersonal relationships, the beliefs influenced by the viewing event, and
later activities or memories motivated by the event, such as quoting films, can all be
examined through a folkloric perspective. While Koven mentions folklorists are looking
17
into new folklore expressions created by the film industry, they have not published, to my
knowledge, research on the expressions and beliefs created within natural viewing
contexts.
In addition, while folklorists are beginning to investigate fan ethnography, the
"fan" is an intense concept that often focuses on passionate viewers and does not
represent the more casual media viewer. Though fan studies provide key insights into fan
cultures and subcultures in terms of resistance, cultural appropriation, and participatory
culture, lost in the emphasis on fan ethnography is causal viewer ethnography. To
clarify, the family members that serve as the research participants for this study define
their family as a "movie family" because movies are a central part of their family culture,
not because they are intense fans (this will be explained in more detail in Chapter 5).
Folklorists can add a great deal to the study of fictional films if they move from
the examination of folklore in film to an examination of film as folklore. Film as
folklore is not the study of a film through textual analysis alone-like motif spotting or
the study ofjilmic folklore-nor is it a study which emphasizes a comparison to
traditional folklore performances. Film as folklore is a study that places film in its natural
context ofeveryday life, while emphasizing the audience's perspective in relation to
belief, interpersonal relationships, community, creativity, or other folklore concepts.
Film as folklore does not indicate that film is folklore but that it-as well as other
media-motivates, inspires, and aids in producing human expression and belief.
18
Folklore: Narratives, Genre, Belief
Folkloristics brings more to the study of audiences and popular texts than a
specific focus on everyday experiences and expressions. Most notably, folklore studies
can offer key insights into narrative, genre, and belief. In his opening chapter of "Cycles
ofInfluence: Fiction, Folktale, Theory," Stephen Benson investigates the history and
seminal role of folktale theory in the development of narratology. 19 Key to Benson's
study is the fact that an analysis of folk narratives serves as vital building blocks for the
examination of other types of narratives. The related elements ofpopular narratives and
folk narratives have been used to suppress the argument that popular narratives are
standardized, formulaic, and cater to the lowest common denominator. Bird explains:
Indeed, there is a growing body of literature that analyzes all kinds ofmedia in
terms of their relationship to ritual, storytelling, and myth. If narrative is a central
way that we organize experience, as scholars in many disciplines now agree, it
makes little sense to argue for mutually exclusive types of narratives such as
'folk' or 'popular' ...Thus popular culture is popular because of its resonance, its
appeal to an audience's existing set of story conventions?O
Narrative is a key way in which we produce meanings from facts; however, what exactly
does narrative do to facts and what does the impact of real versus imaginary data have on
meaning?
In his work The Content ofthe Form, historian Hayden White explores the effect
of "narrativizing" historical facts into a story with a beginning, middle, and end. White
discusses narrative as a "panglobal fact of culture" that translates "know into tell." By
looking at nonnarrative representations of historical reality, the annal and chronicle,
White stresses that we begin to "catch a glimpse of the basis for the appeal of
19
narrativity.,,21 Annals are simple lists that record historical facts in chronological order.
The only consistent element to compare the data, or historical records, is time. What the
annal lacks is a subject or theme by which one can order events and create deeper
meanings. What the annal lacks, the chronicle possesses. Chronicles are similar to
annals in that they present data in chronological order, but they are different in that they
tie their data together by subjects or themes to create deeper meaning. However, White
explains, "Moreover, the chronicle, like the annals but unlike the history, does not so
much conclude as simply terminate; typically it lacks closure, that summing up of the
'meaning' of the chain of events with which it deals that we normally expect from the
well-made story.,,22 Discussing the chronicle History ofFrance by Richems ofRhiem,
White continues his argument stating the chronicle further "throws onto the reader the
burden for retrospectively reflecting on the linkages between the beginning of the account
and its ending.,,23 On the other hand, narrative itself shapes events in such a way as to
produce reflection and meaning. By ordering events through narrating (relating), a
statement with meaning is produced.
This "narrativising" of historical facts raises three key issues: our genuine interest
in history, the effect of the real opposed to the imaginary, and the relationship between
genre and historical plots. Referring to Paul Ricoeur's philosophy of history, White
discusses the relation of historical facts, narrative, and plot. History, folk narratives, and
literature's ultimate referent is the human experience of time or 'the structures of
temporality.'24 However, White notes, "Historical discourse is privileged instantiation of
the human capacity to endow the experience of time with meaning, because the
20
immediate referent of this discourse is real, rather than imaginary, events." Furthermore,
while a novelist may use his or her imagination, " ... the historian cannot, in this sense,
invent the events of his stories; he must 'fmd' or 'discover' them. This is because
historical events have already been 'invented' (in the sense of 'created') by past human
agents who, by their actions, produced lives worthy of having stories told about them.
This means that the intentionality informing human actions, as against mere motions,
conduces to the creation oflives that have the coherency of emplotted stories.,,25 In other
words, historical actions are and can be narrated (related) because these actions are
performed by historical agents, agents with real intentions which produce real meanings.
These agents' actions produce meanings for both themselves and others interested in their
history.
Additionally, it is sometimes argued that historians force historical plots and their
meanings into genres, such as tragic, romantic, or ironic. However, this argument
presumes that genres do not exist or cannot originate in reality. On the contrary, the
original genres or motifs of storytelling originate from human experiences. White
explains concisely, "By discerning the plots 'preconfigured' in historical actions by the
agents that produced them and 'configuring' them as sequences of events having the
coherency of stories with a beginning, middle, and end, historians make explicit the
meaning implicit in historical events themselves.,,26 Moreover, we are linked to agents
and events of the past due to our common heritage as humans linked by time. We can
relate to the experiences and emotions ofpast agents as common experiences of
humanity. This repetitive view of history is described by Ricoeur as "the retrieval of our
21
most basic potentialities inherited from our past in the form of personal fate and
collective destiny.',27 History is humanity's experience. What brings us to history is the
fact that we, like past agents, are also agents within history. History takes the shape of
genres because life is genre; we live sad tales, heroic tales, and comedic tales.
By combining White's depiction of historical narrative with the work of
folklorists, such as William Bascom, we can better understand the reception of historical
films with regards to belief and attraction. In his essay "The Forms of Folklore: Prose
Narratives," Bascom differentiates myths, legends, and folktales from proverbs, riddles,
ballads, poems, and other narratives due to their form as prose. Bascom further
delineates the three prose narratives by examining the relationship between the formal
attributes of the narratives and the believability of the narratives amongst a community;
his definitions are worth quoting in their entirety:
Myths are prose narratives, which, in the society in which they are told, are
considered to be truthful accounts ofwhat happened in the remote past.
Folktales are prose narratives which are regarded as fiction.
Legends are prose narratives which, like myths, are regarded as true by the
narrator and his audience, but they are set in a period considered less remote,
when the world was much as it is today.28
Oring comments on these definitions claiming that "these terms do not refer to the forms
of narrative as so much as the attitudes of the community towards them.',29 Myths
generally represent narratives focused on beings and the world as it was in the distant
past. These narratives often result in the explanation for the way things are today and are
often regarded as both sacred and true. Folktales represent narratives that burrow deepest
into the realm of fiction and fantasy in order to focus on our dreams, desires, or fears.
22
Legends, on the other hand, represent narratives set in historical periods and often result
in the questioning of their happening. While Bascom's definition above stresses that
legends are regarded as true, Oring explains, "In a legend, the question of truth must be
entertained even if that truth is ultimately rejected...The legend never asks for the
suspension of disbelief. It is concerned with creating a narrative whose truth is at least
worthy of deliberation; consequently, the art of legendry engages the listener's sense of
the possible.,,3o In other words, legends postulate the possibility of an event. In addition,
opposed to myths and folktales, the principal characters of legends are human characters
opposed to non-human or imaginary characters.
The entertainment oftruth, the lack of suspension ofdisbelief, and the worthiness
of the deliberation of truth are all elements ofa legend that can be said to be similar to the
majority of historical films. With the exception of historical-entertainment films, which
will be described in much greater detail below, the period film, the faction film, and the
bio/eventpic film all entertain truth, promote belief, and are worthy of deliberating their
truth value. Thus, it can be claimed that historical films may function as legends. Their
characters are primarily human, they are often set in a remote or recent--opposed to
mythical-time, and they all raise issues of believability. Lastly, Bascom explains that
the formula based on belief should be relevant to the truth status of the narratives for the
teller and audience, not the scholars own subjective notions of the narrative.
Overall, it stands that narrative is a central way to present facts and meaning. In
fact, Bascom's third function offolkore stresses this point: often folklore is educational
and serves pedagogical functions.3! For example, narratives are pedagogical in that they
23
provide knowledge about facts, behavior, or even societal norms. Here is a brief example
of film serving a pedagogical function at the most basic level. While working in an
office, I observed coworkers playing a game they call "word of the day." In order to
stump a fellow coworker, one worker used her Iphone to select the word of the day,
which happened to be the word "basilisk." One coworker shouted out she knew the
answer. She explained herselfto her bewildered coworkers, "See, Harry Potter is
educational. You can't tell me I don't learn from watching movies!" In addition, this
instance reminded me of a similar occurrence in my own life. I was in high school and
my mother and I were watching Jeopardy. One of the answers begged the question,
"Who is Bellerophon?" I happened to know that Bellerophon was the hero who killed
the Chimera in Greek mythology. Ironically, I knew this answer because these were the
names for the virus and anti-virus in the film Mission Impossible: 2. My mother
expressed sure bewilderment on her face when I knew the answer, but once I explained I
knew the answer from a film, it was as if order was reestablished.
Films can serve pedagogical functions beyond simple facts, and as historical films
are narratives that present historical facts and meaning, they relate to Bascom's third
function of folklore as educational. Historical films as folklore function as pedagogical
devices, and each of the four subgenres of historical films functions at a different
pedagogical level. Historical films offer insights into people, materials, events, and
customs of the past. However, how does the dynamic of truth and history change when a
film is partially based on true data? If history is full of raw marks or traces of the real
world, what happens when artificial data is added to a historical film? Is this history still
24
"true?" These questions will be addressed below in the section titled Re-Constructing
History_ But first, I will look at the attitudes and historiography surrounding historical
film as well as its definition.
Notes
1 Barbara Kirshenblatt-Gimblett quoted in Elliott Oring, "Anti Anti- 'Folklore' ," in Journal ofAmerican
Folklore III (1988): 331.
2 Elliott Oring, "On the Concepts ofFolklore," in Folk Groups and Folklore Genres: An Introduction
(Logan, Ut: Utah State University Press, 1986), 1-22.
3 Ibid., 6.
4 Ibid., 8.
5 Ibid., 9.
6 Ibid., 11.
7 Ibid., 16.
8 For example, see Jay Mechling, "Children's Folklore," in Folk Groups and Folklore Genres (Logan, Ut:
Utah State University Press, 1986),91-120; Willie Smyth, "Challenger Jokes and the Humor of
Disaster," Western Folklore 45 (1986): 243-260; Michael Owen Jones, "Creating and Using Argot at
the Jayhawk Cafe: Communication, Ambience, and Identity," in Exploring Folk Art: Twenty Years of
Thought on Craft, Work, and Aesthetics (Ann Arbor, Mi: UMI Research, 1986), 109-117; Lisa Gilman,
The Dance ofPolitics: Gender, Performance, and Democratization in Malawi (Philadelphia: Temple
University Press, 2009); Diane E. Goldstein, Once Upon a Virus: AIDS Legends and Vernacular Risk
Perception (Logan: Utah State University Press, 2004); Daniel Wojcik, Punk and Neo-Tribal Body Art
(Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 1995); Joseph P. Goodwin, More Man Than You'll Ever Be:
Gay Folklore andAcculturation in Middle America (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1989);
Heather R. Joseph-Witham, Star Trek Fans and Costume Art (Jackson: University Press ofMississippi,
1996); Trevor J. Blank, Folklore and the Internet: Vernacular Expression in a Digital World (Logan:
Utah State University Press, 2009).
9 Oring, "On the Concepts of Folklore," 17-18.
10 Wilson, The Deeper Necessity, 164.
11 Oring, "Anti Anti-'Folklore'," 335.
12 Ibid., 243.
13 Ibid.
25
14 For an example ofa folkloric perspective on ethnographic film, Sharon R. Sherman, Documenting
Ourselves: Film, Video, and Culture (Lexington, Ky: University Press of Kentucky, 1998).
15Michael J. Koven, "Folklore Studies and Popular Film and Television: A Necessary Critical Survey,"
Journal ofAmerican Folklore 116, no. 460 (Spring 2003): 188.
16 Koven, "Folklore Studies and Popular Film and Television," 176-195.
17 See, Michael Koven, Film, Folklore, and Urban Legends (Lanham, Md: Scarecrow Press, 2008), and
Sharon R. Sherman, and Mikel J. Koven, ed, Folklore/Cinema: Popular Film as Vernacular Culture
(Logan: Utah State University Press, 2007).
18 S. Elizabeth Bird, "Cultural Studies as Confluence: The Convergence of Folklore and Media Studies," in
Popular Culture Theory and Methodology, ed. Harold E. Hinds (Bowling Green, Ohio: Bowling Green
University Popular Press, 1996),347.
19 Stephen Benson, "Tales in Theory: The Role of the Folktale in the Development ofNarratology," in
Cycles ofInfluence: Fiction, Folktale, Theory (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2003), 17-41.
20 Bird, "Cultural Studies as Confluence," 346. For discussions on the centrality ofnarrative, see Jay
Mechling. "Homo Narrans across Disciplines," Western Folklore 50 (1991): 41-52, and Walter R.
Fisher, "The Narrative Paradigm: In the Beginning," Journal ofCommunication 35 (1985): 74-89.
21 Hayden White, The Content ofthe Form: Narrative Discourse and Historical Representation (Baltimore:
Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987),4.
22 Ibid., 16.
23 Ibid., 17.
24 Ibid., 175.
25 Ibid., 172-173.
26 Ibid., 174.
27 Paul Ricoeur in Hayden White, The Content ofthe Form, 52.
28 William Bascom, "The Forms of Folklore: Prose Narratives," in Contributions to Folkloristics (Meerut,
India: Folklore Institute: Archana Publications, 1981), 97-98.
29 Elliott Oring, "Folk Narratives," in Folk Groups and Folklore Genres: An Introduction (Logan, Ut: Utah
State University Press, 1986), 124.
30 Ibid., 125.
31 William Bascom, "The Four Functions of Folklore," The Journal ofAmerican Folklore 66, 266 (1954):
333-349.
26
CHAPTER III
HISTORICAL FILMS
From Historiography to Historiophoty
As noted in the introduction, historians are beginning to investigate the re-
construction of history in historical films. As part of a project funded by the National
Endowment for the Humanities, the book Image as Artifact: The Historical Analysis of
Film and Television analyzes moving images as historical artifacts. The editor of the
piece, John O'Conner, writes that the mission of the project is "for historians to learn to
use film and television in critical ways, and to train future generations to view everything
they see more critically, in light of traditional humanistic values."} The project itself
offers an overview of the ways in which historians use moving images as artifacts; it
breaks the analysis of historical films into two stages-Stage One: Gathering Information
on the Content, Production, and Reception of a Moving Image Document; and Stage
Two: Four Frameworks for Historical Inquiry. The second stage's four frameworks are
entitled, The Moving Image as Evidence for Social and Cultural History, Actuality
Footage as Evidence for Historical Fact, The History of the Moving Image as Industry
and Art Form, and The Moving Image as Representation ofHistory.
The Project looks briefly at audience reception and often discusses audiences in
terms of the effects caused by moving images, and while historians are aware of the
influence of cultural dispositions, such as race, class, sexuality, and politics on viewer
27
reception, 0'Conner writes, "Yet, no certain way exists to measure the impact of even the
most popular film on the people who saw it.,,2 Without a solid method for examining
audience reception, scholarship on historical films produces general claims on reception
or sometimes lacks any discussion of reception whatsoever.
While scholarship on historical films as artifacts has grown, there seems to be a
gap between the belief in film's power to influence individuals and the belief in a need to
study this influence in terms of the audience. John O'Conner writes, "However
unfortunate, it appears likely that even well-educated Americans are learning most of
their history from film or television."] Meanwhile, Robert Rosenstone agrees that
modern audiences often actually learn their history from moving images, "Today, the
chief source of historical knowledge for the majority of the population--()utside the
much-despised textbook-must surely be the visual media ... Any reasonable
extrapolation suggests that trend will continue.,,4 Moving images have come to dominate
the popular domain of history through television, documentaries, and film. It is not
unreasonable to state that the average American citizen may not have the time or desire to
read a textbook or historical monograph, and the two hour celluloid reality is a modern
vehicle for entertainment and attaining historical knowledge. Toplin succinctly
concludes, "For many Americans, and for people around the world, visions ofthe past
emerge from scenes in Hollywood productions. When imagining conditions in ancient
Rome, life in the American West, social relationships in the antebellum South, scenes
from the royal court of England, or conditions at a World War II battlefront, individuals
often conjure up images and words from the movies."s
28
I agree with Toplin when he claims the influence and role of cinematic historians
force us to look at their contributions and impacts on the attainment of historical
knowledge, since "they are delivering abundant information to the public, and they often
shape ideas as much or more than those who provide traditional education do. These
cinematic historians have become powerful storytellers. They are competing effectively
with the schoolteacher, the college professor, and the history book author. Their work
deserves attention.,,6 In other words, historical films serve as pedagogical devices both in
and outside the classroom. However, as historical films are popular texts and
entertainment, they are sometimes dismissed by historians as irrelevant. Historical films
are not historical when compared to traditional definitions ofhistorical narrative. These
films rarely use or interpret primary sources in order to produce a historical narrative. As
a result, many historians often do not consider these films as historical works since they
do not use the tools of history. Toplin poignantly states that this dismissal comes at a
price: "It segregates scholars from important discussions of the subject that are taking
place beyond the academy. Outside of university campuses, media critics, politicians, and
film enthusiasts are engaged in energetic debates about cinematic history's interpretations
and influence. Participants in these well-publicized exchanges recognize the potential of
motion pictures to affect the public's attitudes about the past.,,7
To narrow this gap, Hayden White denotes a new subfield of scholarship within
history titled historiophoty, defined as "the representation of history and our thought
about it in visual images and filmic discourse."g As historical films are formally and
functionally different than traditional historical narratives, they require and deserve a new
29
field for discourse and analysis. White's distinction ofhistoriophoty as a new scholarship
alongside historiography stresses the divergence between the discourse surrounding
visual texts and written texts. Visual texts require different tools for analysis than written
texts. White writes, "Modem historians ought to be aware that the analysis of visual
images requires a manner of 'reading' quite different from that developed for the study of
written documents.,,9 In other words, visual images create meanings in their own way
and it is imperative to understand their mechanism for projecting interpretations.
Robert Rosenstone makes two key claims in the introduction to his work Visions
ofthe Past: The Challenge ofFilm to Our Idea ofHistory. He states first, "a film is not a
book," and then second, "film is history as vision."l0 These two phrases could not be
more paramount in the understanding of historical cinema compared to historical
literature. It is for this reason, as introduced above, that Hayden White implements the
new field of scholarship called historiophoty. Toplin elaborates this predicament, "Their
[academicians] suspicions about the fundamental handicaps of filmed history vis-a.-vis
written history appear exaggerated."l1 When viewing, judging, and reacting to historical
cinema, historians are prone to basing their opinion on the written discourse of a subject.
Pierre Sorlin explains further, "We are trained to read, rather than to watch.,,12
Rosenstone lightly touches on narratology to evaluate historical literature. He
states four basic findings: First, all narratives are structured by historians and never truly
lived. In other words, the actions of historical agents are formed into narratives by
relating beginnings, middles, and endings in order to make sense of the past. Second,
narrative histories are fictional representations of the past created through verbal
30
language. Third, historical narratives are cast within their own gemes-ironic, tragic,
heroic, or romantic. And fourth, language is not a mirror; it does not reflect history, for it
"structures history and imbues it with meaning.,,13 Following this realization, written
history appears no less bound to a degree of fiction than filmic history. However,
White's discussion of historical agents, noted in Chapter 2, weakens Rosenstone's
argument. For starters, the actions of human agents are not merely structured by
historians, for these actions are lived; that is, they are performed in time. In addition,
gemes may be cast, but they are also lived. Overall, historical narratives are both
fictional and factual representations.
Although all narration carries some fictional elements, this does not give
cinematic historians the authorization to replace fact with fiction. I partially agree when
Pierre Sorlin stresses that "historical films are all fictional," for not all historical films use
the same degree of fiction. [4 While arguments stressing fictionalization within historical
narration are valid and should not be forgotten, they should not be embraced entirely.
Toplin stresses this case in three strong statements. First, "Historians are not naIve about
the truth claims of either authors or filmmakers." Second, "They are quite familiar with
the argument that complete objectivity is an impossible goal and that all interpretations
... are constructed and contestable." And lastly, "They are therefore quite amused by film
scholars' excitement in making this discovery and lecturing historians about its
importance."15
Relating fiction in historical literature to fiction in historical film, David Herlihy
states, "Like Thucydides, they [filmmakers] must also place in the actor's mouths words
31
that were probably never spoken but that seem appropriate to the person and the
occasion.,,16 Historical films share with literary history the setbacks of constructing
history with fiction, but cinematic history also contains its own unique and powerful
abilities. When discussing film as taken from a historical text, Rosenstone explains that
the filmic data "will always be so skimpy compared to a written version covering the
same ground.,,17 However, he illuminates, "if short on traditional data, film does easily
capture elements of life that we might wish to designate to another kind of data. Film lets
us see landscapes, hear sounds, and witness strong emotions as they are expressed with
body and face, or view physical conflict between individuals and groupS.,,18 Historical
films have the unique power to communicate through sound and image which otherwise
dry historical texts do not. Professor Toplin agrees, "Often, they [book oriented
enthusiasts] concentrate on details in the script rather than on the visual and auditory
devices employed by the director, the cinematographer, the sound engineers, and other
artists and technicians who play important roles in shaping a film's presentation.,,19
These unique elements of film-the visual and auditory splendors ofpast worlds
created-are part of what makes a historical epic so intriguing to its audiences. I shall
conclude this discussion with a quote from David Herlihy, "Films are superb in
representing the visual styles and textures of the past-values almost impossible to
convey in written words. Let the visual serve the visual.,,2o
Historical Films and Public History
Despite some acceptance of the importance of filmic histories, dismissal is the
more common attitude taken by historians with regard to historical films. Cultural studies
32
theorist len Ang explains this type of dismissal through her notion of the ideology of
mass culture. Ang claims that within the ideology of mass culture "some cultural forms-
mostly very popular culture products and practices cast in an American mould-are tout
court labeled 'bad mass culture' due to their apparent economic determinism.,,21
According to Ang, the power of the ideology ofmass culture is its ability to subordinate
cognitive thought processes to emotional feelings. Ang further writes, "In opposition to
'bad mass culture' implicitly or explicitly something like 'good culture' is set up.',22 In
other words, according to historians, historical films are 'bad mass culture' and their
written counterparts are the 'good culture.' However, as this ideology illustrates, it is
possible that historians are dismissing historical films based on their emotional appeal to
their own work and the amount of influence popular films may have on audiences'
historical consciousness.
The issues surrounding historical films and the ideology of mass culture relate to
the subfield of history known as public history, a somewhat broad subfield. It covers a
variety of issues including, but not limited to, national identity, memory, heritage,
material culture, exhibition, oral history, public policy, and education. According to the
National Council on Public History, public history is "a movement, methodology, and
approach that promotes the collaborative study and practice of history; its practitioners
embrace a mission to make their special insights accessible and useful to the public.',23
The underlying assumption in this definition is that public history is done by historians,
in collaboration with historians, or by using the tools of historians. Moreover, public
history is done for a general public. The most important feature of this definition is that
33
public history must be done by historians or in collaboration with historians. Public
history must use the tools of history to create interpretations that can be provided to a
general public.
There are a variety of ways that historians can make their research available to the
public. They can reach the public through books, radio, television, and the internet.
They can do interviews, create documentaries, or provide historical interpretations
through both written and digital text. However, the very idea of public history seems to
require sacrifice and simplification. Historian John Tosh explains, "The test for all the
exponents of public history is whether they promote public understanding of significant
topical issues. In that cause, some of what academics value highly may have to be
sacrificed. Historical analysis designed for the public is almost always bound to simplify,
by removing the stages of argument by which the writer has come to the stated
conclusion.,,24 In effect, this is the general annoyance many historians feel towards
public history. It must simplify the historical interpretation and to a degree it becomes
'bad history,' if claimed to be history at all.
However, in their work Teaching History for the Common Good, Keith Barton
and Linda Levstik argue that most scholars formulate two different approaches to the
past. These approaches are often polarized and simplify the issue. Scholars often
"identify one approach as 'real' history and dismiss the other as inadequate, inauthentic,
or merely 'popular.'25 John Tosh further explains this dismissal ofpopular history for its
lack of activating critical thought, "Ofcourse, the outreach work of academics does not
necessarily promote critical debate. Much of it treats history as entertainment: the good
34
story, the alluring ambiance, the historical who-done-it.,,26 In other words, history as
entertainment does not necessarily promote critical debate for most scholars, and popular
history is more often seen as mere entertainment that does not encourage critical modes
of thinking.
Although historians may polarize representations of history in a way that Barton
and Levstik might disagree with, the majority ofpublic historians agree that history
provides a specific way of thinking: history trains citizens to rationally evaluate evidence
and arguments in order that these citizens form their own judgments. In the words of
Barton and Levstick, "History's place in the curriculum must be justified in terms of its
contribution to democratic citizenship--citizenship that is participatory, pluralist, and
deliberative-and its practices must be structured to achieve that end.',27 History's main
use for the public is to give them critical thinking skills. However, these skills are not
general transferable skills such as good communication skills or organizational skills:
"The most valuable objective of history teaching is to enable young people to situate
themselves in time, to recognize the centrality of change and development in accounting
for the world around them, to grasp the merits-and the drawbacks-of historical
comparison, and to draw on the past for a richer sense of possibilities in the future.',28
While these skills should be the focus of historical education, according to historians
these skills are not encouraged by popular history.
I challenge this notion and investigate why citizens are interested in history and
how historical films may fulfill their uses, needs, and desires. Image as Artifact and the
majority of scholarship on historical films examine the effects of historical films and yet
35
do not question their function. Furthennore, public historians often fail to delineate
between public history and popular history. Perhaps they believe that popular history is
more abundant than uncommon fonns ofpublic history. For example, an oral history
project may be designated as public history but not popular history whereas a
documentary broadcasted across the nation would be considered popular history. I
distinguish the subfield public history from popular history for one simple reason. Public
history is based on historian's historical insights whereas popular history is not. Popular
history, according to my own definition and delineation, makes historical insights
accessible and useful to the public, but these insights are not produced by historians. For
instance, they are produced by filmmakers who, to the chagrin of many historians, have
great agency and influence.
Additionally, Barton and Levstik's research parallels this study as they examine
what students think about the past in their own terms and not "whether students confonn
to an abstract standard of 'correct' historical thinking or understanding.,,29 Barton and
Levstik found that children were learning history from a variety of historical contexts:
television, trade books, museums, historic sites, and through oral communication with
relatives. Barton and Levstik's study correlates with this study for another reason. They
decided to use images to prompt students to discuss historical topics and concepts, and
they found that "the pictures seem to have 'warmed them up' to answer more verbal and
abstract questions, and the images also provided concrete reference points they could
refer to throughout the interviews.,,3o They asked the students to put the pictures in a
chronological order and were amazed by the students' ability to discuss historical
36
concepts. They also found that the students were highly interested in discussing the
historical periods. Their use ofpictures to "warm up" the research participants is
evidential of the power of images, what William Mitchell describes as the "pictorial tum"
in the study of culture: the conceptualization that linguistic signs and symbols are
supplanted by visual, nonlinguistic signs and symbols in everyday life.31 One of their
findings is particularly relevant; the researchers asked a girl why history was something
people wanted to study and the girl replied, "Just to find out about what's happened in the
past ... that's something that everybody wants to knoW.,,32
While Barton and Levstik stress the need to know how history is embodied in
various contexts, they state, "For the most part, we haven't watched students use history
outside formal educational contexts or talked with them naturally as they engage in such
activities, nor, as far as we know, have other researchers. As a result, we are not as well
positioned to examine students' participation in a variety of specific social settings as we
are to analyze the impact of societal contexts on school history.,,33 My thesis attempts to
add to this research by engaging in such activities and performing fieldwork. I am
interested in what viewers think about the past in relation to historical moving images.
This study differs in that I do not examine young children who are beginning or in
school, but older adults who are at various stages of their life and are no longer in school.
I argue against the fact that the general public is not interested in thinking critically about
history or that popular texts cannot provoke critical thought and debate.
Take, for example, two statements by historian Peter Seixas on students and film
watching in and outside the classroom. Seixas first states, "Though teachers may show or
37
discuss popular film in class, it is fair to assume that most students do their thinking and
discussion of these films outside the context of school. ,,34 He then claims, "Students are
likely swept quite completely into the 'historical' world as presented on film, but unlikely
to exercise critical judgments of this filmic depiction of the past.,,35 A paradox arises
between students "thinking" outside the context of school and their unlikelihood to
"exercise critical judgments of this filmic depiction of the past." What exactly are
students (and others) "thinking" about historical films outside of school, and are these
"thoughts" lacking critical expression? Moreover, we must not forget that the ways in
which instructors introduce, discuss, and present films can greatly impact the students'
reception of said films.36 Viewing context matters both in and outside the classroom.
Evidently, the discussion of historical films as pedagogical tools has increased and will
offer significant findings on students and reception??
Roy Rosenzweig and David Thelen's research on the everyday uses of history
begins to examine what Americans think about historical film and television outside the
classroom. In their survey of over l,400 Americans, they found that their respondents
ranked films and television to be the least trustworthy of historical sources. They explain
their respondents reasoning, "Many respondents talked about their hatred and fear of
being manipulated by people who distort the past to meet their own needs.,,38 While it
should come as no surprise that viewers may adhere to the ideology of mass culture like
historians, the ways in which viewers negotiate historical film's various uses of history
has yet to be researched. For example, Rosenzweig and Thelen note, "People repeatedly
told our interviewers that every book or movie was different," and yet they did not
38
investigate how viewers make these assessments.39 Current reception studies of historical
film are only taking place within the classroom. My study examines the ways in which
viewers assess different films' uses of history, and this is where a folkloric approach can
strengthen popular history studies.
I have briefly discussed scholarship covering historical films as artifacts and how
both written and filmic histories use fiction when constructing the past. It is essential to
understand that film is a visual text and requires its own method for evaluation.
Additionally, this evaluation must take care to understand the pervasive influence of the
ideology of mass culture if it is to understand that historical films may have a greater
function with regards to critical thought than historians first realize. It is also important
to examine how historical films re-construct traditional history. This issue of re-
constructing history begins with the exploration of two elusive questions: what exactly
are historical films, and are they all the same?
Historical Films: Analysis ofa Genre
Although I have discussed "historical films," "historical cinema," or "cinematic
history" with a very loose assumption of these terms' definitions, it is important to define
the historical genre and its subgenres so that we can better judge the films that make up
such an eclectic mix. What differentiates a historical film from other genres of film? Is
there something that speaks to audiences to let them know that the visual medium they
are viewing is to be taken as a historical rendition? Is there also a differentiation within
the genre of historical film itself? And lastly, how does a film re-construct history? The
historical film as a unique genre, the subgenres of historical films, and film's technique
39
for re-constructing history are factors that must be studied in order to better interpret
film's mode for communicating history.
Pierre Sorlin states that there is something real between a film and viewers that
allows them to know that the presentation they are about to see is historical. There is an
"understanding that is formed, with no difficulty, between the filmmakers and the
audience: for both, something real and unquestionable exists, something which definitely
happened and which is history.,,40 Sorlin goes on to explain that signs in the form of
details enable the audience to connect the film with a specific time in the past. He uses
and defines the term historical capital as the referent of such signs; "The cultural heritage
of every country and every community includes dates, events, and characters known to
all members of that community. This common basis is what one might call the group's
'historical capital.",41 In other words, individuals are aware of their own historical
customs, beliefs, and materials-as well as others' . Many signs within a film can mark it
as a historical film; furthermore, signs surrounding the production and advertising of a
film can achieve this historical projection through various techniques.
As George F. Custen explains, title cards, voiceover narrations, and filmic
overtures at the beginning of a film can avow to its historical intent.42 For example,
while a film such as JFK (1991) easily asserts its historical intent by the very title of the
cinematic presentation, other films can open with a filmic overture consisting of
newspaper articles, news videos, or speeches. For instance, Disney's Miracle (2004)
opens with these overtures, including President Carter's "Malaise Speech." Some kind of
"facticity" is asserted to mark a historical film, according to Custen.43 In a section titled
40
Biography as Difftrentiation, Custen states that "the assertion of truth is yet another
strategy used to differentiate a product, be it film genre or star, in a highly competitive
market.,,44 The same could be said about any historical film and not just the biographical
film.
Although the guidelines above differentiate historical films from other genres of
cinema, these are not guidelines for categorizing historical films amongst themselves.
This is one of the limitations of current scholarship concerning historical films. A film is
often categorized simply as a historical film or based on the type of history: Western,
Roman, Medieval, etc. Historical films are not categorized based on how they use
history. For instance, a film may portray characters with events during a period while
other films may depict specific characters with specific events during a specific period. I
must inteIject a key point here: these differentiations among historical films are
paramount when judging this genre. For example, a period film cannot be criticized for
failing to tell the life story of a specific person. I have developed a scheme for
categorizing historical films by asserting a continuum from fiction to fact. The two ends
of this continuum consist ofmostly fictional representations on one end and mostly
factual representations on the other end. Furthermore, each subgenre rests on a point
along this continuum with some being more fictional or factual than others (Figure 1).
Fiction [ .~ ----,.;-- .,------ -----,..] Fact
Historical-entertainment Period Faction BiopiclEventpic
Figure 1. Continuum of historical subgenres from most fictional to most factual.
41
The four subgenres into which I divide historical cinema are historical-
entertainment films (which abbreviate to h-e films), period films, faction films, and lastly
the biopic or what I will also call eventpic films. As described above, these categories
place historical films on a continuum of fiction: the h-e film being the most fictional, the
period film being slightly less fictional, the faction film being more factual, and the
biopic or eventpic attempting to be the most factual. All four of these subgenres of
cinematic history attempt to recreate, or what Robert Rosenstone calls "re-construct,"
history to varying degrees.45
First, not every film that can be marked as historical by Sorlin's concept of
historical capital attempts to tell a historical story. These films are categorized as
historical-entertainment films. H-e films use a historical setting as a mode ofplacing
events within a period of history for strictly entertainment purposes. The placement of
this type of film into a period of history is as relevant as the magnificent worlds of
fantasy films or sci-fi epics. For example, the science behind Star Wars is not meant to
explain the possibility of a light saber; in comparison, the history behind A Knight's Tale
is not meant to detail the events ofany real period or any real characters. There may be
some moral or influential aspects ofthe tale, but these are relevant to the story itself and
not the historical references.
As stated, A Knight's Tale is full of humor and modernity while placed in a
medieval setting. The overall moral of the story is that "every man can change his stars,"
and the leading hero, William Thatcher (played by the late Heath Ledger), changes his
stars by denying class repudiations and rising from a thatcher's son to a noble knight.
42
This film is a historical film with the Medieval Age setting creating its historical capital.
It even has a cameo by the "Black" Prince, Prince Edward, and references the wars
between the English and French. However, this film is pure fiction within a historical
setting, whilst touched with a pinch of modem anachronism. A humorous film and often
recommended for its synthetic soldering of "pastness" and modernity, A Knight's Tale is
a historical h-e film with one purpose: entertainment.
The second subgenre of historical film, the period film, is not as easy to label and
defme. Period films constitute films that depict mostly fictional characters within a
specific historical setting. A period film not only aims to assert its historicity through
historical capital, but, using a phrase from Robert A. Rosenstone, also aims to
"emotionalize, personalize, and dramatize" the feel and social environment of that
period.46 Through completely fictitious characters, period films communicate the
situation of a given movement through time. The characters and events depicted are
representational rather than real. That is, the characters and events depicted are not based
on specific historical individuals and specific historical events; they are only depicted as
generic types of individuals and events that may embody this time period.
Representation and realism will be discussed, separately, in greater detail below.
Saving Private Ryan (1998) is an example of a period film. The film is set during
the invasion ofNormandy in World War II and follows Captain John H. Miller (Tom
Hanks) as he attempts to bring home one of four surviving American brothers, Private
James Ryan (Matt Damon). The film is applauded for its realism, especially the opening
thirty minute rendition of the invasion ofNormandy. The film emotionalizes,
43
personalizes, and dramatizes events of World War II through fictitious characters and
events. It makes no claim that the tale of Captain Miller and Private Ryan is historical.
The next subgenre of historical film, the faction film, requires a deeper
examination of the blending of fact and fiction in historical films. In a section entitled
The Growing Prominence of "Faction, JJ Robert Toplin defmesfaction films as historical
films that "spin highly fictional tales that are loosely based on actualities. Their stories
identify some real people, events, or situations from the past but blend these details into
invented fables.,,47 Since this definition is comparable to the definition affiliated with
period films, further delineation is necessary. Afaction film will more closely adapt real
people to its stories and incorporate them than will the period film. The faction film
places a fictitious character within a specific period consisting of specific historical
individuals. One point must be stressed with relevance to faction films because of their
amenability of actual characters with fictional characters: faction films are still not an
attempt at portraying documented history. However, such films use specific periods,
events, or persons more so than period films.
For example, Ridley Scott's film Gladiator places the fictitious Maximus in the
middle of factual characters within a specific period of history. Emperor Marcus
Aurelias, his son Commodus, and his daughter Lucilla are all specific historical persons
who playa large role in the film. While Steven Spielberg's period film Saving Private
Ryan places fictitious characters within a specific period, the faction film Gladiator
places a fictitious character within a specific period consisting of specific historical
individuals. Toplin makes note of the raison d'Stre of faction films, "filmmakers have
44
developed strategies to protect their flanks from the arrows shot by history-critics.,,48 The
faction film enables filmmakers to use specific periods ofhistory by creatively looking
through the eyes of fictitious characters in order to avoid public scrutiny. Gladiator is
still not an attempt of portraying documented history. The characters mentioned above in
Gladiator are mentioned in name only, for their actions with the fictional character
Maximus are obviously purely fictional. However, it uses a more specific period, events,
or persons than that of a period film, thus adding to its appeal and sense of reality.
The attempt at actual historicity in the genre of historical films can be found in the
subgenre known as the biopic or eventpic. I correlate the term biopic or biographical epic
with the term eventpic because sometimes the main focus of a film is on a group of real
characters and events rather than just a single individual. Let us think of the terms as one
with the exception of the characterization of one versus many. The biopic or eventpic
attempts to accurately portray the history ofa specific person(s) and event(s). As I will
discuss below, some fiction is inevitable in cinematic history, but the goal of
bio/eventpics is to portray history by staying within the bounds ofthe historical record.
Oliver Stone's Alexander (2004) attempts to recreate and examine key moments
of Alexander the Great's life: from his upbringing as a child to his feats accomplished as
one of earth's greatest military geniuses and leaders. Although some dramatic license
should be expected, the characters surrounding the historical Alexander are factual and
the majority of events portrayed in the film are well documented. Alexander should not
be defined as a h-e, a period, nor a faction film. It is imperative to note that though a film
is defined as a bio/eventpic, this does not necessarily make it a successful one! The key
45
question is whether a bio/eventpic, such as Alexander, does what it aims to do. That is,
does the film fall in line with its intention ofportraying history, or does the film disguise
false history as true history. All four of these subgenres can be evaluated based on their
advertised use of history in comparison to their actual presentation of history. All
cinematic history attempts to recreate history to varying degrees, and this raises a
plethora of questions concerning an attempt to accurately depict historical periods,
events, and people on the big screen. Overall, the four subgenres of historical films serve
as tools to analyze historical films and their reception. The subgenres are general
templates, not meant to be absolute, and a film will usually land close to one of these
subgenres. Both the research participants' general reception of historical films (Chapter
5) and the case study of The Last Samurai (Chapter 6) will illustrate the effectiveness of
this template in guiding the analysis of historical film reception.
"Re-constructing" History
In the introduction to his essay in the AHR Forum ofthe American Historical
Review, John E. O'Conner stresses the importance of contributions from historian
filmmakers who have experiencedjilmland.49 He explains their importance for two
reasons; first, they can contribute to our thinking of visual evidence in reconstructing the
past, and secondly, they "can offer important assistance to their colleagues" who must
allot their time to teaching in undergraduate classrooms.50 These historian filmmakers
are important, for they have firsthand knowledge and experience regarding the creative
production process of historical films: from pre-production to canning the film.
46
Historians Toplin and Rosenstone have had the unique experience of creating
historical fiction films for a broad public. Rosenstone was involved in the process of
creating the film Reds (1982) and Toplin was the principal creator in the making of
Denmark Vesey's Rebellion (1982), a made-for-television movie broadcasted on PBS
Television. These historians can be considered historian filmmakers, and as such, their
professional findings and discussions of historical films are invaluable. Toplin begins the
discussion, "There are no true 'rules' for fabricating popular docudramas. Filmmakers do
not consult a respected guidebook that lists successful strategies for the design of
cinematic history.,,51 On the other hand, there are some common elements that can be
identified as key issues when producing historical cinema. It should be noted, however,
that these are not necessarily problems but necessities of a unique and powerful medium.
I will list these elements of constructing historical films as scope, 3-act drama,
partisanship, representation, illusion and the use of romance in historical films.52 I
conclude this segment of filmic construction by discussing what Rosenstone states to be
the "key issue" and most "controversial" in constructing cinematic history: invention.53 It
should also be noted that several of these elements relate to the criticisms some historians
generally have against popular history.
The average film is two hours long, or is it two hours short? The problem of
scope in historical film deals with the reduction of time, characters, and events along with
the blatant cutting of substance. According to Toplin, "Motion pictures cannot present
comprehensive, definitive studies, and filmmakers understand the foolishness of even
trying to cover a topic's length and breadth.,,54 However, Toplin addresses the rebuttal
47
by Adrian Scott (a writer for the 1947 movie Crossfire) when discussing an attempt to
definitively examine anti-Semitism, "It is proper material for pamphlets and books. But
even in those media it is doubtful if definitiveness is possible. Find, if you can, a
definitive one-volume analysis."ss In other words, not even written monographs can
completely cover a topic and provide a definitive, closed analysis. New interpretations
and findings will always breed new avenues for discussion and debate. The compression
of substance in historical film also serves a more dramatic purpose. Rosenstone explains,
"Films that have been truest to the facts have tended to be visually and dramatically inert,
better as aids to sleep than to the acquisition of historical consciousness."s6 This is to say
that too much emphasis on detail equates to too little drama and even fewer viewers.
Playing devil's advocate, instructors must understand the complications of creating
curriculum and giving discussions on a specific topic in a one hour lecture while keeping
an audience's-their student's-attention. Why then is it difficult to appreciate how
much a film can do through image, sound, and voice in two hours?
The next element of historical drama deals with drama specifically. Historical
films must contain the basic necessities ofthe 3-act drama described by Aristotle:
exposition, complication, and resolution.57 The underlying notion behind the 3-act
dramatic element is that every historical film must contain some form ofmorality.
However, as White's research on the content of historical narrative shows, narratives are
meaningful to their audience because of the lessons they teach. Moreover, as research on
narratives and popular culture show, mass mediated narratives function to satisfy the
same needs, uses, and desires as those of folk narratives. Rosenstone takes this criticism
48
ofmorality further, "To put it bluntly, no matter what the historical film ... the message
delivered on the screen is almost always that things are getting better or have gotten
better or both."s8 For Rosenstone, all historical films contribute to what historians call
the myth ofprogress. In contrast, one cannot generalize that all historical films promote
progress or that all historical films idealize hope. For instance, some may promote the
exact opposite: nostalgia for a simpler and lost time. Moreover, if the majority of films
idealize hope or nostalgia, is this necessarily something we must discourage? History is a
tool that explains the past through the construction of a story; should historical films
refrain from using the renowned 3-act drama as their storyline structure to better relate
and bear meaning for their audiences?
The third element ofhistorical cinema is partisanship. Toplin states that
filmmakers "leave an impression that their interpretation is the only viable one."S9
Rosenstone adds that "each [film] compresses the past to a closed world by telling a
single, linear story with, essentially, a single interpretation. Such a narrative strategy
obviously denies historical alternatives, does away with the complexities of motivation or
causation, and banishes all subtlety from the world ofhistory.,,6o The fact is that
filmmakers have the right to speak their mind, or shall I say show their visions-whether
propagandist, nationalistic, progressive, or nostalgic. As historians who have worked on
the production of historical films, these two "historian filmmakers" know it is a bit much
to state that filmmakers believe their interpretation is the sole, enlightened one.
Furthermore, some films do acknowledge the complexity ofmotivation and causation and
even leave the audience questioning the films interpretation.61 Is it also too simple to
49
assume that viewers take the history they see on screen as the only viable one? At what
point does responsibility for the belief that the film's interpretation is the only
interpretation turn from the film to the interpreter? Is it possible that audience members
may take their history from the historical films they see yet are as skeptical of historical
renditions on the big screen as historians and other critics?
A nuance ofpartisanship is the notion of demons and "grayness" in historical
films. American audiences may want uplifting stories, as noted above, and in order to
have these stories one needs heroes and villains. As Toplin states, "Cinematic history
needs demons, too, and they are often assigned rather cavalierly.,,62 In addition, if a film
provides good analysis in the form of contradiction or "grayness," it is often stated that it
does not provide strong entertainment. A recent example is the film Kingdom ofHeaven
(2005). By attempting to show religious fanaticism as the real enemy, critics claim
Kingdom ofHeaven is said to lose its audience as it focuses on religious fanaticism. The
film depicts fanaticism as the enemy rather than providing a clear cut enemy; the film is
thus labeled as bad entertainment that audiences will not comprehend. However, if the
film instead depicted polarized heroes and villains, audiences would be looked down
upon for not wanting a more sophisticated interpretation and for getting the simplistic
version they desire. Toplin concludes that filmmakers must hook the audience with
strong partisan views and if they refuse to do so, they will invite great financial risks.63
One must not assume that all filmmakers are so egotistical as to believe that their films
are definitive interpretations. Moreover, it could be argued that it is not contradiction and
grayness that invites great financial risk, but more facts than satisfying narrative. Films
50
are primarily entertainment, and if they become documentaries instead, their box office
may suffer. Filmmakers must attempt to balance history with entertainment.
Representation, the fourth element of historical cinema, is the collapsing of
characters into what could be called stock characters and the compression of events into
one unlikely episode. Toplin explains, "History from Hollywood almost always appears
in its familiar generic form, with the principal characters' encounters standing in for the
experiences of hundreds, thousands, or millions.,,64 The individual is said to stand in for
the many, and through their lives one sees the broad social changes of history. In
historical cinema, it is the individual versus society in what Toplin calls the "great men"
and "great women" theory.65 Rosenstone agrees, "The point: both dramatic features and
documentaries put individuals in the forefront ofhistorical process ... the solution of
their personal problems tends to substitute itself for the solution of historical problems.,,66
According to these two historian filmmakers, individuals are the motor and main
attraction of the changing tides of history in historical cinema. For them, rather than the
struggle ofindividual versus history, the cinematic film should take a more traditional
approach and depict the individual being shaped by the impersonal forces of history.
However, one cannot generalize and say that all historical films show individuals
determining history.
It is worth noting that history instructors use representational figures to instruct
their students with regard to historical happenings. In addition, filmmakers can make it
clear that individuals are affected by the impersonal forces of history. The problem is not
that representation is an element of historical cinema but how filmmakers use and abuse
51
this contentious element. The case study of the The Last Samurai and its reception by the
family (Chapter 6) will explore questions concerning history, individuals, and impersonal
forces in greater detail.
lllusion is the element of a historical film that brings the "pastness" to the present.
"As some historians describe the achievement," writes Toplin, "films can demonstrate
'the pastness of the past,' communicating a sense that conditions in historic times were,
in many ways, different from those of the present.,,67 Historical films have the ability to
bring textures, sounds, and emotions of times that are otherwise terra incognita. David
Herlihy exclaims, "The historical film not only creates illusion but also extends its
domain into the audience.,,68 History is not a complete mirror image of the past but a
mere re-construction, and this re-construction can sometimes get in the way of historicity.
Rosenstone disparages, "This is the mistaken notion that mimesis is all, that history is in
fact no more than a 'period look. ",69 For him, this is "the baleful Hollywood corollary:
as long as you get the look right, you may freely invent characters and incidents and do
whatever you want to the past to make it more interesting.,,7o With the new awesome
ability ofCGI (Computer Graphic Imagery), audiences are able to witness this "pastness
of the past" at a whole new level. Historians have the right to denigrate the preferred
superceding of historical imaging over historical facticity, but this does not mean that
historical cinema must stop focusing on period detail. Imagery is a powerful tool, and it
is essential for historical realism and its attraction.
Some audience members love a romantic tale and not every historical tale has
one, so why not play with Cupid's arrow and insert a little bit oflove into a lot of history?
52
Toplin explains, "The romantic elements of a story heighten the emotional impact for
most audiences; in particular, they help attract women to the theaters.',7l Gambling with
romance and love does not always mean the addition of romantic characters, mostly
women, for it can also mean the negation or manipulation of characters to focus on the
amorous, dramatic effect. Toplin refutes the criticisms of filmmakers playing Cupid,
"The prominence of romantic element in cinematic history does not constitute grounds
for dismissing the genre's value as a perspective on the past ... Romantic themes draw
audiences to cinematic history, adding strong human touches to topics that may, at first
glance, seem too dry for mass entertainment.',72 The element of romance in filmic
narration cannot be forgotten, for it brings a larger audience to the theater for mass
entertainment. Hopefully, history will not be forgotten in the process.
The reason for the alienation of invention from the elements of constructing
historical films discussed above is that invention embodies these elements. By reducing
events, stocking characters, mingling events, creating illusion, and adding romance,
filmmakers are inventing the past. They are artistically re-constructing at both the factual
and symbolic level. Invention is the various manipulations of historical capital found in
cinematic history. Toplin notes that film scholars constantly reference Hayden White's
theory of relativism that states all "historical interpretation involves the arranging and
telling of stories, not the objective presentation of truth. All historical explanations
constitute forms offiction.',73 The idea that there is no objective truth is a cornerstone
for the argument pertaining to invention and manipulation in historical films; however,
Toplin notes it would be wise not to take this fact to the extreme: "But are all
53
manipulations defendable?,,74 The short answer is no, but this requires further
examination.
Robert Rosenstone states that there are two types of invention-false invention
and true invention-but before explaining this theory, it is important to form a basis and
explanation of "truth" that enables us to judge the veracity or falsity of a historical
manipulation.75 Sometimes the best way to judge what is, is to judge what is not. Alan
Brinkley explains, "There may be no completely objective or 'absolute truth,' but there
are such things as untruths. There are things that simply are not true, that are lies.... We
do not always find [truth], but we seek it. And in seeking truth, we also have to seek
untruth and attempt to avoid it or discredit it.,,76 Furthermore, historical interpretations
are labeled as true interpretations when they are weighed against current historiography
and considered plausible interpretations. Rosenstone explains that "any 'historical' film,
like any work of written, graphic, or oral history, enters a body ofpreexisting knowledge
and debate.',77 For Rosenstone, inventions are true "in that they symbolize, condense, or
summarize larger amounts of data; true in that they impart an overall meaning of the past
that can be verified, documented, or reasonably argued.,,78 In other words, while
historians may not know exactly what happened, they often know what did not happen,
and any filmmaker must be prepared to face Rosenstone' s notion of false and true
invention.
In conclusion, the genre of historical film is an elusive and complex creature.
Rather than criticize all historical films against the written discourse, historical films
should be studied based on how they advertise and actually use history. Is a historical-
54
entertainment film bad history because it uses blatantly obvious anachronisms? Does a
period film that aims to portray the beliefs, customs, and materials of a past time fail the
test if it uses stock characters and romance? Should a/action film be examined as a
bio/eventpic? Should a bio/eventpic be dismissed as history because it cannot examine the
entire life of a character? I assert that a historical film should, first and foremost, be
evaluated based on its advertisement and aim in relation to its degree of fiction. Having
discovered a film's aim, the analysis can move to ajudgment of whether or not the film
actually stays true to its advertised intention. Once the film's intention is addressed and
evaluated, the analysis of the film as propaganda can begin. Clearly, period films,/action
films, and bio/eventpic films, with their intent to inform at various levels, can be the most
problematic when it comes to concerns of romanticizing, stereotyping, or propagating the
past. This guide, along with the knowledge of invention, truth, "untruth," and subgenres
of historical films, is the beginning of the examination of historical film reception. In
order to finish it, one must consider the viewers.
Notes
I John O'Conner, Image As Artifact: The Historical Analysis ofFilm and Television (Malabar: Robert E.
Krieger Publishing Company, 1990), ix.
2 Ibid., 20-21.
3 John O'Conner, "History in Images/Images in History: Reflections on the Importance of Film and
Television Study for an Understanding of the Past," American Historical Review 93 (1988): 1201.
4 Robert Rosenstone, "History in JmageslHistory in Words: Reflections of the Possibility of Really Putting
History onto Film," American Historical Review 93 (1988): 1174.
5 Top1in, Reel History, 198.
55
6 Robert Toplin, History by Hollywood: The Use and Abuse ofthe American Past (Urbana: University of
Illinois Press, 1996), ix.
7 Toplin, Reel History, 4.
8 Hayden White, "Historiography and Historiophoty," American Historical Review 93 (1988): 1193.
9 Ibid.
10 Robert Rosenstone, Visions ofthe Past: The Challenge ofFilm to Our Idea ofHistory (Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1995), 14-15.
11 Robert Toplin, "The Filmmaker as Historian," American Historical Review 93 (1988): 1226.
12 Pierre Sorlin, The Film in History: Restaging the Past (Totowa: Barnes & Noble Books, 1980), 5.
13 Rosenstone, "History in Images/History in Words," 1180.
14 Sorlin, The Film in History, 21.
15 Toplin, Reel History, 168.
16 David Herlihy, "Am I a Camera? Other Reflections on Film and History," American Historical Review
93 (1988): 1189.
17 Rosenstone, "History in Images/History in Words," 1179.
18 Ibid., 1179.
19 Toplin, Reel History, 50.
20 Herlihy, "Am I a Camera," 1191.
21 len Ang, Watching Dallas: Soap Opera and the Melodramatic Imagination (London: Methuen, 1985),
93.
22 Ibid.
23 National Council on Public History, "What is Public History?" http://ncph.org/cms/what-is-public-
historyl (accessed May 3, 2010).
24 John Tosh, Why History Matters (Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008),
136.
25 Keith Barton and Linda S. Levstik, Teaching History for the Common Good (Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, 2004) 4-5.
26 Tosh, Why History Matters, 103.
27 Barton, Teaching History, 40.
56
28 Tosh, Why History Matters, 127.
29 Barton, Teaching History, 17.
30 Ibid., 14.
31 W.J.T. Mitchell, Picture Theory: Essays on Verbal and Visual Representation (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1994).
32 Barton, Teaching History, 16.
33 Ibid., 17-20.
34 Peter Seixax, "Popular Film and Young People's Understanding of the History ofNative-White
Relations," in Celluloid Blackboard: Teaching History with Film, ed. Alan S. Marcus (Charlotte, NC:
lAP-Information Age Pub, 2007), 100.
35 Ibid., 101.
36 S. Elizabeth Bird and J Godwin, "Film in the Undergraduate Anthropology Classroom: Applying
Audience Response Research in Pedagogical Practice," Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 37:3
(2006): 285-299.
37 For example, John O'Conner, Image as Artifact: The Historical Analysis ofFilm and Television,
discussed above, provides an ancillary chapter that relates to public history. This chapter, titled "An
Introduction to Visual Language for Historians and History Teachers," discusses historical films as a
pedagogical tool in the classroom. For further reading on this topic, see Alan Marcus, ed., Celluloid
Blackboard: Teaching History with Film (Charlotte, NC: IAP-Information Age Pub, 2007).
38 Roy Rosenzweig and David P. Thelen, The Presence ofthe Past: Popular Uses ofHistory in American
Life (New York: Columbia University Press, 1998),97-98.
39 Ibid., 99.
40 Pierre Sorlin, The Film in History, 20-21.
41 Ibid., 20.
42 George F. Custen, "Making History," in The Historical Film: History and Memory in Media, ed. Marcia
Landy (News Brunswick: Rutgers Univ. Press, 2001), 76.
43 Ibid., 77.
44 Ibid., 82.
45 Rosenstone, Visions ofthe Past.
46 Robert Rosenstone, Visions ofthe Past, 123.
57
47 Toplin, Reel History, 92.
48 Ibid.
49 O'Conner, "History in Images/Images in History," 1200.
50 Ibid., 1200-1201.
51 Toplin, Reel History, 14.
52 The terms scope, 3-act drama, partisan, representation, illusion, and romance are formed as a
compilation of the several ways that historical films use historical content. The motivation and
influence for these terms are from the works of Robert Toplin, Reel History, 17-50, and Robert
Rosenstone, Visions ofthe Past, 54-61.
53 Rosenstone, Visions ofthe Past, 67.
54 Toplin, Reel History, 17.
55 Adrian Scott quoted in Toplin, Reel History, 18.
56 Rosenstone, Visions ofthe Past, 7.
57 Toplin, Reel History, 19-22.
58 Rosenstone, Visions ofthe Past, 56.
59 Toplin, Reel History, 23.
60 Rosenstone, "History in Images/History in Words," 1174.
61 For example, see Alexander. Directed by Oliver Stone. (Warner Home Video, August 2005), and Breach.
Directed by Billy Ray (Universal Studios, 2007).
62 Toplin, Reel History, 26.
63 Ibid., 30.
64 Ibid., 41.
65 Ibid., 38.
66 Rosenstone, Visions ofthe Past, 57.
67 Toplin, Reel History, 48.
68 Herlihy, "Am I a Camera? Other Reflections on Film and History," 1186.
69 Rosenstone, Visions o/the Past, 60.
70 Ibid.
71 Toplin, Reel History, 46.
72 Ibid., 47.
73 Ibid., 162.
74 Ibid.
75 Rosenstone, Visions o/the Past, 72-73.
76 Alan Brinkley quoted in Toplin, Reel History, 167.
77 Rosenstone, Visions o/the Past, 71-72.
78 Ibid., 70.
58
59
CHAPTER IV
AUDIENCE STUDIES, REALISM, METHODOLOGY
Audience Studies: A Brie/Survey
"Visual literacy is an essential tool for citizenship in contemporary America" - John E.
O'Conner.)
In modem society, Americans are inundated with media and mass culture and it is
essential for theorists to examine the media's role in everyday life. While it is currently
common practice to examine the medium, the message, and the audience to understand
the complex role and effects ofmedia in our society, early theorists disregarded
audiences. Moreover, as I have argued, historians continually neglect audiences as they
have yet to formulate a methodology to examine the function of historical films among
viewers. In this chapter, I give a briefoverview of audience studies and note some
relevant findings in order to formulate a methodology for historical film reception. I
begin with a survey of general theories ofmass culture and move into a survey ofthe
recent ethnographic tum within audience studies. I conclude this chapter with a
discussion of my methodology; this methods section also introduces the research
participants.
While certain elitist, Marxist, and the Frankfurt School theories can be contested,
their place and importance in the discourse ofpopular culture studies is well documented.
60
Both general historians' views towards historical films and len Ang's ideology ofmass
culture serve as evidence that these early theories are still predominant in the everyday
discourse surrounding popular culture. Mass culture studies, and thus the study of
popular culture, were originally dominated by two theories: elitist and Marxist.2 The
former theory bases its argument against mass culture's democratization of culture and
exhibits a feeling of nostalgia for the days when taste, and thus authority, belonged to the
elite. The elitist argument stresses that art is high art, literature is "great" canonical
literature, and authority over taste belongs to elite intellectuals. In addition, mass culture
from this perspective produces passive audiences who are manipulated by standardized
commodities that are based upon the lowest-common-denominator of interests in order to
gamer mass profit. Furthermore, individuals are considered atomized individuals due to
the decline of community ties in the new societal framework: industrial and modem.
These theorists, such as Matthew Arnold and Dwight Macdonald, are pro avant-garde,
seeking art outside the marketplace ofmass culture.
Similar to elitists, Marxists stress the democratization of culture and its societal
import; however, for Marxists, the massification and democratization of culture is part of
the political economy's natural evolution and a necessary revolutionary step. In other
words, capitalism is a necessary step that initially provides power to the masses.
However, Marxists hold the view, similar to elitists, that individuals have become
atomized, passive consumers within this modernization. The Marxist's greatest critique
61
of mass culture is that mass media impairs critical ability: the critical ability to see past
the guise of capitalism.
Drawing upon Marxist theories of mass culture, the "pessimistic mass society
thesis" was put forth by leading members of the Frankfurt School: Theodore Adorno,
Max Horkheimer, and Herbert Marcuse. The leading force behind the development of
this thesis was the rise of fascism in early twentieth century Germany. Due to the Nazi's
propaganda machine, the media was perceived as a powerfully persuasive, aggressive,
and negative force. Falling in line with elitist and Marxist theories, Horkheimer and
Adorno describe the "Culture Industry" as a factory that produces standardized cultural
goods and ideology in order to manipulate the masses into passivity.3 Mass culture is
easy pleasure that creates false needs and false consciousness.
Sociologist Dominic Strinati offers a succinct review of the weaknesses and
critiques of the Frankfurt School theories of popular culture, including the notion that
leisure culture is bad culture:
It is as if Frankfurt School theorists know what people should and should not be
doing on the basis of their own ideological preferences ... The idea of what
people should and should not be doing, and what they should really want,
although couched in vague and abstract terms, actually assumes a particular
model of cultural activity, one influenced by the example of art and the social
position of the elite intellectual, to which all people should inspire.4
According to Strinati, the Frankfurt theories' critique of the standardization ofpopular
culture misunderstands that standardization is necessary for communication, and above
all, finding the next popular song is easier said than done. Finally, while the Frankfurt
School emphasizes that theory must be critical-oriented towards changing society-
62
their approach to capitalism implies a Marxist ideology of a revolutionary overthrow of
capitalism followed by its socialist replacement. Strinati clarifies, "The fact that this
revolution failed to materialize did not lead the Frankfurt School theorists to question the
basis upon which it had been predicted in the first place. What they did was to assume
that it should have happened, and then tried to work out why it had failed to materialize, a
characteristic of much Marxist thinking in the twentieth century."s Implied in this view
is the Marxist ideology that capitalism is merely one evolutionary step in the political
economy.
Lastly and most important to the study ofhistorical film reception, the Frankfurt
School's view ofpopular culture continued to define audiences as passive, atomized
individuals that are susceptible to the Culture Industry's omnipotent power. Overall, the
theories lack empirical evidence and are inundated with abstract and inaccessible
language. For example, part of the pessimistic thesis is the "hypodermic model" of
media consumption that holds the belief that powerless viewers are simply injected with
the media's message. However, as David Morley explains, after Adorno, Horkheimer,
and Marcuse immigrated to America during the 1930's, their model was refuted by
American researchers throughout the 1950's and 1960's due to the plurality of American
society. American researchers, according to Morley, thought the thesis "sociologicallY
naYve.,,6
In addition to mass culture theories based on political economy, structuralism and
semiology are tools that aid the understanding of mass culture texts, specifically the ways
in which they determine meaning. To reiterate, it is not my intention to give a substantial
63
review ofthese theories' development but to clarifY their strengths and weaknesses as
tools that determine the production of meaning. Structuralism's greatest contribution is
the recognition that all parts within a structure are systematically related, and each part,
including the summation of parts, acquires meaning through these relations. As such, in
the beginning structuralism took a deterministic view of the production of meaning as the
audience was still a mass audience that was dominated by the meaning produced by the
structure of the text. This universalistic and deterministic approach often "reduces
culture to a mental structure and so neglects its complexity and its historical and social
specificity."? Structuralism is a valuable tool for determining the dominant meaning
within texts, but meaning cannot be truly understood through textual analysis alone.
Drawing upon structuralism, semiology began to open the meaning of texts with
the key notion that sign systems are arbitrary. While semiology's strength lies in its
emphases that texts are polysemic and open to various interpretations, it raises questions
concerning the availability of interpretations and why some interpretations are preferred
over others. As Strinati notes, "How do we know, for example, that the conclusions
offered by semiology are not the result of the subjective impressions of the analyst but an
objective uncovering of a systematic structure of meaning? Indeed, is semiology better
viewed as a type of textual appreciation or literary criticism than as an objective social
science?,,8 Both Structuralism and semiology's strengths lie in their ability to determine
a dominant meaning within a text, but researchers need to be aware of falling into their
traps: there is one universal and deterministic meaning that cannot be negotiated or
resisted, or there is an indefinite availability of meanings. Overall, such theoretical tools
64
are practical if combined with contextual data, most importantly, socially situated
viewers.
In comparison, recent psychoanalytic theories seem to add similar, but limited,
value to media reception theory, for they focus their analysis on the universality of
subjects and thus a text's universal meaning. While psychoanalytic theory has heavily
influenced scholarship on identity, subjectivity, and personality, the theory largely fails,
as David Morley states, "because the theory, in effect, tries to explain any specific
instance of the text/reader relationship in terms of a universalist theory of the formation
of subjects in general.,,9 Such approaches have been the failure ofmany discussions of
historical films. Following film theory, these films are often analyzed using structural,
semiological, or psychoanalytical models, and while each of these models provide
valuable insights, they often generate a preferred reception of film without examining
contextual data: most importantly, audiences' or viewers' interpretations and opinions of
the texts.
To continue, early American research on popular culture began to focus on one of
two poles in the communication paradigm: the message or its audience. lO The former
model focused on the message and then moved the examination to its effect on the
audience. The latter model began with the audience in terms of social, environmental, and
"needs" elements and moved the examination to its "use" of the text. As Morley
explains, the former model took a behavioral approach while the latter model took a
structural-functional approach. It must be noted that throughout these early studies the
audience was still assumed to have "a shared and stable system ofvalues."ll Morley
65
places these two models under a normative paradigm in comparison to the new
interpretive paradigm. The interpretive paradigm is articulated through the "uses and
gratifications" model, which stresses "the important fact that different members of the
mass-media audience may use and interpret any particular programme in a quite different
way from how the communicator intended it, and in quite different ways from other
members of the audience. Righty, it stressed the role ofthe audience in the construction
of meaning.,,12 In other words, audience members bring individual needs, desires, and
uses to popular texts and may create variable meanings.
In Television Culture, John Fiske expands on these ideas and delineates the
concepts of audience, audiences, and viewers. Fiske explains that audience is a term
easiest to understand and dismiss as "it implies television [or other media] reaches a
homogeneous mass of people who are all essentially identical, who receive the same
messages, meanings, and ideologies from the same programs and who are essentially
passive.,,13 The term audience is clearly a remnant of the view held by early popular
culture theorists. Fiske continues by discussing the practical move from audience to
audiences:
Pluralizing the term into <audiences' at least recognizes that there are differences
between the viewers of anyone program that must be taken into account. It
recognizes that we are not a homogenous society, but that our social system is
crisscrossed by axes of class, gender, race, age, nationality, region, politics,
religion and so on, all of which produce more or less strongly marked
differences. 14
Lastly, Fiske describes viewers as socially situated individuals who make meanings and
gain pleasures from media. Fiske is clear to delineate a viewer from a "reader," however.
66
He explains, "The 'reader' is less concretely situated than the 'viewer' and is rather the
embodiment ofthat central cultural process-the production ofmeaning."l5 To clarify,
Fiske defines a "reader" as an individual who interprets texts (e.g., books, film,
television, advertisements, etc). Hence, a viewer is a type of reader, or interpreter, who
is further situated in an interpretive event: film. Understanding research participants as
readers further situated as film viewers enables the implementation of a uses and
gratifications approach. Film offers a different format than both television and books,
and thus will serve different functions, uses, and gratifications.
However, several scholars dismiss the uses and gratifications model, which
stresses the agency of individuals to use and interpret texts differently than the producer
intended or differently than other users. For example, drawing on Stuart Hall and Philip
Elliott, Morley raises two objections to the uses and gratifications model: first, the model
overestimates the openness of the text, and second, the model is insufficiently
sociological due to its "essentially psychologistic problematic, relying as it does on
mental states, needs and processes abstracted from the social situation of the individuals
concemed."l6 Morley insists the text is more closed than open by its portrayal of
dominant ideology and thus limits the availability of interpretation. While I agree with
Morley's inference that a text limits the availability of its interpretation, I strongly agree
with Fiske's claim that "in this negotiation the balance of power lies with the readers. The
meanings found in the text shift towards the subject position of the reader more than the
reader's subjectivity is subjected to the ideology of the power ofthe text."l? In addition,
Morley emphasizes that individual reception based on inter-psychological facets, such as
67
needs, desires, and gratifications, is sociologically irrelevant. Obviously, mental states,
needs, and processes should not be abstracted from social situations, but they also should
not be forgotten when discussing social situations. It is common practice among media
ethnographers, and folklorists, to socially situate research participants before delving into
their individual reception.
The strength of the uses and gratifications model in relation to its utilization as a
framework for historical films lies in its ability to discover the details of reception at a
deeper level: the people's level. In regard to Morley's second claim against such an
approach, individual viewers' needs, desires, and gratifications can both affect other
viewers' watching habits or opinions, and if enough individuals are satisfying their needs,
desires, and gratifications through film, it can clearly be quantified to be sociologically
relevant. There should be no doubt that sociological relevant factors will be revealed
through detailed analysis. The uses and gratifications model simply stresses quality
before quantity; it stresses the need for empirical evidence. This is where folkloristic
approaches fall in line with the uses and gratifications approach to audience reception.
Folkloric approaches document the experiences and opinions ofrepresentative audience
members in order to complement grand social theories by examining what common,
informal, and everyday phenomena mean to individuals and small groups within
societies. The overall strength of these two models is their ability to discover the details
of reception as a function of people first and society second. These approaches ensure
that raw data and experiences ofphenomena are elicited in order to serve as a foundation
for the application of theoretical analysis. Clearly, the documentation of individual and
68
small group reception raises questions regarding representation. Representation in
qualitative analysis will be discussed in more detail below.
Morley's objections to the uses and gratifications model brings up another
approach to mass culture and audiences that both supports the uses and gratifications
model and provokes similar objections. This is the populist approach to mass culture. In
contrast to the ideology of mass culture, Ang describes the ideology of populism, and this
ideology can be summed up in one phrase, "There's no accounting for taste.,,18 There is
also no accounting for "use." The populist approach to mass culture, ofwhich Fiske is
often labeled a proponent, acknowledges the freedom of viewers to interpret and use texts
in their own manner.
The objections to populist approaches draw from arguments proposed by elitists,
Marxists, and the Frankfurt School. In his article "Beyond Cultural Populism: Notes
toward the Critical Ethnography of Media Audiences," Timothy Gibson stresses the
power of macrostructures to restrict polysemy and political activism. Throughout the
piece, the term "constrain" and the phrase "over-determined social positions" stress the
power ofmacrostructures, specifically culture and industry. Drawing upon early
pessimistic theories, Gibson emphasizes two key objections proposed by opponents to
populist approaches. First, the active viewing ofmass culture is not in itself political
resistance. And second, economic structures of power constrain divergent and
oppositional meanings as individuals do not hold the same discursive power or influence
of those as central institutions. For Gibson, scholars need to stress how macrostructures
constrain political efficacy, political activism, and meaning. 19 Clearly, the reaction to
69
populist approaches assumes a particular model of cultural activity that involves political
activism, and this is the main argument against proponents ofviewer agency (e.g., Fiske,
Jenkins, Ang, and Radway).
However, by making political activism imperative and compulsory, opponents to
populist approaches completely disregard and dismiss other cultural activities,
specifically the role of pleasure, entertainment, or leisure activity in everyday life. As
Ang concisely argues, "Pleasure, however, is the category ignored in the ideology of
mass culture. In its discourses pleasure seems to be non-existent. Instead it makes things
like responsibility, critical distance or aesthetic purity central-moral categories that
make pleasure as irrelevant and illegitimate criterion.,,2o The ideology ofmass culture,
and specifically the Marxist and Frankfurt School component of this ideology, dismisses
all possible functions of mass culture except political activism. As Ang notes, "In this
way the ideology ofmass culture places itself totally outside the framework of the
popular aesthetic, of the way in which popular cultural practices take shape in the
routines of daily life. Thus it remains both literally and figuratively caught in the ivory
towers of 'theory. ",21 The uses and gratifications model, a folkloristic perspective, and a
populist approach can help explain how mass culture objects, such as historical films,
function in lieu of the ideology of mass culture's assumptions regarding compulsory
political activity. Moreover, as I reveal, cultural objects, specifically certain historical
films, are not only pleasurable, but can be pedagogical and provoke critical modes of
thought, such as cultural and historical awareness.
70
Overall, audience studies have taken an "ethnographic turn" with an emphasis on
participant observation, interviews, and other tools affiliated with the fieldworker. For
example, Henry Jenkins' work, which is often cited by folklorists, examines fan cultures
and participatory culture through a seemingly ethnographic and folkloric perspective.22
Fan studies, such as those by Jenkins, are currently fashionable in audience studies for
their focus on community, participatory culture, cultural appropriation, and resistance.23
Meanwhile, scholars, such as Annette Markham, Nancy Baym, and Elizabeth Bird, are
also implementing and discussing digital ethnography.24 However, studies which focus
on fan cultures tend to move the discussion of audience reception away from more casual
viewing experiences. As Elizabeth Bird states, "Most people, most of the time, are fairly
casual media users.,,25 While discussing scholarly approaches to handling taste and
aesthetic judgments of popular culture, Bird also notes, " ... there is also a tendency to
favor programs and genres that may be considered, edgy, avant-garde, or attracting a
'cult' audience, such as the Star Trek franchise.,,26
Jenkins work on American Idol, a recent cult favorite to be studied by academics,
is intriguing for its discussion of viewer social interaction. In "Buying into American
Idol: How We Are Being Sold on Reality Television," Jenkins explores the convergence
of media corporations and advertising companies to tap consumers emotional capital via
"affective economics.,,27 In cooperation with Initiative Media, Jenkins and other MIT
researchers carried out ethnographic research to understand group dynamics of families
viewing American Idol. Jenkins describes the goals of the research, "We wanted to better
understand how people integrated the experience of watching American Idol into the rest
71
of their social interactions.,,28 What is of interest to me and important to my study is the
description of three types of viewers by media industry insiders: zappers, casuals, and
loyals. Zappers are individuals who simply "channel surf," that is, they constantly switch
programs seeking instant gratification. Casuals, on the other hand, are individuals who
may be aware of general themes of a program yet follow programs rather sporadically.
And lastly, loyals are individuals who stick to their programs, spend time talking about
them, and "are are more likely to pursue content across media channels." Jenkins
succinctly notes, "Loyals watch series; zappers watch television. Loyals form long-term
commitments; zappers are like the folks at cocktail parties who are always looking over
their shoulders to see if someone more interesting has just entered the room. Casuals fall
somewhere in between; they watch particular series when they think of it or have nothing
better to do.,,29
Jenkins notes one of the project's key findings, "The Initiative Media/MIT
research team found that in almost every social space where American Idol was watched,
viewers of different degrees of commitment were present.,,30 While I am uninterested in
viewer dynamics in relation to affective economics and advertising, the discussion of
zappers, casuals, and loyals and the finding that viewers of different degrees of
commitment are present at different viewing occasions are key insights that can be
related to other viewing events. For instance, loyal viewers of American War films can
attract other casual and seemingly uninterested viewers of this specific subgenre. Lastly,
while these notions of loyal, casual, and zappers aid in understanding viewer interactions,
72
ethnographic findings concerning realism-specifically its attraction-add a great deal to
the more specific study of historical film reception.
Realism "Rules"
Realism is an attractive element in multiple platforms ofpopular culture, whether
it is the lure of reality television, sports broadcasts, or even comic book superheroes. The
recent boom of reality television is a case in point. It is obvious that reality television's
current reputation is based upon its dubious advertisement of being "real." Scholars,
such as Su Homes, Deborah Jermyn, Ron Simon, and John Comer, use a seemingly
historical-geographic method to search for the history of reality television through a
mixed investigation of documentaries, television game shows, and caught-on-tape
television; all shows that market their "liveness.,,31 In addition, the two most watched
programs in the United States and Candida are currently Super Bowl XLIV and the recent
2010 Winter Olympic Hockey final, respectively; sport is reality.
Moreover, realism's attraction can be seen in seemingly super-human platforms:
the comic book industry. Like all tales, the values superhero stories instill and stand for
are only relevant if they speak to current audiences, and all superhero audiences have one
thing in common, they are indeed human. For example, Marvel's attention to emotional
realism awarded them great financial success. Comic book readers "showed enthusiasm
for what [Stan] Lee called 'realistic fantasy' stories about superheroes who performed
impossible feats but evinced believable human qualities and failings ... If not quite
'believable,' these stories at least took place in a world more relevant to the audience.,,32
The epitome of emotional realism for the young comic book audience has been
73
Spiderman. Comic historian Bradford Wright explains, "Peter Parker furnished readers
with an instant point of identification. All but the most emotionally secure adolescents
could relate to Peter's self-absorbed obsessions with rejection, inadequacy, and
loneliness.,,33 Comic book artist John Romita notes D.C. Comics never understood the
key to Marvel's success; their "characters were becoming human.,,34
Recent ethnographic studies by David Morely, len Ang, and Janice Radway offer
key insights into the importance and appeal of realism. I use findings in their research in
order to create my own qualitative framework for investigating the reception ofhistorical
films. Below, I explore how realism can aid our understanding of historical realism in
the reception of historical films.
While investigating family viewing within the home, David Morley discovered
that social roles played a larger role in viewing preferences than gender.35 Furthermore,
while masculinity identified itself with "factual" programs-news, documentaries, and
sports-and femininity identified itself with preferences for fictional programs, there
were systematic exceptions to this rule as educated women and working women found
themselves more interested in factual programs.36 The disapproval of fictional programs
by socially placed men or women along with the penchant for needing to learn during
leisure activities fits well into len Ang's conception of the ideology ofmass culture. For
those who adhere to this ideology, mass culture, and possibly leisure itself, is bad unless
one is bettering oneself. Factual or seemingly pedagogical programs have a higher status
than programs of mere entertainment. Lastly, Morley's work on family television is
complimented by James Lull's work Inside Family Viewing, which partially focuses on
74
the media's role in creating and maintaining interpersonal relationships.3? Lull's work on
family viewing will be discussed in greater detail in the next chapter that focuses on
family viewing and historical film reception (Chapter 5).
In addition to Morley's findings concerning factual programs within the family,
len Ang provides a mechanism for examining historical films beyond entertainment with
her delineation of empirical, classical, and emotional realism.38 Empirical realism is the
comparison of material realities "in" and "outside" the text. Classical realism is borrowed
from film theory to designate the conventions of moving images to resemble the flow of
reality, mainly the natural and physical laws associated with causation. Ang notices that
both empirical and classical realism are cognitive opposed to the last type of realism,
emotional realism. Emotional realism, paraphrasing Ang, is the act of discerning concrete
situations and complications as symbolic representations of a more general living
. 39
expenence.
These three types of realism relate to the four subgenres of historical film-
historical-entertainment, period,jaction, and bio/eventpic. The reader might observe that
this all seems very theoretical and may question its relevance to a discussion of
ethnography. However, Ang's delineation of realism is paramount in the analyses of
audience member's responses to historical films. Degrees of fiction, a formal
characteristic of texts, can be linked to degrees of realism, an ethnographic characteristic
more easily discerned through audience members' responses. Who is to say that
audience members will designate The Last Samurai as a period film as I have?
Furthermore, do audiences actually view films and delineate them in terms of these four
75
subgenres? It is clear they do, to varying degrees, and these subgenres are useful tools
for analyzing both the formal and ethnographic elements ofviewer reception. By
combining structuralist and semiological approaches to texts with ethnographic findings,
we can rid ourselves of the pitfalls of believing texts are both over-determined and
infinitely polysemic. Moreover, another question arises: how powerful is the attraction of
empirical and emotional realism? As noted in Chapter 3, it would appear this power is
strong as filmmakers use historical realism to advertise their products amongst
competition. The three types of realism identified by Ang serve as a bridge between
audiences and the fictional characteristics of historical films.
With the exception ofthe historical-entertainment subgenre, the period, faction,
and bio/eventpic film will always use the production ploys of classical realism: the flow
of reality, specifically the natural and physical laws associated with causation. The key
element of delineating historical films lies in their use of empirical realism and emotional
realism, for empirical realism within a historical film can encompass both material
substances-architecture, geography, etc.-and historical characters. Meanwhile,
emotional realism within a historical film can encompass both documented events and
symbolic representations of general living experiences. The addition of history adds the
possible addition of historical characters and events in order to strengthen realism's
affect.
For clarification, the period film focuses on emotional realism from general living
experiences and empirical realism solely from material objects. The faction film blends
fictional characters with empirical characters, empirical materials, and emotional
76
situations; this is, no doubt, why the faction film is the most complicated subgenre. The
bio/eventpic encompasses empirical realism at both the material and character level while
strengthening emotional realism through the representation ofdocumented events (Figure
2).
Historical Subgenre Classical Empirical Realism Emotional Realism
Realism
Material Character Documented Representative
events events
Historical (more often yes
entertainment than not)
Period yes yes yes
Faction yes yes yes/no yes/no yes
BiopiclEventpic yes yes yes yes yes
Figure 2. Subgenres of historical film and their relation to realism.
Most importantly, empirical and emotional realism are transformed into historical
capital--dates, events, and characters of a historical period-with the addition of
temporality. What makes each of these historically real is not only that they existed, but
that they existed in a specific time and place. This holds true for events as well; they
happened.
In addition to Morley's findings on factual programs within the family and Ang's
discussion of empirical, classical, and emotional realism, Janice Radway's Reading the
Romance offers external validation that audiences believe that they learn cultural
"knowledge" and "facts" by reading texts; most importantly, they see this as a
77
legitimating factor. Due to the simple prose writing and narrative structure, readers
believe they are reading historical "facts" that can be used at a later date. The
significance lies in the fact that the readers believe they are learning and cite this learning
as an industrious act ofvalue. Furthermore, while Radway establishes that women enjoy
learning factual data from long historical, she also notes that editors are aware that
instruction is a principle function of Romance novels for their readers.4o This is relevant
to my research as two ofmy research participants discuss Romance novels and their
depiction of history in comparison to historical films serving the same function.
Methodology: Media Ethnography and Historical Films
I use the above research findings to compliment my own methodology, and
throughout this thesis I have been stressing the importance of a folkloric perspective and
a uses and gratifications model in performing such ethnography. David Machin explains
there are two main reasons for ethnographic studies ofmedia: ethnography finds the finer
details of the ways in which people live with media more generally, and ethnography
observes and seizes real instances of social phenomena.41 Moreover, Machin restates my
emphasis for discovering rather than speculating about social phenomena, "Further, if we
are imposing a model of what we assume that social we are investigating is like, are we
really investigating anything?,,42 Lastly, since ethnography stresses the contexts of
investigation, it is a qualitative approach to gathering data that raises concerns about
representation. Such studies deal with target samples in order to examine specific
questions and issues. Bird clarifies, "And we should not agonize unnecessarily about
pure 'holism' as a goal. Few anthropologists study complete, self-contained societies any
78
more (if they ever did), but write ethnographies that explore specific questions and
issues." She continues, a "holistic perspective emerges in the attempt to see these
questions and issues in context, and linked to other aspects of the culture.,,43
Additionally, it is imperative to realize the benefits and limitations of one's
methods. As folklorist Bruce Jackson notes in regard to fieldwork, "Every question
implies a category of answer, and every machine limits the field of acceptable response.
The questions we ask and the machines we use do not merely provide data; they also
structure the data we get.,,44 Methods matter because they shape our conclusions, not
because they lead to transparent truthS.45 For example, I categorize my methodology for
this project as a media approach. In other words, I begin the search for evidence of
historical viewings through observations and by asking the interviewees about their
general habits of watching moving images. I began the group interview with an open-
ended question that asked for clarification on why the family members considered
themselves part of a "movie family." On the contrary, I could have begun the interview
with a question regarding the family member's feeling about history, which I would have
termed a historical approach. Ironically, my methodology begins with a discussion of
media and moves towards historical films and historical consciousness. I could have
easily reversed these concepts, and undoubtedly, I would have gathered different data.
The reasoning for choosing the media approach resulted from my interest in folklore
studies and media culture, in general, and historical films, in particular.
As noted, the representational audience that I am investigating in depth is a small
family that defines itself as a "movie family." Members of the family include the
79
daughter, Jessica Gray (28), the son, Jason Gray (30), the mother, Lori Gray (54), and the
father, Rick Gray (57). Also, Jason Gray is married to Heather Gray (32). Heather took
part in the group interview, but individual interviews were not performed with Heather as
she was pregnant and gave birth to her new son Daniel Gray. All members of the family
are Caucasian. Rick and Lori can be classified as middle-class, and Rick is a pilot for a
major airline. Jason, Heather, and Jessica are all college graduates and employed. In
addition, I have a special relationship with this family as Jessica is presently my fiancee.
As far as logistics, Rick and Lori live in upstate New York during the warmer months
and spend time in Florida during the colder months. Jason and Heather live in upstate
New York, and Jessica is currently living near Boston, Massachusetts.
The main reasons for writing about this family are threefold. First, as Jessica is
my fiancee, I am able to examine people with whom I am familiar and a micro-culture in
which I already participate. And as such, "'fieldwork' has actually started years
before.,,46 Bird explains, this allows "the native researcher to focus attention on
phenomena that they are already quite familiar, whether the context is India or the United
States."47 Second, as Lull's work on family television shows, the watching ofmoving
images serves various functions for families and small groups. As a subtheme of the
proposed study deals with additional avenues of folklore research, the general findings
about this family and the importance of moving images to their lives serve as examples of
future research possibilities for folklorists outside "motif sporting" and fan ethnography.
Additionally, everyday observations have made me aware of the fact that small groups
outside of family contexts can also be situated as "movie friends" or "television friends."
80
Families are certainly not the only type of small group in which moving images are
central to their culture and identity. It is important to remember that this family is a
representation of one type of culture in which the watching of moving images serves a
central role. Also, the family members are all college graduates who are no longer in
school, unlike the school subjects ofprevious studies (Chapter 3).48 As such, these
findings relate to the interests of public historians, such as Barton and Levstik, who
explore how citizens think about the past in their own terms.49 This study presents
findings relevant to this question and offers a new method for historians to perform
similar qualitative studies in other contexts. In other words, this study attempts to
address the question: how and where do working, educated citizens learn their history and
why?
For this research project, I performed one group interview with the research
participants, focusing on their general viewing habits, and I observed the viewing of
several films through participant observation. I then performed individual interviews
with the participants to discuss historical films in more specific detail. Because I literally
live on the opposite side of the country (Eugene, Oregon) from my participants, my
fieldwork was performed using a variety of methods and tools. I originally contacted the
research participants through email, received their consent letters, and then had them
carry out a small activity that discerned whether or not the individuals separated
historical films from other genres of films. I performed this step by simply asking the
research participants to categorize their film collections into their own genre schemes.
The benefits of this method over other commonly practiced methods is it allows research
81
participants to categorize their films in their own ways-opposed to me imposing
categorizations and defining films as historical films for them. Fan ethnographies
generally categorize the viewers based on specific cultural objects (e.g., Jenkins and Star
Trek, Radway and Romance novels, Ang and Dallas the soap opera) rather than allowing
the participants to categorize their viewing preferences and habits in their own terms in
relation to other media objects. By allowing research participants to categorize their
films in this personal way, I am able to compare the reasons behind their selection and
viewing of historical films in relation to other genres of film. Also, their categorizations
provide broader data about the ways in which viewers classify and think about their film
collection.
After the initial email and response to the categorization activity, I performed an
in-person group interview with the family to contextualize their viewing behaviors and
experiences in order to establish and situate an in depth discussion of their categorization
and viewing of historical films. This group interview also allowed me the opportunity to
begin questioning the family on the genre schemes they used to categorize their films. I
began the general discussion ofhistorical films in relation to other film genres in this
group interview. Most importantly, I discovered whether or not the individuals
differentiate historical films within the genre itself by questioning the individuals about
their general perception of historical films and the use of history in these films. This
group interview was highlighted and contextualized by general everyday observations
that I experienced and observed in my time participating with the family.
-----------------_._-----
82
I performed this group interview and the individual interviews as conversational
styled interviews following the strategy of Kathryn Anderson, communications scholar,
and Dana Jack, education and psychology scholar; the key element here is the ability of
the interviewee to discuss his or her own interests in a conversational manner. 50 As
Anderson and Jack state, "The spontaneous exchange within an interview offers
possibilities of freedom and flexibility for researchers and narrators alike. For the
narrator, the interview provides the opportunity to tell [his or her] own story in [his or
her] own terms.,,51 In other words, conversational styled interviews allow for flexibility
and digression on the part of the narrator.
After this initial in-person group interview, I carried out interviews using a variety
of tools and interview formats, such as in-person interviews, email interviews, and instant
messaging interviews. It is important to understand when and why it is possible to use
new media formats, especially if the goal is execute a conversational styled interview. 52
In other words, it is imperative to know when new media provides what Bruce Jackson
calls "useful-fieldwork-fieldwork from which the researcher learns something and by
which valid information is obtained.,,53
New media provides various benefits for those engaged in fieldwork and
interviewing. For example, while I was transcribing the family group interview, I came
to a point where my fiancee was speaking, and I suddenly realized this portion called for
an important follow up question. I immediately stopped transcribing, asked my fiance a
question concerning the interview using instant messaging, and then she responded. I
easily copied and pasted the typed-text into my transcription notes, making a note of the
83
second transaction. This additional and crucial follow up question was asked and
responded to within a few minutes. This example illustrates the extent to which new
media can benefit the research process in terms of transcription, distance, and time. This
follow up question not only added information to my transcription but improved the
quality and clarified the information already present.
In "New Media Technology's Qualitative Effect on Interviews," I argue, "If new
media platforms ultimately add original data or aid existing data in order to clarify the
research of the person or people of interest, the raison d'etre of our research, then one
should use them ... As folklorists, we may use these systems, while always being
cognizant of their capabilities and drawbacks. In the end, folklore studies is as much
about the researcher and his or her methods as it is about the people it explores and
attempts to understand."s4 Furthermore, as Bruce Jackson states, "The machines and
their products are never more than tools to capture information which in turn will add to
our knowledge and increase our understanding."ss The following two chapters examine
the information gathered from my fieldwork in order to add knowledge and aid our
understanding of the reception and function of historical films.
Notes
I John O'Conner, "History in Images/Images in History: Reflections on the Importance of Film and
Television Study for an Understanding of the Past," 1201.
2It is not my intention to review the history of these theories here. My intention is only to draw out the
relevant themes of these studies to popular perceptions of popular culture and audiences. For a concise
introduction to mass culture theories, structuralism, and semiology with regards to popular culture, see
Dominic Strinati, An Introduction to Theories ofPopular Culture, 2nd ed. (London: Routledge, 2004).
3 Theodore Adorno and Max Horkheimer, "The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception," in
The Dialectic afEnlightenment trans. John Cumming. (NY: Seabury, 1972), 120-167.
84
4 Dominic Strinati, An Introduction to Theories ofPopular Culture, 2nd ed. (London: Routledge, 2004), 67-
75.
5 Ibid., 72.
6 David Morley, Television, Audiences, and Cultural Studies (London: Routledge, 1992),46.
7 Strinati, An Introduction to Theories ofPopular Culture, 107.
8 Ibid., 111.
9 Morley, Television, Audiences, and Cultural Studies, 60.
10 Ibid., 45-58.
II Ibid., 50.
12 Ibid., 51-51.
13 John Fiske, Television Culture (London: Methuen, 1987), 16.
14 Ibid., 17.
15 Ibid.
16 Morley, Television, Audiences, and Cultural Studies, 52-53.
17 John Fiske, Television Culture, 66.
18 Ang, Watching Dallas 113.
19 Timothy Gibson, "Beyond Cultural Populism: Notes Toward the Critical Ethnography of Media
Audiences." Journal ofCommunication Inquiry 24 (2000); 253 - 273.
20 Ang, Watching Dallas 116.
21 Ibid.
22 Henry Jenkins, Textual Poachers: Television Fans & Participatory Culture (New York: Routledge,
1992); Henry Jenkins, Fans, Bloggers, and Gamers: Exploring Participatory Culture (New York:
New York University Press, 2006).
23 For example Matt Hills, Fan Cultures. (London: Routledge, 2002); Lisa Lewis ed., The Adoring
Audience: Fan Culture and Popular Media (London: Routledge, 1992); Henry Jenkins, Textual
Poachers: Television Fans & Participatory Culture (New York: Routledge, 1992); and Camille
Bacon-Smith, Enterprising Women: Television Fandom and the Creation ofPopular Myth
(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1996).
85
24 Annette N. Markham and Nancy K. Baym, Internet Inquiry: Conversations about Method (Los Angeles:
Sage Publications, 2009); Annette N Markham, Life Online: Researching Real Experience in Virtual
Space Ethnographic alternatives book series (Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press, 1998). S. Elizabeth
Bird, Audience in Everyday Life: Living in a Media World (New York: Routledge, 2003).
25 S. Elizabeth Bird, Audience in Everyday Life: Living in a Media World (New York: Routledge, 2003),
51.
26 Bird, Audience in Everyday Life, 121.
27 Henry Jenkins, "Buying into American Idol," in Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media
Collide (New York: New York University Press, 2006),59-92.
28 Ibid., 80.
29 Ibid., 74.
30 Ibid., 80.
31 John Comer, "Performing the Real: Documentary Diversion," Television and New Media 3, no. 3
(August 2002), 255-59; Su Holmes and Deborah Jermyn, "Understanding Reality TV," in
Understanding Reality Television, ed. Su Holmes and Deborah Jermyn. (New York: Routledge, 2004),
1-31; Ron Simon, "The Changing Definition of Reality Television" in Thinking Outside the Box: A
Contemporary Television Genre Reader, ed. Gary R. Edgerton and Brian Jeffrey Ross. (Lexington:
University Press of Kentucky, 2005), 179-200.
32 Bradford W. Wright, Comic Book Nation: The Transformation ofYouth Culture in America (Baltimore,
Ma: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2001),207.
33 Ibid., 210.
34 John Romita quoted in Bradford W. Wright, Comic Book Nation: The Transformation ofYouth Culture
in America, 224.
35 David Morley, Family Television: Cultural Power and Domestic Leisure (London: Comedia Pub. Group,
1986),146-147.
36 Morley, Family Television: Cultural Power and Domestic Leisure, 162 - 163. Also, it is important to
note that Morley himself states the respondents answers may have been slightly skewed as he
performed group interviews rather than individual interviews whereas pressures from other family
members may not have been felt. For his discussion of this issue see Morley, Family Television:
Cultural Power and Domestic Leisure, 166-167.
37 James Lull, Inside Family Viewing: Ethnographic Research on Television's Audiences (London:
Routledge, 1990).
38 The definitions that follow for empirical, classical, and emotional realism are based on len Ang,
Watching Dallas, 36-44.
39 Ang, Watching Dallas, 44.
86
40 Janice A. Radway, Reading the Romance: Women, Patriarchy, and Popular Literature (Chapel Hill:
University ofNorth Carolina Press, 1984) 86-118.
41 David Machin, Ethnographic Researchfor Media Studies (London: Arnold. 2002), 85.
42 Ibid., 86.
43 S. Elizabeth Bird, Audience in Everyday Life, 7.
44 Bruce Jackson, Fieldwork (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1987),4.
45 Bird, Audience in Everyday Life, 9.
46 Alasuutari quoted in Bird, Audience in Everyday Life, 7.
47 Bird, Audience in Everyday Life, 7.
48 For example, see Keith Barton and Linda S. Levstik, Teaching History for the Common Good (Mahwah,
N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2004), 17; Alan S. Marcus, ed. Celluloid Blackboard: Teaching
History with Film (Charlotte, NC: lAP-Information Age Pub, 2007).
49 Barton, Teaching History for the Common Good, 17.
50 Kathryn Anderson and Dana C. Jack, "Learning to Listen: Interview Techniques and Analyses," in
Womens's Words: The Feminist Practice ofOral History, ed. Shema Berger Gluck and Daphne Patai
(New York: Routledge. 1991), 11-26.
51 Ibid., 11.
52 Vincent Bisson, "New Media Technology's Qualitative Effect on Interviews" (paper presented at the
annual meeting of American Folklore Society, Boise, Id, Oct 23, 2009).
53 Jackson, Fieldlvork, 1.
54 Bisson, "New Media Technology's Qualitative Effect on Interviews."
55 Jackson, Fieldlvork, 108.
87
CHAPTER V
A "MOVIE FAMILY" AND HISTORICAL FILMS
A "Movie Family"
As noted, the research participants for this study partially define their family as a
movie family. Movies serve as a central part of their micro-culture. While the overall
aim of this project is to examine the function and reception of historical films, one goal of
this project is to explore how movies playa central role in interpersonal relationships and
within small groups. This goal focuses on film as folklore as it stresses the cultural
activity around and long after viewing events. This chapter can be divided into two
sections: a cultural exploration of movies within family culture, and the reception of
historical films by the family members.
James Lull provides a typology for the social uses of television, and this typology
can be extrapolated to other media, such as film. This typology is an invaluable asset that
helps to illustrate the ways in which the members of the Gray family use film within their
own movie culture. Lull stresses, "It is somewhat arbitrary to distinguish between the
personal and interpersonal uses of television, however the inventory and explication of
the uses of television described here focus directly on their communicative value as
social resources."l Lull divides the social uses of television into two camps: the
structural and relational. The two structural uses of television are television as an
environmental resource and television as a behavior regulator. As an environmental
88
resource television serves to "create a flow ofconstant background noise which moves to
the foreground when individuals or groups desire."z For example, both Jessica and Lori
will often leave the television on while doing work. Jessica, specifically, will throw in a
movie while cleaning her room, doing chores, or finishing up work for her job. I also
noticed that Rick will leave the television running while he is preparing his flight plans or
doing other paper work.
As a behavior regulator, Lull notes that television "punctuates time and family
activity such as mealtime, bedtime, chore time, homework periods, and a host of related
activities and duties.,,3 As will be described below, the watching of moving images for
the Gray family is simply "family time," and sometimes television schedules regulate
when one will watch (e.g., Sunday afternoons and football) while on other occasions
movie time is influenced by other factors, such as a rainy day.
It is Lull's discussion of the relational uses of television that should be of interest
to folklorists, for these relational uses describe the ways in which small groups-in this
case families-use media for interpersonal relationships, contact, and activities. There
are four divisions of the relational uses of television: communication facilitation,
affiliation/avoidance, social learning, and competence/dominance. As a communication
facilitator, media and their narratives are used as illustrative examples. Lull writes that
media can be used as "primary known-in-common referents in order to clarify issues.,,4
As a communication facilitator, media can also be used to ease the tension in a room or as
a resourceful way to entertain house guests. Media can also help "some family members
clarify interpersonally their attitudes and values."s Several examples of film as a
89
communication facilitator will be illustrated below in the family members' discussions-
such as quoting films, reminiscing about memorable viewing events, or referring to films
in relation to other people and activities.
Affiliation/avoidance refers to the use of media for interpersonal contact or
avoidance. Simply think of the stereotypical date night: dinner and a movie. Two
general observations will briefly clarify this point. First, while the family and I relaxed to
watch one of their traditional holiday films, each of the couples spent the time nestled
next to his/her significant other. Second, when Rick fiddles with paperwork or prepares
his next flight plan, he often goes into the secluded den, puts on the television, and works
without distraction. This notion of affiliation/avoidance relates in great detail to the
discussion of dyads and media viewing below.
Socialleaming as a relational use of media simply implies that we learn from
media. Media offers propaganda, role models, or even educational topics. Lull writes of
the latter, "Parents encourage their children to watch television game shows, public
television, or network specials as substitute school experiences.,,6 Social learning clearly
relates to the notion of media functioning as pedagogical devices. However, Lull's
statement serves as evidence that some shows are more often examined in this light while
others are not. The constant and persistent notion that historical films are merely
entertainment evinces this common practice. Moreover, Lull focuses more specifically
on the interpersonal uses of television. My examination of the uses and reception of
historical films within the family focuses on both the personal and interpersonal aspects
of historical film reception.
90
The last of Lull's relational uses of media is competence/dominance: viewers can
illustrate their competence by demonstrating knowledge to others. In addition,
individuals can demonstrate knowledge over the television itself, thus expressing their
own dominance of the issues. Other ways of illustrating dominance include the selection
of shows to watch or the restriction of television use (e.g., a parent removing television
privileges from a child). Competence and dominance were prevalent elements in my own
observations of and discussions with the Gray family. For example, Rick may often
illustrate his competence of aircraft knowledge in films or television shows, Jessica may
divulge scientific facts regarding marine life, and Jason, as a martial arts instructor, may
critique fight scenes.
Overall, the typology of the social uses of television can aid in clarifying the ways
in which families, other small groups, and individuals use media. While this study
focuses on a "movie family," the four relational uses oftelevision--eommunication
facilitation, affiliation/avoidance, social learning, and competence/dominance--ean be
extrapolated from television to offer a framework for this discussion. I will highlight
these four uses of media as I present a cultural exploration of movies within family
culture, and I will begin by examining the family's self-identification as a "movie
family."
When asked what Jessica [the daughter] means when she describes her family as a
movie family, she replied:
What I mean about that is typically when we want to do something together at
night, we usually try to pick a movie to watch. We will also quote movies on a
regular day to day basis. We'll quote them and then ask what movie it is, kind ofa
back and forth. Even if we're not asking, if someone quotes a movie, someone
91
else chimes in about what movie it is and comes out with another quote. So, I feel
like our conversations a lot of time end up revolving around movies in some way
or shape of form. I just feel like we are a movie family, and we enjoy watching
movies and kind of commenting on them.
It is clear that Jessica's comments fit well with James Lull's notion ofmedia serving as a
communication facilitator. While quotations fuel conversations, the act of watching
movies as a family creates shared experiences and memorable events as well. In a sense,
movies and the viewing event can become "family capital." By family capital, I mean to
stress that both the movies and the memories associated with the viewing event are drawn
upon to provoke conversations, memories, or stories that take on significant meaning.
Jessica continues to stress the watching of movies in terms of memories of shared
experiences:
We revolve around movies because we watch them together. When I see a movie
it makes me think of times we've watched it or quote them together. If I'm
watching it alone and I watch something like Spaceballs or Men in Tights or
Princess Bride, I just think of quoting stuff. And even sometimes I just think of,
'Ohh my god when Jason and I watched this we did ... ' I just think of things like
that. Even Armageddon, I think: of the one time that I was actually laying on the
couch [and] we were together [her and Jason] and the first time I ever, ever in my
life cried during a movie. I was balling at the end of the movie ... I just think of
those times, and I like thinking back on fun times or times when we've been
together, especially when I'm alone. So I just really associate movies with my
family.
While the family defines itselfpartially as a movie family, Rick [the father] was
clear to stress that the act of watching movies stressed quality over quantity, "I was just
going to say, believe it or not, if you were to probably compare us with a lot of other
families, maybe except for this one [referring to Jessica], I don't think ... it sounds like
92
we're a family where all we ever do is watch movies. And I don't think we watch that
many movies." Lori [the mother] commented on Rick's response, "No, we don't," and
Rick continued, "As a whole, she [Jessica] watches a lot when she's alone." Jason [the
son] added his take on the quantity of time spent watching films, "I mean, we don't spend
all day watching or we'll watch one at night after a full day ofdoing stuff as a family."
Lastly, Jessica had her say, "At night before we go to bed after we play cards or do
something we'll typically stick in a movie and watch it. I'm not saying like all day long.
1fit's raining we'll maybe put something in, but we do other stuff-when I'm alone
especially. I mean, I watch movies all the time just cause I have nothing ... I can't play
cards by myself."
Here in Rick's and the rest of the family members' comments, the ideology of
mass culture and the implication that leisure activity is idle activity comes to surface.
Throughout the group interview, Rick was clear to stress that the family did not watch
movies constantly and that "movies are the lazy man's way out." He also commented,
"When we're together, got some time to kill, and we want to do something brainless, we
put on one of the movies we know we all like." While the family members mention they
do not constantly watch film, it is Rick who consistently throws in belittling comments
here and there. Rick's responses are socially consistent with David Morley's findings
that heads of households, specifically working class males, tag media entertainment as
unproductive cultural activities.7 As I will illustrate throughout this chapter, it is clear the
Rick enjoys the time spent with the family during these activities. His quips concerning
film are actually sociologically triggered than actually practiced.
93
In addition, the family's desire to clarify the amount of time they spend watching
movies seems to raise issues regarding their status as a movie family. One could contest
that film may not seem to be a central part of their daily life. However, it is clear that the
family recognizes not only the watching of films as part of their culture but also the
memories, quotes, and activities that are generated from the viewing events as well. The
members of the family do not just sit, watch a movie, and then leave after being briefly
entertained. They carry the movie and the moments they shared together with them, and
they continue to build on these moments to construct part of their identity as a family
who owns shared experiences.
When I asked how the family decides what films to watch, Rick joked, "There's
dictatorial rule." After the laughter, Lori explained, "It depends on what mood we are in.
We decide, 'Do we need action, do we need mystery, do we need' ... ", and Jessica
commented, "That's when we go to the genres. 'What are you feeling today?' Then it's a
majority decision. Then we'll start listing off movies, and we'll go with that one. On the
rare occasion that dad wins ... its either Western or War." Jason explained the format for
choosing rentals, "Now, what's fun is when just one or two people get sent to the video
store to rent one. Then you bring it back and you always try to find something that you
wanted to see, but you also try to figure out what everyone else wanted to see. And you
never get it right [he laughs]." Jessica explained this is why they ''typically bring two"
home, and Rick joked, "Especially when you bring Veggie Tales [a computer animated
Children's show]!" Jason commented on the different interests between him and his
sister and their parents, "This is the one to watch tonight. This is the one mom and dad
94
can watch later after they complain about the one we picked up and about how awful the
movies are we like."
While the family jests about their individual movie choices, it is also clear that
they have movies that are considered "family movies." These are movies that someone
in the family has seen and believes the other family members will like, or these are
movies that they all saw together. Ifthey seem to all enjoy the film, then these films will
usually be bought for the others and given to them on Christmas, their birthday, or for
other occasions. As Jessica explains, "Oh yeah, every year, everybody has the same
movies every Christmas ... For the most part, we tend to like the same movies." Lori
chimed in, "Well, if we all like them and since we're not together, we want everyone to
have it, so that would be Christmas presents for everybody." Rick explained the type of
movies they all enjoy and will watch when the family is together:
We watch, I don't know, lots of times, Pirates ofthe Caribbean or stufflike that.
We get together and we like to watch some of those movies, even National
Treasure, King Arthur. Movies that we all found we like. So, it's one ofthose
things that when we're together and we got some time to kill, and want to do
something brainless, we put on one of the movies we know we all like. And
movies like Pirates we always get a laugh out of. So, it's a good way to do it.
They continued to discuss the importance ofmovie time being family time, and
Rick transitioned the conversation into their holiday traditions, "Especially at the
holidays, there's nothing better during the holidays then to have a fire in the fireplace,
have the Christmas lights on, put on a Christmas movie, and have all your family there."
Jessica added, "Yea, its unwinding, not worrying about it, the holidays are just family.
It's really our family oriented gathering." They even have a select group of films that
95
they watch every holiday season: Scrooge, Christmas Carol, White Christmas, Little
Drummer Boy, and Rudolph. Rick and Lori further commented that they were films they
watched when they were younger, "1 think Rudolph 1 watched when I was young and
everything ... and White Christmas. Well, my mom liked White Christmas." Lori added,
"Yeah, all the movies we watched as youngsters." Rick and Lori watched these films
when they were younger, and as Rick noted, they watched these films with Jason and
Jessica "ever since they were knee high to a grasshopper." Even though members ofthe
family live in different states, they usually manage to get together during the holiday
season to spend part of the season together. They each explained they watch the films at
least once throughout the holiday season together, and Lori added, "We don't watch
Scrooge without him [Rick]." Rick agreed, "Scrooge, Scrooge we watch once ... and
that's with everyone together." And in traditional jesting fashion, Jason commented on
Jessica's distaste for one of the films, "It's a Wonderful Life we like to watch when we
really want to annoy Jess." Jess replied, "When I'm never anywhere in sight, cause I will
go upstairs and read. I won't sit and watch it." During the interview Jason could not help
but get throw in a one-liner and quoted the movie, "EVERYTIME A BELL RINGS AN
ANGEL GETS ITS WINGS," and mid-quote Jessica and Lori chimed in and repeated the
quote. Both the films they must watch together and the film Jessica refuses to watch, It's
a Wonderful Life, illustrate the contact/avoidance element of Lull's social typology of
television. The family comes together to spend quality time together during Scrooge, and
Jessica and Heather bolt upon the idea of watching It's a Wonderful Life.
96
The family's discussion ofScrooge led to an examination ofvariation between the
television depiction of the film and the DVD. Lori explained, "It was on TV and they
always cut off the ending. We didn't know that movie had another section to it until we
bought the DVD." Jessica clarified the difference between the two versions, "He's
[Scrooge] in this red looking coffin on the ground, and all of sudden he wakes up and
he's choking, and I was like, 'I don't know where it goes from there to there.' Until you
actually see it and see the whole in hell scene. And you're going, 'Dh, that makes more
sense. He's getting the chain wrapped around him and then he wakes up with the bed
sheets wrapped around him.' It makes more sense." In other words, the television
adaptation deleted a scene that confused the family for some time, and it was not until
they bought the DVD that their curiosity was satisfied.
A few years ago I spent Christmas with Jessica and her family, and we spent one
traditional night watching Scrooge together as a family. Each of the three couples sat
together while watching the movie, illustrating the use of the media for contact. The
family also had their traditional holiday wassel drink. When the scene depicting Scrooge
in hell came up, the family had the same conversation they continue to have every year
about the DVD's and television version's contrasting variations, illustrating another
example of the media as communication facilitator.
Christmas is not the only time the family watches certain films. They also watch
. films during Easter, such as King ofKings or 10 Commandments. Jason explains he and
Heather have even began their own tradition, "Ironically enough, Heather and I have
gotten into the tradition ofwatching Veggie Tales Easter Carol, which is very similar to
97
Scrooge but done at Easter time, and Veggie Tale style." And Jessica commented on this
new tradition in regards to their pregnancy, "And it's Veggie Tales. Now you'll be able
to watch it with the kids!" As Rick and Lori watched films with their parents and then
films with their children, so too will their children watch traditional films with their sons
and daughters.
One specific memory was brought up with regards to a Christmas film, but it was
not because it was Christmas. During the interview and out of nowhere, Jessica
exclaimed, "Yogi'sfirst Christmas!" and explained how her and her father, Rick, watched
the film-what was perhaps an exaggeration-around twenty seven times after she got
her tonsils out. The following conversation then took place between her and the rest of
the family:
Rick: I never wanted to see Yogi again.
Lori: But you did.
Jessica: He hibernated for a long time. I love that movie.
Lori: I'm surprised we didn't wear it [VHS] out.
Jessica: It is. Don't worry. It is.
Rick: What I want to know is: you were working a part time job. I'm working my
full-time career job, and I got saddled with her watching Yogi's First
Christmas twenty-seven times while you went off to work. How did that
work?
Jessica: Because I was daddy's little giiiiirl.
Lori: Because you were off. You were off at that time.
Jessica: I was daddy's little girl and you had to be with me. I was five and I was
coughing up blood .
Rick: The things I do .
Jessica: ... and I had pound puppies in both hands and I was watching Yogi's
First Christmas, eating ice-cream.
Rick: Over and over and over and over and over again.
98
These are the sort of personal experience narratives, memories, and associations
this "movie family" has with their movies. Jessica even brought Yogi's First Christmas
down to Florida when she had to have neck surgery a few years ago. She knew she
would be out for awhile and explained to her father, "In honor of you I watched it. We
brought it for after my neck surgery, but you were gone. I did bring it up so it would be
ready, available after my neck surgery. I was like how can you not. I'll be in bed longer
than when I had my tonsils out." Overall, these types of personal experience narratives,
memories, and associations are prevalent amongst other small groups as well, including
families, friends, and coworkers who make moving image a central part of their daily
lives.
As Jessica alluded to in her explanation of their movie family, quotes often spur
conversations or guessing games as to which movie the quote belongs to. She and her
brother, Jason, are particularly fond of"speaking quote" or playing the "quote challenge"
game. Jessica explained, " ... even if we're not watching it, we are talking about them or
quoting them. So even if we're playing a game, somehow we get on the topic of movies,
which is why I think maybe we're not always watching them but we talk about them."
Furthermore, when I earlier asked Jessica what she meant by "movie family," Lori
immediately commented, "Those two [Jason and Jessica] can quote any movie anytime."
Jason commented, "Not mentioning that dad's always said that if you take all the movie
knowledge out of our heads, they'd be flat." Jessica replied, "That too."
Rick explained his feelings toward Jessica and Jason's compulsion, "Well that's
what I was about to say. I was going to mention that I believe the only conscious thought
99
that you two ever have is a movie quote. I don't think you have a conscious thought of
your own." Of course, Rick seems to be disparaging Jason and Jessica for their
unproductive knowledge or habits. However, Morley and Lull's work on viewing
preferences within the family along with Ang's concept of the ideology of mass culture
provide evidence to question ifthese feelings are really just pressures of a patriarchal
society that sees certain leisure activity as irresponsible of the duties ofmale providers in
households. In fact, Rick's comments are sociologically based rather than actually
practiced, for Rick enjoys jumping into the fray as well. He explains, "It's always a
challenge of mine if! can get them because these two, that's all they ever do is quote
movies. And I don't, believe it or not, watch that many movies, but if I can get them on a
quote or something, makes my day, especially when it's her favorite movie." Jessica
jumped into the conversation, and she and Rick began reminiscing:
Jessica: I get a kick out of it when you actually do, and then you look and your
actually like, 'I quoted a line, what movie is it from?'
Rick: Especially when I get ya!
Jessica: Shutup! ... He didn't. I got it!
Rick: That made my day!
Jessica: I got it. It's just so frustrating that it took so long, cause its ugh. Coulda
popped out the whole rest of the movie, quoted the entire rest of the movie,
and I was still like, 'the name of the movie would be?'
Rick: You know we've done that. I can't remember a time when we didn't do
that. When you guys were this high you were quoting movies.
Here Rick and Jessica are reminiscing over an instance where Rick quoted a line from
one of Jessica's favorite movies, White Christmas. Rick's, as well as the other family
members, use of movie quotes falls in line with Lull's relational uses of media. Movie
quotes are used to affiliate with others through shared capital. It is clear that Rick enjoys
100
this "movie culture" and values the opportunities it provides to be close to his family-if
only in jesting.
As the family member's discussion shows, quoting movie lines is more than just
reminiscing the good and memorable times they have spent together. It is also a way to
challenge each other in their own folkloric game, illustrating the social use of media for
competence and dominance-albeit in a lighthearted manner. To give the reader an idea
of how pervasive the activity of quoting and challenging each other is, the following
"quote challenge" took place mid-interview when Jason quoted a line:
Jason [quoting a movie in a goofy British accent]: '1 haven't quite figured that
part out yet.' ... don't let me down on that one (speaking to Jessica).
Lori: They can not only quote movies, but they can quote them in the way the
people talk.
Jessica: Oh freaking hell ... is it ...
Rick: There's another one!
Jessica: No, 1know it. 'I haven't quite figured that part out yet.'
Jason: Let it be known, Jess has just been stumped. AAAGAIN!
Jessica: Uhhhgghh.
Rick: Wow, this is a new record.
Jessica: Uhhggh.
Jason (quoting from the same movie): 'I'm on the east side; I'm on the west side.
It's not exactly the Mississippi.' [He laughs]
Jessica: Heh, yea. Robin Hood: Men in Tights. Crap.
Rick: See that's why 1 didn't get it. Cause I [Jessica commented: Yea, you haven't
made it that far in that movie] never made it through that movie.
Jessica: Nope, you never made it that far.
Rick: 1 saw that movie for about ten minutes and took it out. Said, 'Never, 1 don't
wanna ... '
After Rick's comment, Jason and Jessica continued quoting the movie, practically
fmishing each other's quote:
101
Jessica: 'Achoo. Bless you! Yup, must be him ... I am Asneeze, father of Achoo.'
Jason: 'Do you know Praying Mantis? You're looking at him.'
Jessica: 'What are you wearing under there? Practically nothing. Except that. I
have a chastity belt. Mmmmhhmm ... '
Jason: 'It's an everlast ... '
Jessica: 'It's an everlast. I bet. Urn ... darling. [Rick commented: See what I
mean.] The key won't work. What? Call a locksmith! Call a locksmith!' Man.
I can't believe that. That's just depressing [referring to her inability to
remember Jason's quote immediately].
Rick: Stumped again.
Jessica [quoting the same film]: 'I challenge you to a duel. Waaatssssshh. I
accept. Born.' Fabulous!
Finally, I commented, "I just want to see if you're going to keep going," and Jessica
replied, "With my quoting? I was thinking of another one. I was going to, and I was like,
'I can stop probably now.'" Of course, the quoting did not stop. And, as Jessica was
quoting one film, one quote lead to an entirely new film:
Jessica: 'I'm guessing, I guess no one is coming ... I guess there was a ladder
around here somewhere. Oh shit ... Oh shit. There goes the planet.'
Spaceballs.
Me: It just keeps going.
Lori: ... and going.
Jessica: When I said, 'Oh shit,' it just got me into Spaceballs, 'Oh shit. There
goes the planet.' I can just quote from one to the next! I don't know! They just
remind me ofthe next one!
The sheer ability of individuals, such as Jessica above, to remember lines is
incredible, and it is reminiscent of the wonder expressed by folklorists when they
encounter the ability of oral story tellers or oral historians to memorize phrases, events,
and details. In fact, memorization and moving images are two important elements of
historical film reception that will be discussed below. Some viewers, such as Jessica, are
102
visual learners, and this can have an impact on their historical consciousness both in and
outside the classroom.
Dyads and Dyadic Traditions
Until now I have discussed films and their significance in regards to the family as
a collective, but as Jason and Jessica's compulsion to quote films demonstrate, their
relationship is quite intimate. Additionally, each of the family members has a unique and
close relationship with each of the others. While folklorists examine folk groups, such as
class based, occupational, ethnic, religious, or familial, the nominal societal relationship
is the dyad, defined by Elliott Gring as "a more or less enduring interaction between two
individuals who primarily relate to one another as persons rather than as occupants of
social statuses."g To clarifY, while Jason and Jessica are brother and sister and members
within the family, they also have their own unique and significant relationship, and as
exemplified above, their fondness for films is one basis for their bond. Their "quote
challenges" have become a dyadic tradition that also has been incorporated into the wider
family, and as Gring explains, "Dyads regularly utilize ideas and behaviors common to
the larger society, but endow these with unique characteristics and meanings."g Gring
designates these traditions as "behavior or linguistic routines that are generated, endowed
with significance, and maintained within the dyadic relationship."lo These traditions
have three meaningful effects. First, they test the sensitivity of immediate experiences as
shared significance. Second, they symbolize intimacy through uniquely shared
experiences. Third, they solidifY past experiences into a recurrent and significant
relationship built on shared experience and value. II I use the term dyadic traditions
103
loosely to designate shared experiences that belong to two individuals but can also be
related by others. For example, Jessica and her father's, Rick, shared experience of
Yogi's First Christmas is not secretive or esoteric, but it is their experience. However, as
Oring notes, dyadic traditions can be ephemeral, and if Rick decides to never see this film
with his daughter again, this will move from tradition to memory.
Most importantly, Oring notes, " ... it is the spirit of play that strongly imprints the
culture of this social relationship, and we must be prepared to acknowledge that play and
humor are important languages for the expression of intimacy and affection.,,12 There is
no doubt that play and humor are strong elements of the "quote challenge" or "quote
sparring" that takes place between Jason and Jessica. Interestingly, it appears that Rick
enjoys the capability of sparring with his two children, hence solidifying his relationship
with them.
Ofcourse, dyadic traditions are not solely linguistic but behavioral as well. This
is evidential in the family members' viewing preferences. As Jason noted when renting
movies, "This is the one to watch tonight. This is the one mom and dad can watch later
after they complain about the one we picked up and about how awful the movies are we
like." Lori explains her and Jessica's watching habits in opposition to her husband's, "He
[Rick] watches his War. I have to watch all my love stories without him; I can watch
them with her [Jess]." Jessica commented, "Typically she'll watch them with me. When
I'm home," and Rick noted, "I'll put the action ones on alone, and tum them up loud, get
the house verberating."
104
Additionally, after Jason jokingly noted that Merlin, Jessica's dog, enjoys
football, Rick noted, "Yes, there are things that take precedence over movies, like
football," and Jessica commented, " ... maybe not in your household [talking to Jason and
Heather]." Jessica and her father enjoy a boisterous Sunday afternoon screaming at the
television watching football. This is one of their dyadic traditions, yet Jason explains,
"No, but I'm happy to sit down and [Jessica commented, "Which is good."] watch it
when we're together ... " Jessica finished his sentence importing the significance of these
times, "When we're together ... it's all just family time, really."
Moreover, while not specifically a dyad as it relates to three people, Lori
acknowledges her attempt to create a fun atmosphere for her children through humor and
fun while Rick, a pilot, was away on flights, "But we [Lori, Jason, and Jessica] always
used to do things together ... when he [Rick] was gone on flights because I was trying to
make it a fun time for them. So we would watch a lot of movies. That's how we would
really get into some of the movies. We were taping VHS tapes and everything." This
"triad" confirms the use of film for play and fun in order to alleviate the melancholy of a
missed loved one. In addition this "triadic" tradition strengthened their relationships
through shared experiences with value. Films, both in the theater and home, are powerful
stimulants for dyadic, or even "triadic," traditions as often times they are excuses for
intimate encounters, such as dates, or friendly relaxation. These shared experiences can
often provide "couple/friend/family capital" for testifying to the uniqueness and existence
of relationships.
105
A "Movie Family's" Historical Reception
During the group interview, I moved the discussion from the importance and role
of film within their family to their individual categorization of films. The members of the
family were previously asked to categorize all of their movies by their own definition
based on geme and attraction. To clarifY, Lori and Rick, Heather and Jason, and Jessica
have their own collection of movies. They were asked to categorize their collections
individually, and due to their status as a "movie family," all three of these groups have
several of the same films. Most importantly, their categorization of films served as a
nuance to the ways in which they felt about their films at a generalleve1. For example,
Lori, Heather, and Jessica were the only ones to use the term HistoricallHistory as a
geme type. Jason and Rick, on the other hand, used less specific terms to define their
films, such as Comedy, Action, Adventure, Battle, Humor, etc.
However, while Rick often insisted, "I'm simple, it's just Action," or listed
another type of geme, one geme did stick out among his more straightforward terms:
America at War. As Rick explained, "That's a big interest. WWII especially is a big
interest of mine, historically. So, I put a lot of that stuff together there." Additionally,
Jessica asked her father ifhe would put Saving Private Ryan in America at War instead
of Action, and he replied, "Mmmmhmmm. Yeah. Cause even though the story ofPrivate
Ryan is fiction, the D-Day was pretty accurate that they showed, and you know some of
the other stuff, so yeah." He continued explaining his reason for America at War as a
geme for him, "And I do all of the American wars though, like Gettysburg, The Patriot as
the Revolutionary War stuff. I'll put that as America at War. It's just my separate
106
category for that stuff. And then, the other one, the Action, Blood, Gore ... whatever [he
laughs]. Lots of noise, 'yay!'" Rick does not initially consider history to be the major
attraction in several of his other films, but he does have his own historical interest. Here,
Rick even comments that the story of Private Ryan in the film Saving Private Ryan is
fiction, yet the film has meaning for him as a representation of World War II and D-Day.
Rick is illustrating his awareness that Saving Private Ryan is a period film.
Jessica commented that she would have put Saving Private Ryan with her military
films because it has real aspects "but it's not necessarily realistic so I would have still just
put it with military." Jessica is also illustrating that Saving Private Ryan contains
emotional realism and period realism although "it's not necessarily realistic," referring to
the characters and some events. After mentioning she has another military film called
Tears ofthe Sun, she explains why this film-like Saving Private Ryan-is a period film
opposed to a bio/eventpic. She explains a scene where a Special-Ops team helps refugees
in Nigeria:
They have real stuff in that [film] too ... the scene where the people [refugees]
that were walking with them [Special-Ops] were crying. They were real tears
because they were remembering when they were in that situation. Because a lot of
them were actually taken out of that situation. And so, you watch the commentary
on it or you go into the bonus features and they start talking about this stuff, and
they were there and talking about how this is all realistic. This was happening.
Although it's not necessarily based on a true story, that stuffreally was
happening. It's not like they're true characters. But the whole philosophy behind
it was happening. These people that were in the movie actually went through that
and experienced it. So they re-experienced it in the movie. And so a lot of those
scenes were raw emotion because they flat out said they almost couldn't deal with
it because it was really the same thing that they saw before. So it was really
interesting when I read or listened to that and looked at it. But that's still in my
military section.
107
This film, like other period films, is not based on real people but real situations.
Although Jessica places this film in a "military section," she discusses the film in great
detail with respect to emotional realism and also as a period film-illustrating the
usefulness of Ang's three types of realism in ethnography.
With regards to historical-entertainment films, it is interesting to note that none of
the research participants designated A Knight's Tale (briefly discussed in Chapter 3) in a
Historical/History genre categorization. Although Rick and Jason did not label any of
their films historical-with the exception of Rick's America at War films- Lori,
Heather, and Jessica, who had History/Historical categorizations, labeled the film as
Comedy, Adventure, or Action. Despite the fact that a discussion ofA Knight's Tale
never took place during the group interview, Jessica commented on another h-e film,
Timeline. This film is about a son who, with the help of a few archeologists, attempts to
rescue his father trapped back in time in fourteenth century France. Even though Jessica
categorizes this film as Adventure and History, she discusses it as existing between a h-e
film and period film:
I put that as kind ofa Medieval Action because there's historical value there.
They go back in time and they actually tell the real story of certain battles and
stuff that were happening there. So I put that as historical but in a Medieval [time
frame]. I mean it is historical but it's not based necessarily on a true thing. But
they do talk about the true events and they're showing true events. There's history
in there. I have it as Historical Adventure.
During her discussion, Jason commented on the use of a medieval setting, and why,
although the film contains time travel, one could categorize it as Medieval "because the
majority of it [the film setting] takes place there."
108
The difference between a h-e film and bio/eventpic film came to light when the
family started to discuss the recent King Arthur (2004) film. IntemetMovieDatabase.com
(IMDB.com) offers a succinct synopsis of the film: "Based on a more realistic portrayal
of'Arthur' than has ever been presented onscreen. The film focuses on the history and
politics of the period during which Arthur ruled-when the Roman Empire collapsed and
skirmishes over power broke out in outlying countries-as opposed to the mystical
elements of the tale on which past Arthur films have focused."l3 In fact, Jessica
explained the film in terms of the other more mystical and romanticized versions:
It wasn't the normal story. It was a little different. I liked it better because, to me,
it seemed like a more realistic story-for some reason. I felt it was more realistic
than any of the other [King Arthur film] ... First Knight ... and all those other
ones that are based on the same thing. Because it wasn't just ... this mythical
person that had this great community and it all worked out and blah blah blah.
There was a story to get there '" I felt like it was more realistic and that's why I
put it more with a little bit of history, because I really felt they really tried to get a
real story out of it.
Jason agreed with Jessica's description ofKing Arthur as being a more realistic version
of the Arthur tale in comparison to the other Arthur films, like First Knight: "The thing
with this Arthur movie is it, it doesn't have the legend feel to it. It doesn't have that
fairytale ..." and then Jessica finished his sentence, "That mythical, 'Oh there's King
Arthur and the round table' ... " The family then had the following conversation among
themselves, practically finishing each others' sentences:
Jessica: It's like he's a real man, he looks like a real person.
Jason: Right, right, you could really ... you could really look at it and say ...
Jessica: ... that could be true ...
Jason: '" this could be the way this happened [Lori commented: Yeah] and how
when stories are told of it, you know...
109
Jessica: it gradually changes, yeah ...
Jason: down the line you can see how it can become what we think ofKing
Arthur as being .. ,
Jessica: ... become a fairytale, but in reality, that could ... this is a person that
could have really felt this way and done this, but there's, it's not just always
going to be roses.
Jessica: Yeah. And that's why the first time 1watched it that's not what 1would
have pegged it for. 1 liked it the first time 1watched it, but it wasn't what 1
was expecting when 1watched it. 1was like its King Arthur. Yeah, clearly 1
know the story ofKing Arthur ... and it definitely wasn't that way ...
Lori: ... and it was not the same storyline ...
Jessica: ... I liked it, at no moment was 1 like, "I ... don't really like this movie."
It's different.
What is of interest here is the fact that they feel this version ofKing Arthur's life "could
be" the story behind the romanticized versions. They understand the possible evolution
of the historical Arthur into a romanticized fictional tale.
Most importantly, they understand that this is not the true history of Arthur. Due
to other contexts, they are aware that the story of a real, historical Arthur is unknown, but
they feel that this film is at least an attempt to discuss what that real, historical period and
man could have been like. This film is hard to place as a bio/eventpic because it attempts
to tell a story of a historical person that is unknown. However, the film works as a
bio/eventpic because it is a more realistic version than the often romanticized tales.
Perhaps King Arthur is afaction film due to its ability to be more specific than aperiod
film but less specific than a bio/eventpic. The importance does not lay in our ability to
successfully cast the film as either type; the importance lays in the viewers' ability to
realize that this film is a more realisticlhistorical depiction of a legendary, mythical, and
110
often romanticized historical character and yet also realize that this is only a closer
representation of history rather than the representation of history.
When asked if the film changed their perception ofArthur, Jessica noted, "In
some level it made it more real for me. It made it feel like it could be more of a realistic
situation ... " and Rick jumped in, "The story behind the Legend!" Jessica continued,
"The story behind it, yeah, the story behind it made it better for me rather than something
like a First Knight where it just seemed like 'Ok, whatever, it's just a movie.''' Here,
Jessica notes that while she enjoyed First Knight, its status as a h-e film made it more
"just a movie" compared to the King Arthur film that took a more realistic and
informative approach. After Rick commented that First Knight was still a good movie,
Jessica rebuked, "Well, yeah, no, it's [First Knight] good. I'm not saying that. It's a
completely different feel ... It's like, yeah this is a movie, it's a legend, whatever. But
with King Arthur, I was like 'that makes it more realistic for me, like it could really have
been that way.''' Jason commented on the ability to perform a willful suspension of
disbelief between films:
It changes my perception of [a historical King Arthur] when I'm just thinking
about it and having conversations like this about it afterwards. Where I'll say,
'You know it could be similar to the way this movie [King Arthur] shows it
[rather than more romanticized versions].' But when I go back and watch a movie
like First Knight or something like that, I'm not thinking ofthe movie King
Arthur in the back of my mind ... I just look at the story that's being told in that
movie. But as an overall, 'Oh I'm thinking about it or having a conversation about
it,' I'd say it [King Arthur] affects [my view ofa historical King Arthur].
Lori commented, "It's a different movie; it's a different way to tell it, yeah." Jason's
comment brings up two key points. First, he is not comparing the two movies and
111
assuming that one is more relevant or important than the other as entertainment. Second,
the film King Arthur still affected his perception of what a real story of Arthur and his
times may hold.
A popular perception of the film-a perception I also know others have from
firsthand accounts and conversations-was negative because of its more realistic and
dark approach. Lori fits into this group ofpeople. She states, "I didn't like it at first ... I
have a very tough time with a dark storyline." In a phrase that seems to represent the
general, if flawed, judgment of audiences, she also noted, "I like happy endings [she
laughed]. I need happy endings." Furthermore, the film's more realistic, or brutal,
depiction of Arthur was not what she was expecting. Reminiscing over the older, more
romanticized versions, she explains her initial reaction to the film, "Now this isn't how
this is supposed to be." However, she explained, "But now that I've seen this Arthur a
few times, I actually like this, and I don't know why."
As the family members' comments illustrate, the film was a newer and more
realistic depiction ofthe man and history behind the legend. In addition, Lori's initial
reception of the film is representative of many others who felt the film introduced them to
a still unknown historical character, who they had previously only witnessed as a
romanticized knight in shining armor. In a way, the film introduced and informed its
viewers of a more historical reality behind the man. The film's opening caption shows no
cloak of intention: "Historians agree that the classical 15th century tale ofa King Arthur
and his Knights rose from a real hero who lived a thousand years earlier in a period often
112
called the Dark Ages. Recently discovered archeological evidence sheds light on his true
identity.,,14
Moving from the family's discussion of the more realistic King Arthur-a
bio/eventpic-in comparison to the more imagined First Knight-a h-e film-the family
presented its own type of bio/eventpic that serves as evidence to the importance of
emotional, empirical, and thus historical realism: the Inspirational film. Jessica explains
the genre, "[An Inspirational] has to be something that actually happened. There's a story
line behind it and it's like Wow! There's a Wow factor ... it does [really] happen." This
categorization fits well within the bio/eventpic subgenre of historical films and illustrates
that "something that actually happened" has a "wow factor."
One ofthe films the family discussed as an Inspirational film was Miracle (2004),
which is about the 1980 U.S. Olympic Hockey team's "miraculous" victory over the
Russian team. As Americans, the film is of special interest to them, and while Heather's
parents went to those Olympics, Rick admits, "I saw that game live and I'm not even a
big hockey fan." However, this film was of special interest to Jessica for two main
reasons. First, as a graduate of the University of New Hampshire, she explains, "You
know the last guy that got cut? The very last guy that got cut out of that team right before
the Olympics. He was from UNH. His picture is on the wall at UNH." In addition, the
inspirational aspect of the film was key to the reason Jessica saw the film. She was a
member of the UNH swim team, and the team went together to see the film. After Rick
commented, "Inspirational sports, always good. That ranks right up there with War
movies [he laughed]," Jessica explained:
113
Basically that's why our team went ... that's why I put it in with Inspirational.
Because it is a big underdog film. Especially as a swim team, we went in [saying],
'look they can do it, we can do well [too].' As a whole team we wanted to go and
see them kick butt-show the hard work and how it paid off, and it was fabulous.
By the end, you're like, 'Alright were pumped, ready to go, when we have our
next meet' ... I mean, I've always had to work hard to kind of get where I want to
go or do. So when I see a movie where other people have to do that and it pays
off, it's really, 'Ok, that's cool.' It gives you this-I mean it sounds silly-but it
gives you this warm feeling of 'that's awesome, that's just really cool, and that
can happen'--especially when its sports. When I was swimming, I'd sit there and
be like, 'I can, I can go and I can win and I can do it.'
This example serves as external validation that viewers are aware of some films' use of
history and intention-in this case, the intention to motivate and inspire through a
"miraculous" event. The entire University ofNew Hampshire swim team went to see the
film because of its inspirational quality: a quality based on authenticity of events. As
Jessica stated, the film showed the whole team, "Look they can do it. We can do it too."
This film was clearly more than an evening of entertainment for these student athletes,
for it had lasting effects-such as feelings ofmotivation-long after the viewing event.
Jasonjumped into the conversation and explained his attraction to Inspirational
films, "I like the aspect ofthe team coming together. Cause your always starting with
people hating each other at the beginning or something like that, and then through the
hardships they go through they pull together. That's what I like." However, Jason
admits that Inspirational sports movies are not necessarily his thing, "I really don't have a
desire to go out and watch [Inspirational sports movies], so I typically don't watch those
ones in the theater." However, Jason, a casual viewer, explains his desire to see the
films. He just needs a little push:
114
I usually wait until these guys [Rick or Jessica] actually rent it and ask me over to
watch it. And then I sit down to watch it ... I really enjoy the movies. I just don't
have a desire to go out and see those ones. There's lots of movies I'd love to go
out and watch. Those ones just don't do that for me, but I really do enjoy the
storyline when I sit down and do watch it. But I need the motivation of someone
saying, 'Hey let's watch this together,' and then I'll go.
Of course, that someone for Jason is usually Rick or Jessica, the loyal viewers. Rick
clarified, "That's because you [Jason] like the inspiration part, but you're not a sports nut
... you're big in Tae Kwon Do, but outside that you're not a sports nut." Jessica added,
"But you're [Jason] not sports. We're obsessed with sports. So, sports, and add in
inspiration and we're like 'double whammy, let's go!'" The family and social interaction
in this instance result in diverse viewing experiences-in this case, for Jason. As loyal
viewers, Rick and Jessica bring Inspirational films to Jason, a casual viewer. Here we
can place Rick and Jessica in a behavioral dyad as loyal viewers ofsports broadcasts and
Inspirational films, and as noted above, dyadic traditions serve as ways to communicate a
relationship's status and significance. With Inspirational sport films and sports
television, Jason joins in on Rick and Jessica's behavioral tradition to share the
expenence. As Jason noted, "No, but I'm happy to sit down and watch it when we're
together."
As a brief digression, when Jessica mentioned that she was often bruised and
broken during swim season and needed inspiration, Jason quoted a line from the Disney
film Aladdin. The following "quote challenge" took place:
Jason: "Will not break, will not" ... [Jason and Jessica - "it broke!"]
Rick: See you quoted another movie didn't ya? See ...
Jessica: Which one?
115
Rick: I don't know! ... I probably never watched that movie.
Jason [quoting Aladdin again]: "This is no ordinary lamp!" (laughs)
Rick: Not Aladdin? Oh, cause that lamp ...
Jason and Jessica: Yes.
Jason: Get the man a prize!
When asked ifthe film Mighty Ducks, an imaginary film about a group of young
children who come together to form a successful hockey team, is an Inspirational movie,
Jessica explained, "No, it's not real. I'd say it's a good sports one and it's fun to watch.
It's cute, entertaining, inspirational, but it's not, not something that actually happened. So
it's something that is put on there as an underdog just to make it entertaining ... It's not
the real stuff." Rick added, "Most Inspirational [films] we watch actually happened.
[They are] based on something that happened." Meanwhile, the rest of the family listed
several of these films: Remember the Titans, Hoosiers, Miracle, Rudy, and We Are
Marshall. When Jessica finished the list with the movie We Are Marshall, she further
explained the importance of actual events while describing the movie to her family:
It's literally the hard work and its stuff that actually pays off. Because then you sit
there and you're like, 'It does happen.' But if it's just a movie and it's put there
for entertainment value, it's cute and its fun, just like Little Giants. Looooove the
movie, and yes they win and it's fabulous, but I still would have put it under my
sports category and not my Inspirational because it's not actually real ... So, it
really has to be something that actually happened and there's a story line behind it
... it's like 'Wow!' There's a Wow! ... it does happen. I mean Marshall, it's
inspirational and you look at the end of the movie-they really did horrible that
year-but they won that one game.
She continued asking the rest ofthe family, "Did you guys ever see Marshall? Do you
know what it's about?" Rick replied, "Never watched it. I know what it's about ... they
116
got killed in the plane crash ... " Following Rick's reply, Jessica explained the film, its
historical events, and its import in great detail to her family:
It's about the football team that got killed in the plane crash, almost the entire
team. There were only some [players and coaches] that stayed home ... the [head]
coach died. One coach was actually going to do recruiting for someone else, so
he wasn't on the plane. So then they had to recruit some freshmen-[back then]
freshmen couldn't play in games. When they went to certain games they got
playbooks from other teams because the other teams were like, 'Look we're going
to help you out.' Everything was new. And they lost every single game but one,
one of their home games ... they end up basing the inspirational parts on [the fact
that] they won one of the games. At the end, usually all those other inspirational
movies are like they did really well and blah blah blah ... but in Marshall they
explain: they lost this coach, this coach never coached again because he went in to
help that one year, and he said, 'I'm not coaching after this,' and he didn't. So you
listen to it and you're like, 'Really?' It's not like a lot of good things came of it,
but the team pulled them all together. Everybody stayed on the field after the one
win, nobody wanted to leave. And then eventually the team started building back
up. That's inspirational because it pulled everybody together. And that's where I
look at those movies. I'm like, 'That's, that's just cool.' Something happens; it
sucks on some level, but it pulls a community together.
In addition, when I asked Jessica if she knew the story and event before seeing the movie,
she replied, "I didn't know the story before I saw the previews. When I saw the previews,
I started trying to find out because I knew it was based on a true story. So I went to figure
out what it was, what it actually was. So then I did know the story before I actually saw
the movie ... " I followed up on her response by asking where she went to find out the
story, she explained she went online to Google.com and talked to people. She did not
just talk to anyone though. She explained, "Sports people. Any football players or
anybody that actually really enjoys watching college football and understands it too. So, I
I -
I
117
wouldn't have necessarily gone to people [who didn't watch football]. It was definitely
people that would sit on a Saturday and watch college football."
It is clear that the film sparked her interest in this historical-and inspirational-
event. Clearly, Jessica's viewing of this film had affects beyond the viewing event: both
before and after. Before viewing the film, Jessica briefly asked others about the event as
well as did some light research on Google.com to see what the film was generally about.
After the film, she explained both the event and its import to her family during the
interview. Her discussion is in fact an impromptu presentation of the details of this
historical event. Most importantly, she was telling her family what happened based on
the film. Although Jessica did some research to see what the film was generally about,
she drew upon the film as her main resource for presenting this history to her family.
When I asked if she remembered the events from her research or the film, she explained:
I got that information from what the narrator says at the end of the movie when
she explains what happened, and how although that was the only game they won
that year, it meant so much to the town. It [the film] also talks about where some
of the people ended up ... It's similar to Remember the Titans and Radio when
they start talking about what happened later after that one time frame that was
depicted in the movie.
She further added that her other knowledge of the event, such as the coach missing the
plane crash due to recruiting, came from the film.
It is clear that a variety of factors lead to Jessica understanding that this film is a
bio/eventpic. She asked others as well as Googled the film. Additionally, the film's
overtures and narrator signaled the veracity of its historicity. Beyond this, the film not
only informed her of this event in an entertaining fashion, for it was also her resource for
118
sharing this history and its importance with others. The Inspirational film, as a type of
bio/eventpic, verifies the notion that real events truly matter to viewers and inspires them
because the depicted events actually happened. And it is clear that formal signs can help
verify the film's historicity. However, as I will show in the next chapter, these signals-
such as narrators--can confuse viewers as well.
Jessica also discussed her interest in history from reading Romance novels while
noting that the films served as guides while reading. She explained, "See, I got history
out of it a little bit more when I started reading some ofmom's books. Because there's
books that they do the research. They talk about the Bruce [from Braveheart]. Lori
added, "They do talk about it [the history]." Jessica and Lori read Historical Romances
partially for the history, confirming Radway's research on Romance readers. IS In due
fashion, Rick teased Jessica regarding this reading material, "That's not what you read
her books for. Who you kidding?" After repugnant glares from Lori and Jessica, Jessica
continued:
No [referring to Rick's comment], but when your reading through the Medieval
ones, which is why I read them, and they really have that information-they do
the research to try to get the information. You're reading back information that
you didn't even get in a movie but you sit there and you peg it from the book and
your going, 'Oh they're talking about that [from the movie], and that would come
from that, that's interesting.' So, I would've still pegged a little bit historical, but I
pegged it more historical after I really started getting in depth information just
from the books. Not even realizing it going, 'Oh my god I know that from the
movie.'
Rick mentioned, "I mean the books ". the books tend to go into the history of it more
than the movies will. So, when I really want to delve into the history part of it more, I'll
119
read on it, you know. I go to the movies just for the entertainment, you know, Action type
stuff. You know, maybe part of the history of it. But the books will do it more, but that's
why I like to read the books." As noted in Chapter 3, films are seemingly sparse in
historical data compared to novels-with the exception ofvisual information.
Rick enjoys Historical novels and is currently reading a series on the English navy
during the war of 1812. He notes, "Although the characters are fictional, the authenticity
of the time period and the naval battles is astounding. Intense but great reading. So, I
guess you can say I'm still interested in that type of subject. My Air Force upbringing I
guess. It's not just the two periods [Civil War and WWII] but any period dealing with
history and specifically military history." Rick is aware that books can obviously cover
more detail and stresses that movies have more entertaining elements. Yet, remembering
a conversation between him and Jessica where they were referring to the movie
Windtalkers (2002), I asked Rick ifhe was aware of the Navajo marines and their radio
cipher, which the film depicted. He mentioned, "I didn't. Actually I think I did read a
little bit about that but not much. Yeah, if it's a subject that I hadn't read on, I'd still find
it interesting you know. I'll delve into that part of it, but movies are the lazy man's way
out. You know, sometimes" (Here I highlight Rick's response as a stereotypical response
found among many critics of historical films due to the ideology of mass culture, and in
no way am I implying that Rick feels this is purely so). In addition, Rick will delve into
the historical aspects of films even if his main reason for viewing is action. Rick and
many others read historical novels for their interest in history, but this does not mean that
movies are necessarily the lazy mans way out. For example, movies can inspire the
120
pursuit of further historical knowledge. Or, more intriguingly, perhaps the reason that
some viewers select historical films over historical novels is because they are too busy
with other responsibilities: working, the responsibilities ofparenthood, etc.
In fact, this highlights a key argument against those theories, such as anti-populist
theories, that stress political activism. If members of society are too busy to read novels,
why is it necessary to put down their interest in historical lessons through film? Jessica,
on the other hand, does not see historical films as a poor substitute for books but as a
handmaiden to history. The film National Treasure prompted her to read on the Knights
Templar, and she explains the correlation between films and books:
That's how I started after National Treasure, which talked about the Knights
Templar ... I found a book down at the condo-the library at the condo--they
have a book on the Knights Templar. So I got that and I'm trying to read that to
learn a little bit more about the Knights Templar. Cause I love stuff like that,
history is so fun for me but it's not easy for me. I don't always remember
everything. Like I could never be a history teacher, but I find it fascinating. So, I
get more out ofhistory in movies because 1 can keep it in my head longer than,
say, when 1 learn it in school through history books, because 1 learn nothing. So,
now I like to read a little bit more. I wasn't a big reader, so now when I get
interested in a movie about a certain thing and then I find a book on it, I can read
a little bit better. That's how I'm starting to get my history a little bit more,
because I'm enjoying it more that way: with reading it once I've seen it first in a
movie. I started enjoying it through my movies because I find it fascinating, but I
couldn't remember everything prior to that ...
When I asked her what she meant when she stated she could remember her history better,
Lori succinctly added, "She memorizes movies." Jessica confirmed Lori's response, and
then answered my question explaining that she is more aware and knowledgeable of
historical topics after viewing films:
121
Yeah, I can discuss things more a little bit now based on movies. Like if
somebody starts talking about something I'll be able to pick it out ofa movie.
And it's typically something that has been studied, so even if its clips of
information that I know to be true and it may have been put in a movie to make
entertainment value, I know it's true. I can pick it out from a movie rather than
picking out from a history book or a history lesson.
Jessica confers the ability to delineate the different uses ofhistory in films. She is able to
"pick it out of a movie" even if it has "been put in a movie to make entertainment value."
As noted, National Treasure, a purely h-e film that uses history as motivation for a
treasure hunting adventure, prompted her to be interested in the history behind the
fictitious treasure hunt. In addition, she added that movies enable her to contribute to
conversations and feel a sense of accomplishment, "Prior to watching certain movies, I
wouldn't have been able to pick out anything. If somebody started talking about certain
wars, I'd be like, 'I can't even contribute to this conversation.' But I can contribute now
to conversations and actually appreciate and enjoy them." For Jessica, historical films
facilitate an aptitude to enter conversations she would otherwise feel inept at entering.
Jessica's use of historical films raises awareness about the ability of films to serve
as pedagogical devices both in and outside the classroom. Historical films are both
motivational and mnemonic devices. Jessica comments on both:
It's the movies that are getting me interested in the history. And now that I like
reading, I don't mind going and finding books on certain aspects of some movies,
like the Knights Templar. It was just interesting to me in National Treasure
because I love movies like that. So, I'm sitting there going, 'Oh, well there may
be something behind this. It'd be fun to learn about it.' And then I can get into the
history of it by reading a book now. But I have to start it with a movie otherwise I
don't get it. It doesn't click in my head. It doesn't stay there. I can learn so much
better with movies.
122
Lori mused, "If we only had known that when she was going through school ... She
would have done much better on her tests," and Jessica confirmed, "Mmhmm. Yup. I
might not have spent hours and hours and hours and hours and hours every night trying to
remember everything." Jessica's discussion of films as a more appropriate pedagogical
device for historical knowledge relates to the movement in education research known as
Universal Design for Learning (UDL). The Center for Applied Special Technology
(CAST), a non-profit research and development organization that aims to expand learning
opportunities, explains that UDL offers "a blueprint for creating flexible goals, methods,
materials, and assessments that accommodate learner differences.,,16
UDL identifies three strategies for accommodating learning differences: multiple
means of representation, multipIe means of engagement, and multiple means of action
and expression. The former two strategies highlight the power of historical films to aid
historical pedagogy. First, the strategy for multiple means of representation highlights
the need "to give learners various ways of acquiring information and knowledge.,,17 This
strategy focuses on perception, symbols, and comprehension. In Jessica's case, her ability
to comprehend movie details, including visual data, events, and quotes, illustrates the
strategic advantage of using historical films to perceive, comprehend, and maintain
historical knowledge. Second, the strategy for offering multiple means of engagement
highlights the need "to tap into learners' interests, offer appropriate challenges, and
increase motivation." 18 Jessica's passion for film provides an option for enhancing her
engagement with historical topics, which may seem dry in other formats. Regarding
123
motivation, her viewing of National Treasure and consequent activity of reading on the
Knights Templar is a case in point.
The concepts that motivate the need for UDL can attest to the recent scholarship
regarding historical films in the classroom. Historical films have become valuable tools
inside the classroom. Sometimes instructors can simply mention films to encourage
student's attention in class. For example, I was recently sitting in an
undergraduate/graduate seminar and the professor highlighted his discussion of the
ancient Romans and Elizabethan Europeans with remarks from popular films and
television series. With each remark student's ears perked, mouths laughed, and teeth
grinned. The fact that the professor himself highlighted and remembered these points
illustrates the power and attraction of these films. The professor's strategy was to
encourage interest in his discussion by simply referencing popular films of a historical
nature that related to his discussion.
In a similar manner, I asked the family members to raise their hands if they ever
heard of William Wallace before seeing the film Braveheart, and while laughing, none of
them raised their hands. While Rick notes that films are primarily entertainment, I would
not disagree. Historical films are meant to entertain, and although the initial attraction to
Braveheart may be the gory battle scenes, part of the emotional punch is the history
behind the film. Part of the power of inspiration or other meaningful messages, such as
struggle and freedom, is that these actions really took place, these real battles facilitated a
real sense of freedom, and as Universal Design for Learning highlights, this is a powerful
and sometimes even necessary way to engage and motivate individuals.
124
Historical Accuracy: Do We Care?
Closing the exploration of the family members' perceptions of historical films, I
asked the family members a set of questions that focused on one simple issue: does
historical accuracy even matter? This question is of interest for one main reason. If
viewers express an interest in historical accuracy and rendition, neither filmmakers nor
historians can hide behind the veil that these films are merely entertainment: a position
that I have already partially debunked. I have shown that historical films can represent
history in a variety of ways and that the four subgenres-h-e,period,/action, and
bio/eventpics-appear to be plausible conceptualizations that the Grays themselves use in
distinguishing films. Each of these conceptualizations illustrate that historical films can
function at various pedagogical levels. More specifically, the question concerning
historical accuracy and viewer concern is twofold. First, it is useful to know whether
viewers really do care about historical accuracy. Second, if this is the case, the real
implication lies in the reasoning behind these concerns, for these concerns are not just
about truth but the merits of history.
It is clear from the family members' responses that historical accuracy does
matter. They even make it clear that historical accuracy matters depending on the film.
For example, Rick notes that the majority of films are entertaining, and yet, some aim to
portray a reality, in which case historical accuracy does matter:
It depends on the film. Most entertainment movies I don't care a whole lot about
what facts they were based on (except where there are glaring mistakes which I
always point out to my family to their chagrin). Sometimes I like the far out (e.g.,
Star Trek, Star Wars, Lord o/the Rings, etc.). However, if! watch a movie that
125
advertises itself as mostly historically based (e.g., Midway), then I expect it to
remain close to actual events. I understand ofcourse that they insert fictional
characters and story lines into the film to make it interesting. That's fine as long
as the historical facts the film is based on are reasonably accurate.
In similar vein, Jason understands the need to fictionalize certain aspects of history while
he stresses the desire to see accurate films if the intent of the film is to be accurate:
I think if you keep in mind the overall grand story that's going on, then you can
make things up. Like what was a particular character thinking at this point in time,
you don't know. But if you know enough about that character, you can create a
background story that fits with his character that doesn't take away from the story.
I think if you include extras that detract or cut out key parts of the story, than
you're asking for trouble unless your purpose in creating that is to create an
alternate history ... I'm ok with them not sticking true to a story if the intent of
the movie is to deliberately not stick to the story ... I would be ok with it if
something in that story happens that obviously, whether they point it out in the
movie or there's just something so obvious about it that they don't need to point it
out, which would have caused it [the history] to change. Where it's playing out
the way it is and then something unforeseen happens that everyone knows didn't
really happen in the story, and that allows a different storyline to take place with
it.
Jason acknowledges that filmmakers can have fun with history if that is their intention,
and he even stresses that these films can produce interesting thought experiments
regarding the forces of time:
Because to me, that would cause a neat attraction. Even if the trailer comes out
... whether it's dealing with Hitler or whatever .'. whatever key component led us
to a victory over another nation ... the trailer comes out and says, "Here was the
plan ... something goes terribly wrong!" And then that doesn't happen, and then
it's like, "What would the world look like today." To me, I'd be like, "I want to
go see it, that'd be interesting to think about."
126
He continued to discuss the relationship between accurately portraying history and
playing with history, and discussed King Arthur as an example that falls somewhere in-
between:
That's [true history] what draws people into it. They are interested in that story.
They want to see that story portrayed, and not some alternate reality to that story
when it was being advertised as the real thing ... movies like Arthur ... [are]
based on the legend that everyone knows, so they can come out and be like, "Well
here is the story behind the legend." But the problem is most ofwhat we have to
go by is the legend. So, there's really, you can look at it and be like, "Oh that
could be a cool possibility that would have inspired the legend." But, is there a
certain way of knowing for sure that that's what happened? No. Is it possible?
Absolutely. So, that has a certain ring to it. But when you take a historical, well
known, documented event and completely change it, and portray it like, "We'll
here's what really happened." No. Here's what could have happened if things
didn't go as planned. I'm ok with that [he laughs]. What would have happened if
the South won ... You know? What would this world look like today-this nation
look like?
Falling in line with Rick and Jason, Lori uses the film Miracle to reiterate that intention
matters, "Miracle is based on something that really happened and should be more
historical. We have to keep in mind that people want to be entertained, so they might
have taken some license as to making events more dramatic ... But yes, I believe a film
should be based on facts ifthey are portraying a movie to be that way." Lastly, Jessica
offers a succinct review of the use of history in films and the importance of historical
accuracy. It is worth quoting in its entirety:
If a film is based on a true story, I think it is extremely important to be as accurate
as possible with all aspects of the film, such as in Miracle. Inspirational films can
be very heartwarming and can be a good way to get someone motivated about a
sports event, a test, anything, as long as the film does contain accurate
information. Inspiration comes from knowing something was difficult, if not
impossible to obtain, but that it can and has been done before. When I watch
127
movies like A Knight's Tale or King Arthur, I am not really looking for a strong
historical base. However, King Arthur does elicit a strong interest to find out the
"true" story of King Arthur, since there are a number of different versions of the
story. Although Timeline is a fictional movie, I like to think the historical
information they put into the movie is fairly accurate. For instance, the
information about the battle between the French and English that occurs towards
the end of the movie should hold true, since they are using "specific" historical
information as a basis for the movie. The same goes for Saving Private Ryan.
The tale about all the brothers but one dying, and a group of soldiers going to get
the final brother out of the war and back home, does not have to be completely
accurate. However, this is a story about war, and I would like to think that the
details they put into the movie have a strong historical input.
Jessica's response reiterates not only the ability ofviewers to distinguish between various
uses of history but also the recognition that historical accuracy does matter with regards
to intention.
Overall, we can move from this recognition that accuracy does matter in certain
instances to investigating the fallout of inaccuracy by answering one question: but why
does it matter that viewers care if filmmakers stick to the facts or offer proper
interpretations? The simple answer is nobody enjoys being lied to or misled. The more
complicated answer lies in another of Lori's responses to the issue, "If a movie is suppose
to be based on historical facts, then it matters how true the facts are, or we would be
basing whatever we see as fact and could get our history revised to a point where nothing
is true."
In effect, the reason historical accuracy matters--depending on the film of
course-is because truth matters. The underlying assumption is that history itself
matters, and it certainly matters whether the characters, events, or periods of history are
investigated, interpreted, and discussed as accurately as our minds and our methods
128
permit. History matters and as the representational voice of the vernacular, the family
members offered their reasons why:
Rick: As you know, I have a strong interest in history. I believe it is one of the
most important courses that can be taught to our kids. As once said, "Those
that fail to learn the lessons of history are destined to repeat its mistakes." I
very much believe this.
Lori: History is important to understand and know so that you can use it to help
form the present or help prevent things from happening. By looking at events
that have happened in the past, you could help to avoid disastrous events from
happening again. Unfortunately, we as a people do not care to look at what
happened before or try to pretend that it didn't happened, so I believe we are
bound to make the same mistakes again and again. If something in the past
was good, you can look back into history and try to see what events were
happening to bring about good results. You can then see if you could help
things along to make good things happen again. Unfortunately people are
always changing and they don't react the same way in the future ... We need
to look not only into our history, but what is happening around the world to
see where we are headed. And we should use this knowledge to try to make
things better in our society.
Jason: I do believe history is important. However I freely admit that I was not all
that interested in it in school. Why it's taught in school can be summed up
with a quote that I did see in school once (the only thing I probably paid
attention to in school): "Those who do not study history will repeat its errors,
those who do will find new ways to error." I think that studying history allows
you to see patterns that may have occurred before some major event (whether
good or bad), and then you may have a better idea of where things are heading
today when you see current events unfold.
Jessica: History is what helps us remember where we came from, and ifpeople
pay attention to history, it can help us learn from our mistakes and the
mistakes of others. It seems the farther back history goes, the more likely it is
that people are going to forget it and repeat the same mistakes, such as reasons
for wars or political issues that have occurred before. I think ifpeople take
129
the time to understand history, they will start to appreciate where we came
from.
As all of the family members describe, history offers lessons that can serve as
reliable resources for present and future situations. Most importantly, these family
members do not stress the cliche that "history repeats itself." They do emphasize,
however, that it is important to remember the past in order to keep from repeating
mistakes. In other words, history offers warnings and motivations. People can continue
to be racist, bigots, or fmancially unstable, or they can look to and learn from the past and
examine how historical precedents work across the human experience in order to possibly
change themselves. Humanity can continue to fight wars or be reminded of past
moments ofpeace that may motivate action towards pacification. In addition to
activating changes, history can also help us discover who we are. As Jessica said, we can
"appreciate where we came from." Above all, history allows us to understand: "If you
would understand anything, observe its beginning and its development" (Aristotle). If
societies, groups, or individuals base their actions on false histories, the consequences
can be dire: financially, emotionally, and existentially. History is humanity's experience.
How we choose to portray and rely on those experiences matter. As Historian David
Thelen explains, we do it every day:
130
Using the past is as natural a part of life as eating or breathing. It is a common
human activity. What we have in common as human beings is that we employ the
past to make sense ofthe present and to influence the future. From this
perspective it matters little whether "the past" consists of a 200-year-old narrative,
an account from a textbook, a display at a museum, or a tale recounted by a
family member over Thanksgiving dinner.19
... Or even a historical film.
Notes
I Lull, Inside Family Viewing, 35.
2 Ibid.
3 Ibid., 36.
4 Ibid., 37.
5 Ibid., 39.
6 Ibid., 41.
7 David Morley, Family Television: Cultural Power and Domestic Leisure (London: Comedia Pub. Group:
1986).
8 Elliott Oring, "Dyadic Traditions," Journal ofFolklore Research 21 (1984): 19.
9 Ibid., 22-23.
10 Ibid., 20.
II Ibid., 21.
12 Ibid., 27.
13 Scott Summerton, "Plot Summary for King Arthur," The Internet Movie Database.com,
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0349683/plotsummary(accessed March 25, 2010).
14 King Arthur: Director's Cut. Directed by Antoine Fuqua. 139 minutes. Touchstone Pictures, 2004. DVD.
15 Radway, Reading the Romance, 86-118.
16 Center for Applied Teachnology. "What is Universal Design for Learning?"
http://www.cast.org/research/udllindex.htmI(accessed May 6, 2010).
17 Ibid.
18 Ibid.
19 Rosenzweig and Thelen, The Presence ofthe Past: Popular Uses ofHistory in American Lift, 191.
131
CHAPTER VI
A CASE STUDY: THE LAST SAMURAI
The Last Samurai: The Period
In the previous chapter, I discussed and categorized the Gray family's reception
of historical films in relation to the four subgenres of historical films: h-e, period, faction,
or bio/eventpic. The chapter presented the family's reception of these historical films at a
general level for two main reasons: 1) to gain a better understanding of the ways in which
these individuals delineate between the different uses of history by Hollywood; and 2) to
gain a better understanding of the power and attractIOn of histoncal stones and realism. I
ended the last chapter with a discussion of the importance of accuracy, intention, and
history itself. In this chapter I provide a more detailed and specific case study of a
historical film, its evaluation, and its reception by individuals. I chose the film The Last
Samurai for two reasons. A film covering Japan and its samurai during the 1870's
provides an intriguing case study due to the positioning of the historical topic in
American consciousness. In other words, because this historical subject is not well
established in the minds ofmost American citizens, the film is contextually situated to
influence viewers' opinions of the period, events, or persons portrayed. Additionally,
each of the Gray family's members-Rick and Lori, Jason and Heather, and Jessica-all
own the film. The Last Samurai is one of the films that they all enjoyed and decided to
buy for each other, most likely at Christmas.
132
I begin with an overview ofthe Japanese historical period depicted in the film and
then examine the film itself. This examination of the film expresses that The Last
Samurai should be categorized as a period film. By correctly positioning The Last
Samurai specifically as a period film, it is then possible to accurately evaluate whether
the film faithfully fulfills its advertised intentions. Following the discussion ofthe
historical period and the evaluation of the film's depiction of this period, I move the
discussion to the film's reception by the family members.
Before delving into the historical period, two chief claims ground the discussion
ofthe historical period and the evaluation ofthe film's depiction of this period. Due to
the nature of any historical analysis and a filmic one in particular, The Last Samurai is
not a definitive or holistic depiction of the period. This leads to my second claim: most
importantly, The Last Samurai is entitled to its own historical interpretation. However,
this historical interpretation does require due historical process; whether the film and its
creators do so will be discussed below. Having made these claims, it is important to note
that my discussion of the historical period visibly highlights the historical details the film
aims to portray. I find no reason to argue over which details are more significant to the
period. To clarify, similarly, different instructors may highlight different details of
significance in the same course covering a historical period, event, or character.
The film is set between 1876 and 1877, but the overview ofthe period must begin
well before these years. John-Pierre Lehmann explains there were a series ofcultural
invasions of Japan prior to the twentieth century. These invasions culminated in the
cultural invasion by Commodore Matthew Perry and his gun-boat diplomacy of 1853,
133
which reopened Japan to the West by the signing of a treaty between America and Japan
in 1854.1 Other western nations quickly followed and would coerce Japan to undergo a
series of rapid modernizations-political, industrial, educational, martial, and culturaL
An Edinburgh Review (1872) article eloquently comments on the swift progress, "The
Japanese are the only nation in the history of the world that had ever taken five centuries
at a stride.,,2 Others such as the missionary magazine MacMillan's stressed "that such
changes to be durable must be the work of time, and that it is unwise to remove the old
landmarks without due consideration of what it is best to substitute for them.,,3 This swift
progress did not take off right at 1854, for several forces inside and outside Japan were
cautioning against the allure of modernization.
Japan's government during this period had a decentralized sociopolitical
framework. The government consisted of an emperor who, along with his imperial court,
never meddled in political affairs and often lacked the power to do so. The real power
during this period rested with the shogun or military dictator. The shogunate
administration consisted of high ranking samurai lords known as daimyo who ruled over
their domains.
In 1866 the British Ambassador Harry Parkes visited the southwest domain of
Satsuma in an act of diplomacy in order to help coerce forces against both the Tokogawa
shogunate and its international allies. During this diplomatic act, Parkes visited with the
influential samurai Saigo Takamori (the historical figure that gave inspiration for the
main character Katsumoto in The Last Samurai). Saigo, at this time, revered the emperor
and the virtue of the samurai. Japanese historian Mark Ravina writes, "Japan's
134
decentralized government, Parkes declared, was from an international perspective,
fundamentally flawed ... Saigo's meeting with Parkes cemented Saigo's animosity
toward the shogunate. Not only had the shogunate failed to uphold Japanese traditions of
honor, it also was an impediment to Japan's international reputation.,,4 Finally, in 1868,
after the Meiji ("Enlightened Rule") Restoration, "The boy emperor Mutsuhito .,.
reported the 'imperial will' ... went before the assembled daimyo and, seated behind a
bamboo screen on a high platform, read a 'grand edict' dissolving Japan's political
structure. The shogunate was abolished."s Saigo Takamori and his allies had dissolved
Japan's current government system, thus opening up the path for modernization, the path
for international recognition, and the path for the inadvertent end of the samurai class.
With the restoration of imperial authority, Japan's leading officials were able to
exploit this new illusion of imperial agency and began a process ofpolitical reform and
modernization that would continuously strip samurai of their privileges and authority. In
1871 Saigo and others, disconcertingly, petitioned for the abolition of all domains. As a
result, the emperor "appeared before an assembly of fifty-six former domain governors,
and announced that to protect the Japanese people and achieve parity with the nations of
the world, the domains were being dissolved.,,6 In 1873 the newly centralized
government further centralized its power by conscripting soldiers for its national army,
thus replacing what had been the samurai's duty for nearly a thousand years. The final
blows came in March and August of 1876 when the government, first, banned the
wearing of swords in public and, second, converted samurai stipends into bonds, which
diminished their income by thirty percent.7 Saigo Takamori was a leading figure in the
135
abolishment of the shogunate, the restoration of imperial authority, and yet he was also a
devout samurai. How could it be that the loyal servant behind these events came to lead a
rebellion that Lehmann describes as "the last great attempt by the samurai to reverse the
course the government seemed so evident in pursuing,,?8
Lehmann further confounds the issue when he writes"... whereas the old feudal
samurai moral code had been rendered obsolete by Japan's adoption of capitalism and
participation in the world of trade, the country had not yet found a new morality to suit its
new society," and concludes, "Undoubtedly Japan did lose some things of value from the
Tokugawa period, but it also stood to gain a great deal. Nostalgia for pre-industrial Japan
was out ofplace in terms of realities, though perfectly understandable perhaps, in terms
of dreams and images."g In other words, is the replacement of a moral system with a
thriving modem industry a successful transition? Are morality and industry ontological
equivalents? Discipline is not ontologically synonymous with railways. We must not fall
into the trap of believing the historical myth of progression that things have and will
continue to always get better. Nor, however, should we fail to understand that
modernization and industry may improve societies. We must ask, "But at what speed?"
and, "At what cost?" when examining this rapid transition in late nineteenth century
Japan. For example, Saigo would not have debated whether or not railways enabling
workers the ability to commute is progressive and desirable. Saigo helped to dismantle
the Tokugawa shogunate in order to open up foreign relations, engage in modernization,
and progressively improve Japan's way oflife. However, in the beginning, he did not
136
realize that modernization would bring about a way oflife that would, seemingly,
jeopardize his core values.
Mark Ravina offers an alluring explanation for why Saigo chose to lead the
Rebellion of the Southwest:
Saigo did not explain his sympathy for the rebels, but many historians
have argued that he supported their defense of samurai privilege. Yet
although this was undoubtedly true, for Saigo the central issue was
maintaining a government based on virtue. Saigo was concerned with the
dissolution of the samurai estate because they were the class that
epitomized honor and selfless valor. 10
Ravina claims that it "is undoubtedly true" that Saigo supported the defense of samurai
privileges, yet this goes against his entire interpretation ofSaigo's last years. According
to Ravina, Saigo was not an imperialist. In fact, he reproached the West for its imperial
actions. Saigo believed in a Confucian order where a nation should lead through superior
virtue. This belief "suggests why Saigo did not publicly protest the elimination of
samurai stipends in 1876. He hoped to save the samurai class by inculcating frugal self-
sufficiency. These samurai would rule through superior virtue rather than mere hereditary
privilege."l1 Overall, "Saigo's fear was not that Japan would learn from the West, but
that Japan would learn the wrong things from the West and import the fayade of Western
culture rather than the underlying virtues that had led to Western strength," writes
Ravina.12 For Saigo, the West's success must have been due to its belief in similar
superior virtues as those practiced by the samurai class. However, he worried that Japan
would only see the benefits of westernization and not the universal values that must
compose it. In the end, the extermination ofthe samurai class was the extermination of
137
the superior virtues that should have guided Japan through its international, military, and
commercial successes.
On September 24, 1877 Saigo Takamori breathed his last breath because "an
imperial servant was obliged to remonstrate with his lord, to explain to him the errors of
his ways. A servant showed his loyalty not by agreeing with his lord's errors, but by
dissenting and risking death.,,13 The legend of his death by ritual suicide, seppuku, has
inspired the Japanese since 1877 and provided the opportunity for Edward Zwick, Tom
Cruise, and others to continue that tradition through their own rendition of the last
samuraI.
The Last Samurai: An Overview
Having briefly surveyed the period the film aims to represent, it is time to turn to
the examination of the film itself: its plot, its structure, its aims, and its evaluation. The
Last Samurai follows the life ofNathan Algren (Tom Cruise) who is a civil war veteran
and former captain under Colonel Custer. He's a self-destructive alcoholic who is
constantly haunted by the role he's played as a soldier, particularly his role in the
massacre ofNative Americans. Algren is hired to train Japan's new conscript army in the
ways of modem warfare in order to quell the rebellious samurai. The audience sees
Algren's reluctance in his response to his former commander, Colonel Bagley (Tony
Goldwyn), "You want me to kill Japos. I'll kill Japos. You want me to kill the enemies of
Japos. I'll kill the enemies of Japos '" for five hundred bucks a month I'll kill whoever
you want. But keep one thing in mind. I'd happily kill you for free." The first act
continues with Algren making his way to Japan to train the new conscript army. After
138
some brief training, the army is forced into battle prematurely. Lead by the samurai
Katsumoto, the samurai rebels rout the new conscript army, taking Algren captive.
The second act begins with Algren in a remote hillside of Japan. The village is the
village of Katsumoto's son and the audience is made aware that winter is coming and
Algren cannot escape. During this second act, Algren undergoes alcoholic detoxification,
realizes he is staying in the house of one of the samurai he defeated in battle, and begins
to respect the peace and tranquility the village provides. Algren undergoes a series of
conversations with Katsumoto, who is stricken by this former soldier, partly due to
Algren's eagerness to die. Algren comes to respect the ways of the samurai and starts to
pass the time through training. Time passes, the snow clears, and one night the village is
attacked by men in black camouflage. Algren aids the village, Katsumoto in particular,
in the defense. Algren asks who ordered the attack: the emperor or Omura, one of the
conniving council members. The audience sees Katsumoto's loyalty to the emperor when
he replies, "lfthe emperor wishes my death, he has but to ask." After Algren realizes it
must have been Omura, Katsumoto discusses "the way of the warrior" with Algren, "To
know life in every breath, every cup oftea, every life we take. The way of the warrior."
Algren whispers, "Life in every breath," and Katsumoto replies, "That is Bushido."
Katsumoto then apprises Algren that the emperor has granted them safe passage
to Tokyo. Algren rides back to Tokyo with the samurai ensemble, leaving the tranquil
village he has come to respect. Once in Tokyo, Algren is reminded of the changing world
around him as he is shown the conscript army's new howitzers and Gatling guns;
Katsumoto realizes the boy emperor's voice has been silenced; and the audience sees the
139
new implementation of reforms against the samurai class, such as the ban on samurai
swords and the wearing of the traditional topknot. Katsumoto attempts to rejoin the
imperial council based on the emperor's wish, but a dispute erupts when he refuses to
relinquish his sword:
Katsumoto: This chamber was protected by my sword when ...
Omura: We need no protection. We are a nation of laws.
Katsumoto: We are a nation of whores, selling ourselves ...
Omura: Ifwe are whores, the samurai made us this way.
Katsumoto: I have not seen the Omura family giving gold to the masses.
Omura: Minister Katsumoto, it is with great regret. " but I must ask you to
remove your sword.
Katsumoto: This sword serves the emperor. Only he can command me to remove
it.
Omura: The Emperor's voice is too pure to be heard in this council.
Katsumoto: Then, I must refuse to give up my sword.
Katsumoto is then lead out of the council chamber and arrested. Meanwhile, Algren
refuses to lead the now mature conscript army, and Colonel Bagley informs him that
Katsumoto will not last the night. Finally, Colonel Bagley asks one last question before
leaving, "Just tell me one thing. What is it about your own people you hate so much?"
Algren is attacked later that night, defends himself, and frees Katsumoto before he can
commit seppuku. On their escape back to the village, Algren convinces Katsumoto over
a campfire to make the emperor hear his words:
Katsumoto: The emperor could not hear my words. His army will come. It is the
end. For nine hundred years my ancestors have protected our people. Now, I
have failed them.
Algren: So you will take your own life .. , in shame? Shame for a life of service?
Discipline? Compassion?
Katsumoto: The way of the samurai is not necessary anymore.
Algren: Necessary? What could be more necessary?
140
Katsumoto: I will die by the sword. My own ... or my enemy's.
Algren: Then let it be your enemy's. Together, we will make the emperor hear
you.
In the third act, Algren then helps Katsumoto lead one last stand against the
conscript army. Algren wears the armor of the samurai he killed during his first skirmish.
In addition, he is made a sword which is engraved with Kanji: "I belong to the warrior in
whom the old ways have joined the new." The last samurai fight the imperial army
through guerilla tactics, and then are decimated by the howitzers and Gatlin guns during
their final charge. Katsumoto is gravely injured, and Algren aids his friend in committing
seppuku. Algren survives the battle and brings Katsumoto's sword to the emperor. The
emperor takes the sword and states, "I have dreamed of a unified Japan, of a country
strong and independent and modern. And now we have railroads, and cannons, Western
clothing. But we cannot forget who we are or where we come from." The film ends with
the emperor concluding that the new arms treaty with the United States is not in Japan's
best interest. He asks Algren to tell him how Katsumoto died, and Algren replies, "I will
tell you how he lived." The film ends as it began, with a narrative voiceover from the
character Simon Graham (Timothy Spall). He believes the fictional Captain Algren found
the peace and tranquility he was looking for and states, "And so the days of the samurai
had ended... "
Overall, by looking at the narrative of the film, it is possible to extrapolate the
film's principal message. The Last Samurai portrays the samurai and their values in
relation to the encroachment of westernization. Nathan Algren, an American Captain,
undergoes a positive transformation because of these samurai values. Having contributed
141
to Western expansion in the American West, Algren has seen the turmoil of imperialist
values and no longer wishes to playa part in this ideology. Through his decision to aid
Katsurnto, he takes a stand against westernization in order to protect the samurai way of
life. As cited above, Algren declares, "What could be more necessary?" The film clearly
depicts samurai values positively while making westernization their main adversary.
This is a decidedly simple explanation of the film's main message; however, in order to
truly judge this message, it is important to investigate the film's intention, its plausibility
as an historical interpretation, and, most importantly, its reception. Furthermore, it is also
possible that individual viewers do not perceive the film's seemingly predominate
message due to their cultural context, or if they do, the message may be believed,
negotiated, or even resisted.
The Last Samurai: An Evaluation
Attempting to evaluate a historical film is always a very interesting task. For
instance, does one judge the film solely against written history? Are historians at all
interested in its entertainment value? Historians often start with a question regarding the
accuracy of the film's historical content in comparison to preexisting knowledge and
debates. However, I believe it is important to always start with a very basic question-
what is the purpose of historical films?-and then move to a slightly more complicated
question-what is the purpose, or in other words the advertised intention, of this specific
historical film?
Regarding the purpose of historical films in general, such films are the work of
popular culture and as such are intended to reach a wide audience. These films, by their
142
very nature, are not intended to serve the same function as a historical monograph. First
and foremost they are a product that functions as entertainment; however, as discussed
above, these films are not merely entertainment, for part oftheir entertainment is the
ability to introduce and inform their audience about historical capital: historical
characters, historical events, and historical emotions. However, as my discussion of the
genre and subgenres of historical film illustrated, history can entertain in four different
ways through the use of four different degrees of fiction-h-e films, period films,faction
films, and biopic/eventpic films. Moving past the purpose of historical films in general,
what is the purpose of The Last Samurai, specifically?
The title itself provides a clue. The film is about samurai, but what samurai
specifically? Apparently, the last samurai, and it is clear the film's title does not
reference Saigo Takamori or necessarily the Battle of the Southwest. The three movie
trailers that can be found on IMDB.com (Internet Movie Database) also show no sign or
reference to specific characters or events. They purely show clips of the film and relate it
to ideas of courage, honor, and warriors. The only historical capital thus far referenced
are the samurai and some of the period detail which is shown in the trailers. The film
itself begins with an overture by the character Simon Graham:
They say Japan was made by a sword. They say the old gods dipped a coral blade
into the ocean and when they pulled it out, four perfect drops fell back into the
sea, and those drops became the islands of Japan. I say Japan was made by a
handful of brave men ... warriors willing to give their lives for what seems to
have become a forgotten word: Honor.
Still, no reference has been made to any specific characters or events; the period
itself is not yet known. A viewer is left with the knowledge from the title that the warriors
143
the narrator refers to are Japan's samurai, but it is not until later, through a film caption,
that the audience learns the film begins in 1876, America's centennial. The film also
references previous events concerning Native American massacres through flashbacks
and Algren's mention ofthe historical Colonel Custer, a historical man familiar to
American audiences. At no point does the film, through overture or narration, depict
Nathan A1gren or Katsumoto as historical figures-although, as will be explored below,
there is a closing overture in the film that may cause viewer confusion. The captions
throughout the film refer to place names (mainly cities) and dates. The film is full of
historical capital such as period dress and architecture. Of course, historical characters
and historical events can also be considered historical capital, but, as noted directly
above, The Last Samurai does not label its characters or events as historical through
captions. So far-assuming the audience does not recognize the characters as historical
capital, which is a safe assumption due to the position of Japanese history in American
consciousness-the film seems to place itself on the continuum of fiction near the period
film.
Moving from the production ploys, advertisements, and overtures of the film to
the director's aim, the film remains a period film. Director Edward Zwick's DVD
commentary succinctly illuminates the goal of the film and its relation to historical
significance:
You know it's the choice of the movie to celebrate one aspect of the samurai. Of
course, we know they were an aristocratic culture that thrived on, um ... the
burden was placed on the peasants, not unlike the chivalric culture ofKing Arthur
and the romanticization of the round table, but to choose to celebrate those aspects
of their lives-the philosophy, the idea of life in every breathe ... I think the
144
deepest and most important wellspring of their contribution to Japanese culture-
to an audience that never really knew much about it. I mean a popular audience of
seventeen year 01ds. 14
Here, Edward Zwick's own words describe the film's purpose, "to celebrate one aspect of
the samurai," and brings to issue two of the problems concerning the representation of
history on the big screen: partisanship and representation. The film is partisan in
showing the samurai in a good light while illuminating on their more fundamental and
virtuous characteristics: honor, service, and discipline. Paraphrasing Zwick above, he is
stating the main focus of the film is to celebrate and introduce these warriors to viewers
that mayor may not be aware of their culture. Zwick is not introducing Saigo Takamori
or the Battle of the Southwest; he is not providing a definitive analysis of the samurai
class during the nineteenth century. What he is doing is introducing audience members to
a foreign and exotic warrior class in a positive, partisan way.
As noted in Chapter 3, films often use heroes and villains to illustrate their
message. In this film the villain is westernization and the eradication of samurai tradition
and morals, hence the title: The Last Samurai. The film is an attempt to understand the
social turmoil of a disappearing warrior class steeped in discipline, honor, and service.
Some argue that the film depicts westernization and modernization negatively. In the
special features section of the two disc DVD titled History Vs. Hollywood: The Last
Samurai, military historian Geoffrey Wawro opines Hollywood's historical inaccuracy:
Let's face it; the samurai in this ... 1876-1877 ... were the bad guys. They were
reactionaries trying to go back to a bygone time when women didn't have rights,
when there was no hope of democracy, when there was a real caste system in the
Japanese villages, where you have untouchable people who were discriminated
against, and the Meiji government was trying to change that. In fact, a lot of these
145
conscript soldiers who were coming down and shooting at the samurai in the film,
these were actually the good guys, guys that are trying to implicate a kind of
democracy in Japan. IS
Wawro places his Western views of democracy into a film that is meant to depict
the struggle of tradition versus foreign influence and rapid change. Moreover, while his
comments may hold some truth, they make the issues concerning Japan and
westernization appear straightforward. His interpretation is one of many, and so is The
Last Samurai's. It could be argued that the foreign ambassadors were not in Japan solely
to implement democracy and freedom for women and the untouchables. They were there
to make a profit off of a modernizing nation, and did so through force. It was only
through Commodore Matthew Perry's gunboat diplomacy that Japan re-opened its
borders to Western influences, and it seems unlikely that the westerners had women's
rights as a top objective. To insist that The Last Samurai is historically inaccurate due to
the fact that the samurai were the real "bad guys" both simplifies and misses the point.
Most importantly, Wawro's interpretation is grounded in the historical myth of
progression: westernization is simply better.
If historical films, paraphrasing Rosenstone, are meant to make us rethink our
historical path and question the values we live by, then The Last Samurai is an important
historical work, for it highlights the negative impact of imperialism and modernization
while celebrating the positive values of a lost tradition. 16 Furthermore, if one
appropriates Michael Pickering's purpose ofpost-colonial analysis, " ... to write back
against empire, against the grain of colonial discourse, in order to articulate alternative
identities amidst the legacies of the imperial past," then one could argue that The Last
146
Samurai projects images "back against empire" in order to "articulate alternative
identities" ofthe Japanese samurai and their traditions. I? Nevertheless, I must point out
that Zwick's interpretation is neither an objective interpretation nor is it the only possible
one. Rather, it is one answer to a qualitative question: what effect did rapid
modernization and thus the loss of samurai traditions have on Japan?
Having discussed the film's historical interpretation, what about the film's period
details? Zwick opens his portrayal of the samurai with what could appear to be oriental
and mystical illustrations. The first depiction of samurai in this film is Katsumoto
dreaming of a white tiger that foretells Nathan Algren's arrival. It is as if Algren was
placed into their society by destiny for some unforeseen reason. In addition, during the
first clash between the newly trained soldiers and the samurai, the film shows the
samurai coming from amongst the misty Japanese wilderness in their somewhat demonic
armor, thus possibly suggesting that these "men like beings" have come from another,
unknown realm. As the battle is over and Algren is taken away, he sees what appears to
be a gruesome and morose act of violence: Katsumoto decapitates one of the captured
soldiers.
However, with the exception of Katsumoto's vision, both the introduction of the
samurai and the decapitation can be defended as realistic. Zwick's own discussion of the
first scene provides this realistic view:
It was based on some reading that we had all done about the samurai, their use of
weather as tactics, how could a group armed without weapons take on a group
with weapons ... in this case, their counting on the lack of training, lack of
preparation of these troops, and their ability to intimidate them ... The image of
these creatures, almost medieval looking in this armor, in these terrifying
147
silhouettes as they emerge was very much in my imagination, and there are those
rare moments when something you photograph actually exceeds your imagination
,,18
Moreover, the seemingly gruesome decapitation scene is later explained as the ritual
seppuku. Zwick is not stating one must agree with seppuku, only that one must
understand it within its own cultural framework. It could be stated that the film opens
with quasi-exotic portrayals of the samurai and their rituals in order to captivate the
audience. However, throughout the film, the samurai are displayed through realistic, or
should I say earthly, illustrations.
It is interesting to note that, in passing, I have heard several historians refer to the
film as a possible rendition of nineteenth century Japan with the film's attention to period
detail. More importantly, the film illustrates the rapid development and change occurring
during this period, a period summarized above and one that John-Pierre Lehmann
explains was one of "uncritical adulation of all things Western.,,19 However, the question
arises: how important is period detail in relation to true invention and audience
perception? If a piece of armor, in passing, is slightly anachronistic, will the viewer's
understanding of the historical meaning be greatly affected? As noted in Chapter 3,
while historians are aware of the importance of illusion, they are more concerned with
historical content.
For now, a quick example will suffice. While chatting with a Japanese historian
and two history graduate students about the film and its historical representations, the
historian expressed his dissatisfaction with an empirical scene in the film. The scene
portrays Captain Algren, Colonel Bagley, and the translator Simon Graham walking up a
148
large staircase to the emperor's palace. The historian criticized Edward Zwick for
attempting to show the imperial palace "on high" when in reality the palace is a flat
plateau surrounded by the city. Now, for the historian this was a false invention in which
Zwick attempted to embellish the emperor's regality. Interestingly enough, Zwick notes
the stairs are from a different temple in Japan and right after doing so discusses the
"humility" and "tastefulness" of the imperial rooms:
They were not grand, there was a real humility to the imperial family ... the idea
that the rooms were of a modest scale is true to much of the Japanese architecture
of the day. It wasn't as ifthe huge royal imperial palaces ofEurope. Rather, the
emperor was a figure who needn't have that splendor because it was understood
that he had the support of everyone and he wasn't at risk. He was protected by all
of the samurai daimyo around him, so he needn't necessarily have to be guarded
in quite the same way.l°
It is interesting to note that Zwick may have unintentionally caught himself in a
catch-22. By using the elevated staircase, Zwick had inadvertently depicted the Emperor
"on high," yet his intention was to bring a feel of modesty and humility to the inner
imperial chambers. To make the case more intriguing, I discussed this episode with an
individual who had seen the film and she stated that the elevated staircase may have
slightly added to the feel of the atmosphere as "on high"; however, she also stated the
absence of these steps would not have changed her perception of the imperial throne as a
regal position. Therefore, in judging the film, it is imperative to understand the
audience's perception of the film in relation to the filmmaker's intention. How is it
possible that the three people above-the historian, Zwick, and the individual viewer-
all perceived the scene in different ways, and more importantly, are any of them truly
149
wrong in their interpretation? Furthermore, does this take away from the films larger
message?
Overall, is the partisanship and representation of the samurai in this film a true or
false invention? Does the lack of depicting the samurai aristocracy negatively make the
period description null and void, or simply less true? Do certain inaccuracies in period
detail in addition to the answers to the questions above deprive the film of true historical
meaning and interpretation? For starters, the partisan view of the film and its
representation of samurai can be defended by looking at the existing body of knowledge
and debates. As illustrated above, Mark Ravina's work The Last Samurai: The Life and
Battles oj8aigo Takamori illustrates the possibility that samurai fought certain aspects of
westernization in order to defend their moral integrity. Subsequently, the depiction of
samurai in a positive light is, as Zwick stated in his commentary, "the choice of the
movie to celebrate one aspect of the samurai," and it is one choice and one argument in a
sea of already existing knowledge and debate. Most importantly, empirical discrepancies
will rarely impede upon the more powerful messages the film attempts to depict.
However, it is clear that Zwick's "bad guy" is not just westernization but
American westernization, for both the American arms dealing and military training
portrayed in the film was actually performed by other western powers. It could be argued
that it was the United States that first re-opened Japan to the West, and America, as well
as other Western countries, significantly influenced Japan throughout this period. It also
could be argued that Zwick uses America and Algren to rake in American audiences'
attention. And as one of my research participants will show, audience members may be
150
aware of this tactic. However, this misrepresentation of historical content is the type of
issue historians raise when evaluating historical films. For example, while it could be
argued that Nathan Algren, as an American soldier, is used to captivate American
viewers' attention, this does not necessarily mean that American westernization needed to
be the sole antagonist. Surely it is possible to place an American in the time period as
well as accurately portray the influence ofother western powers.
In addition, I have ignored the concepts of 3-Act Drama, Scope, and Romance
because these elements attack film as a medium and do not constitute grounds for "bad"
history. Overall, The Last Samurai is a period film that takes certain artistic licenses with
regards to historical interpretation. There is one general perception of the film that is
worth noting. Both popular reviewers and historians recognize the film's attention to
period detai1.21 As discussed above, I have heard several historians attest to the accuracy
of this detail with respect to a few exceptions, such as the annoyance about the use of
leveled steps at the imperial palace. In addition, the film adequately captures the aura of
the intense modernization of the period--especially the desire for all things Western in
Japan at the time. Ultimately, further investigation is needed: how do individual viewing
motivations, preferences, and historical interests impact the individual's perception of
The Last Samurai, and what can this tell us about the function of this historical film, and
possibly others?
The Last Samurai: Perceived
To begin, the Gray family members initially saw the film when Rick, the father,
had rented it. Rick clarified while stressing his historical interests, "We saw previews,
151
but I'm pretty sure we waited to rent it at home ... My idea, but everyone was interested
to see it. For me it's always the action, but not just action. It's the historical aspect of it
that really interests me. If I had a choice between just some action movie or one that had
a historical perspective to it, I would always choose the historical one, even if mostly
fictional." As a viewer who prefers films with some historical aspect, Rick can be
considered as a loyal viewer of historical films, and in this case, we have a loyal viewer
attracting other casual viewers to this film. For instance, Lori mentioned, "I believe Rick
was the one who suggested the movie and I was ok by that. We have watched it several
times since then and I would pick it out myself now too." In addition, while Rick
mentions that the others were initially interested in the film, Jessica admitted, "I wasn't
too thrilled to watch it" but then "loved it." She loved "the fighting, the samurais" and
"some of the things [she] learned about history." As a self-identified "movie family,"
Jason and Jessica received The Last Samurai on DVD as a Christmas present. Rick
concluded, "The entire family really enjoyed the movie, as you can tell because we all
now own it." The fact that Lori, Jason, and Jessica did not decide to see this movie on
their own, had seen the film because Rick had rented it, and yet were attracted to it and
now own it illustrates the dynamics of viewer networks.
Both Jason and Jessica mentioned they had heard ofthe film before they had seen
it, but Jason specifically noted, "I actually think I did hear about it because I was
intrigued by it dealing with samurai ... For the most part I really enjoyed it. I like the
idea of believing in something so much that you are willing to die for that cause,
especially when you know that standing true to that cause will make your death inevitable
152
... I do, however, think the samurai messed up a bit. Imagine if they chose to embrace the
future even just a bit. Imagine samurai with Gatling guns." At first glance, Jason's
response seems to reinforce the film's interpretation that the samurai refused to use
western weapons; however, this is not the case as Jason's reference to samurai with
Gatling guns was in jest. As I will show below, Jason does not believe that the samurai
would have battled over what weapons to use in a battle.
Lori mentioned she enjoyed the movie "because of the ability of one guy learning
the culture of someone else and actually becoming a part ofthat society." She also
enjoys movies that cater to underdogs while further mentioning that Tom Cruise "tends to
do movies where he will fight for the underdog, and I like that at times." Lori's
enjoyment of inspirational and underdog movies was clear in her early dismissal of the
King Arthur film that was more dark than she was first suspecting. Lori's attraction to
The Last Samurai did not rest so much on the historicity of the film as much as its
depiction of the importance of multicultural awareness. She explains:
I do not like it when people look at another person and judges that person based
on the way they look or the color of their skin, etc. So I like it when a person
takes the time to get to know someone else, even though he [Nathan Algren] had
no choice in the matter in this movie. When you get a chance to understand the
background of someone else you begin to understand why they do certain things.
If you get to know a person and they get to know you, you or they won't be
judged by what the others in the group are doing. You might begin to change the
way people think and change the way things are. I've never liked the fact that
people judged me as being snobbish because I was extremely shy and didn't talk a
lot to others. When people got to know me, they realized I was not a snob and
made a really good friend. I will go to the wall for anyone who I feel is being
wronged. Also, I've always wanted to be able to speak to others in their own
language, but I have not been able to learn any language very easily. Just wish I
had that ability, but it never happened.
153
For Lori, this movie stresses the importance of understanding and appreciating other
cultures, peoples, and customs; the film's value is its lessons on multiculturalism and
xenophobia. These lessons are exemplified by Nathan Algren's path to understanding the
samurai, and Native Americans, as different, yet respectable peoples with different
customs and traditions-rather than the "savages" he once thought. The film performs
two tasks at once for Lori: it presents samurai culture to her, and it stresses the
importance of understanding other cultures while doing so.
In addition, Jason and Jessica are clearly attracted to the samurai, as one might
suspect, but there is a deeper reason for this. Both Jessica and Jason hold black belts in
Tae Kwon Do, and Jason is an instructor. Here are brief excerpts from their interviews,
respectively:
Jason: I like the samurai way oflife, their honor code. It might be a martial art
thing. And I love their swords. There is just something about being
honorable when you are cutting someone' s body in half.
Jessica: The fact that it is samurai is interesting because of my martial arts
background. Movies with any form of martial arts in them are always
something I like to watch. I liked that they had very strong beliefs and
stood up for them. I am a martial artist, so I really enjoyed the training
they went through.
Furthermore, when Jessica was asked why she is attracted to the film-action, morals,
samurai, or Japan-she replied, "The fact that [the film's content] is Japan, not so
much--other than the fact that it is samurai."
As Zwick stated in his commentary-noted above-his main intention of the film
was to celebrate and introduce the samurai class to viewers. So far, Rick's reception and
154
attraction to the film fall in line with the film's intentions. However, if the samurai are
what mainly attract Rick, and thus the rest of the family, to this film, are they still
influenced by the historical details depicted in this period film? In order to answer this, it
is necessary to situate the participant's reception in relation to their background
knowledge of late nineteenth century Japan.
Regarding prior knowledge about the historical period, Jason stated, "I have never
been a history buff. I'm not real sure about that period," yet with regards to the samurai
he stated, "I was fairly acquainted with them before. I don't think I really learned
anything new from the movie." When asked ifhe read up on them on his own or through
a class he continued, "Mostly on my own I think-nothing extensive, just tidbits here and
there." Overall, while Jason stated part of the reason he enjoyed the movie was because
"they were fighting with swords and bows and arrows and I thought it was awesome"-
phrasing that stresses the merely entertainment hypothesis-he states in a sophisticated
manner:
... I think there were real battles that took place during this change, but I think
this movie portrayed the samurai as "the old way" and the more modem army as
"the new way" ... I don 't think the samurai would have fought and diedfor what
weapons we should use in war. I think it was this idea or principle of what we are
willing to give up or how much we are willing to sell o!t on to gain
"advancement" in the world. Are we going to sacrifice honor to gain power?
Jason was more familiar with samurai than the historical period. Furthermore, he states:
I know that Japan went through a period of westernization that of course was
influenced by "westerners." If it weren't for that, the samurai's way of life would
probably still be central there. So yes, I do believe there were other nations [than
America] that played a role ... but I'm not sure it would be right to point fingers at
any specific nations involved and say they are responsible for this change. I think
155
as technology advances the world gets smaller and it is only a matter oftime
before the rest of the world penetrates any area that tries to keep itself set apart.
Jason's response is significant. While he is not a student of the history, he is critically
aware of the film's use of America as a representational country. Furthermore, he is
critically aware of the social forces ofhistory, in this case westernization as an entity in
itself. The film has informed Jason of the period, but he is not so naive as to think that
America was solely responsible and that the samurai were merely worried about their
weapons. In essence, the film did not really inform Jason about the samurai since he was
familiar with their culture; however, he was informed on the period's atmosphere of
westernization while being critically aware of the films use of representation and scope.
In comparison, Jessica knew of samurai, but not much about them. Additionally,
she did not know about this period in Japan:
I knew about the [American] Civil War, but I didn't know about any situation in
Japan where westernization was trying to occur, other than the usual fact that
America wanted to westernize everything. I knew about samurai because I was a
martial artist, but I really didn't know a great deal about them: how they train, or
what they truly believed in. I also didn't know they killed themselves if they felt
they had shamed themselves or others in their group.
In addition, when asked if she has looked into the history since the movie, she stated, "1
haven't really looked into anything. 1 basically think of the movie." However, this does
not necessarily mean she's not interested in the history. In fact, she stated that time is a
relevant issue when it comes to discovering the history presented in The Last Samurai,
"I've thought about looking stuffup but never get around to it ... It's a time issue and
then a push it aside issue. When I watch the movie or talk about it I get interested again
156
and want to look stuff up, but then that fades and I don't think about it until I watch the
movie or talk about it with someone."
Ironically, Jessica even mentions learning about history completely unrelated to
the period. During the film, Algren mentions the Battle of Thermopylae to inspire
Katsumoto. Jessica stated during the interview, "I remember asking dad about that at one
point and him telling me that that was something that "really" happened, and then 300
came out and I thought it was cool that it had been mentioned in The Last Samurai."
Jessica had been informed about another topic in history through the discourse in The
Last Samurai, and because of this discourse, she was influenced to see a film about
another historical topic, the Spartan battle at Thermopylae. As I stated earlier, an average
American citizen in our fast paced culture may not have the time or inclination to read a
textbook or historical monograph. Most importantly, this does not mean that they are not
interested in history. It is clear that Jessica is interested. The two hour celluloid reality is
a vehicle for attaining historical knowledge, and may also be a motivating factor to attain
more. Curiosity breeds discovery. In addition, Jessica's responses expose the fact that she
discusses these films and their history with others, and she looks to others who may know
more about the history, in this case, her father.
While Lori was unaware of the historical period, Rick mentioned, "I don't know a
great deal about that era in Japan's history. I know the emperor was a God and I know
some about the samurai code. I also know that the seeds of friction between Japan and
the U.S. were sowed during that period. That friction helped contribute towards events
leading to World War II years later." Rick, an American military history aficionado,
157
contextualizes the film in relation to the events between America and Japan during World
War II. In addition, Rick's comment about his prior knowledge of the historical period
led into the discussion of the film's period realism, "I was not really surprised by
anything in the movie and I think that it was mostly fiction, as far as the characters were
concerned. Good movie though."
Moving from these viewers' prior historical knowledge of the film, it is time to
see how they categorized The Last Samurai as a historical film and distinguished it as a
period film in their own words. First, as Rick's comment illustrates, he believes the film
"was mostly fiction, as far as the characters were concerned." He clarified:
I think the movie had its facts pretty straight about the time period, especially the
relationship between the u.s. and the Japanese, also, the loss of importance of the
samurai warrior-although that spirit did present itself in the Japanese fighting
class right up thru World War II. Where it went totally fiction, I believe, was
with Tom Cruise's character and that whole story line about an American
samurai. Makes for good story. All in all a good movie with some time period
accuracy and much entertaining fiction with the American character.
Jason sees the film as a period film as well, and although Jason admits he does not
focus on the historical aspect of films and while he may never categorize films as
"historical"-in fact, he simply labeled The Last Samurai as a Battle film-he is often
aware of historical films' historicity. When asked ifhe remembered if the film was based
on a true story, Jason replied, "I would say it is inspired by true events but simplified a bit
for Hollywood purposes, and it gives the United States the role that would have been
played by other nations." Furthermore, when asked what he meant by "simplified," he
responded, "Well, I don't believe the movie was intended to be an historical
documentary. Just like any movie based on something previous, whether real event or a
158
novel, you can't include all the details. You have to get complex issues across in a way
that won't lose the attention of an audience that wants to be entertained ... I don't know
specifics." When further asked ifhe believed Nathan Algren represented a historical
American Captain, he stated:
I would not say that the particular characters found in the movie are the real life
characters exactly, but I would say that, to some extent, they represent certain
historical characters-if that makes sense? I am sure some are completely
fictional. If I had to wager a guess at it, I would say the main roles represent real
people, if not exactly than by concept, while some of the supporting roles, like the
dead samurai's wife that Nathan Algren ends up falling in love with, most likely
were not real. Was there a real Nathan Algren? ... I would guess not ... but was
there a real person from a different culture who had interactions with and fought
alongside samurai at some point during the conflict or conflicts that this movie is
based on ... I would guess so. I guess that is a lot of fluff to say I don't know,
maybe [he winks].
Jason's responses are thoughtful answers that relate to two issues pertaining to historical
film's re-construction of history: scope and representation. He is aware that films
"simplify a bit for Hollywood purposes, can't include all the details" and "have to get
complex issues across in a way that won't lose the attention of an audience that wants to
be entertained." Furthermore, both Rick's and Jason's categorization of The Last Samurai
as an Action and Battle film, respectively, and their attraction to the film due to samurai
serve as evidence that while history may not be a viewer's main reason for seeing a film,
at a deeper level viewers can still be interested in the history, influenced by the history, or
motivated by its historical interpretations. Above all, films can influence their audiences'
historical consciousness without dominating it.
159
On the other hand, Jessica, having no prior knowledge ofthis period or event, is
forced to wonder about certain events and characters the film depicts. She does not get
any help from the film since the film does not provide clues through captions or
narration. At one point during the interview, she turned the question to me, "Can you tell
me if this movie was actually based on a true story because I can't remember?" After
dodging her question through a discussion of realism, I asked her why she placed The
Last Samurai under Adventure and History. She responded, "Hmmm, I think because I
really thought it was based on a true story, and even if it isn't, there are multiple areas of
the movie where there are historical things mentioned that are documented in history."
The fact that she was not sure if the film was based on a true story is significant, for it
forces her to wonder which historical elements of the film were realistic. Additionally,
she is genuinely curious:
I was very interested in how the samurai respond to "failure," by killing
themselves because of the shame. I was also interested in the use of the Gatling
gun, for the first time ... I wonder how accurate the depiction of the fight between
the samurai and the "westernized" army is when they use the Gatling gun, but I
feel certain things that are said in the movie are fairly accurate, such as the
information about the Spartans. And ifI'm correct, there are other pieces of
information straddled throughout the movie that I feel are accurate.
As discussed above, The Last Samurai does not make a claim to tell a true story, and this
lack of claim partly confuses Jessica. However, she helped me understand when she
wonders about a film's historicity and when she does not, "If a movie is actually based on
a true story I wonder less. I'm also not completely stupid when it comes to history. I do
know some things, so I can usually figure out when certain things are accurate. However,
if it isn't something I know, and it's not based on a true story, I wonder." Her last
160
statement in the quote above summarizes her experience with The Last Samurai. First,
the film does not make a claim to tell a true story. Second, Jessica is not familiar with the
historical period. Consequently, this makes her wonder about the film's historical re-
construction.
In addition, Jessica wonders less, if at all, about other films that she and her
family categorize as bio/eventpics-although they obviously do not use this term. For
example, when asked if Algren represented a historical person, Jessica responded, "I
really think he was '" Captain Nathan something ... I could be wrong, but I really
thought he was based on a true person. I'm probably wrong and just hoping he was based
on a real person because I felt like he had great morals, when he finally stopped being an
alcoholic and realized that what the samurai stood for was a great cause to fight for." To
some extent, this statement verifies the notion that real events truly matter and inspire
because they actually happened. In addition, Jessica's category of films labeled
Inspirational further validates this notion. Referring back to Jessica's definition of
Inspirational films, an Inspirational "has to be something that actually happened. There's
a story line behind it and it's like Wow! There's a Wow factor of it does happen." This
categorization fits well within the bio/eventpic subgenre of historical films and illustrates
that "something that actually happed" has a "wow factor." Both Jessica's hope for Nathan
Algren to be a real person and her definition of Inspirational films validate that history
does indeed matter. Overall, through The Last Samurai, Jessica is introduced to
westernization in Japan during the latter nineteenth century, is informed on samurai, and
161
is motivated to discuss and see a film on an unrelated historical topic, the Battle at
Thennopylae.
Lori believes the period of the film is based on actual events and that Algren's
character is real. She explains, "I think the film is trying to depict both these characters
[Nathan Algren and Katsumoto] as being real. At the end they [the narrator] talk about
no one seeing Tom Cruise's character again, and they did not know if he died from his
injuries or ifhe somehow was able to get to the home of the samurai where he was able
to live out the rest of his life. The film also talks about this battle being the end of the
samurai. That's why I think the film could depict an aspect of Japanese history." Lori's
response is significant, for it shows the importance of historical signifiers. As mentioned
in Chapter 3, signifiers ofhistorical capital can range from titles, trailers, captions, and
filmic overtures. In this case, the film opens with a narration from one ofthe characters
and closes with a narration by the same character. As Lori explains, the final narration
proposes the rest of the life of the fictional Nathan Algren. Lori clearly mentions,
"That's why I think the film could depict an aspect of Japanese history." In other words,
this narration is what leads Lori to assume that Algren was real. This is the same type of
narration that Jessica was alluding to at the end ofthe films Miracle and We Are
Marshall-two inspirational films that can be labeled as bio/eventpics. This could also
be part of the reason that Jessica wanted and thought that Algren's character may be
based on a real person, although she was not entirely sure. Lastly, Lori also added that
she did not really watch The Last Samurai as a true historical film, and she explains that
the real significance of the film for her was in fact its multicultural message, "I do not
162
think I was watching The Last Samurai as a true historical movie; therefore, I did not
think that everything in the movie was true to fact. I just enjoyed watching it as a film
where one person learns to accept another culture and how he [Nathan Algren] adapts his
life to it and becomes a better person." While Lori was confused over the films portrayal
ofNathan Algren, the "feel" of the film still seemed to be dominated by its period and
cultural message.
Additionally, Lori stated, "I am not that interested in trying to find out if this is a
true depiction of what happened in their history though." As noted, Lori's interest in the
film stems more from the film's lessons, such as the importance ofmulticultural
awareness she alludes to above. Yet, although she is seemingly uninterested in learning
about the period or validating the films representation of said period, she offers
thoughtful comments on the social forces during this period:
I think the samurai believed they were protecting the Emperor by not changing
their way of life. But things change and if you are not willing to try to change,
you could end up destroying the very thing you are trying to preserve. In this
movie I would not have been able to treat the Emperor as a God when he allowed
others to destroy a very important way oflife for the Japanese people.
Conversely, I think if change comes too fast and you don't prepare for the changes
you could also destroy yourselves.
More than worrying about the historical representation, Lori negotiates the historical
social forces during this time and admits that change is inevitable, but not all must be
lost, "Some change is good, and I believe the Samurai could have protected the emperor
and worked within the society the Emperor wanted to go. The Emperor is depicted as
very weak in this movie for a while, and he allowed the destruction of the samurai to
come about. I think there was a place for both thoughts at this time." She neither agrees
163
that the path to modernization should be quick, nor that one can bring everything with
them on the journey.
In conclusion, The Last Samurai is not merely entertainment, and the family's
reception of The Last Samurai serves as a case study that presents several significant
findings. Estimations to why viewers generally choose to see historical films can
sometimes be thrown out the window. Jessica, Jason, and Lori saw the The Last Samurai
because Rick had rented it and they wanted to spend quality time together. Rick, a loyal
historical viewer, can attract these more casual viewers to the genre (although, I do not
mean to imply that the others may not have ever rented it on their own). Second, these
viewers' responses to the The Last Samurai were contextually based. Rick admits he will
almost always choose a historical film over other films. His knowledge of the period's
history was situated by his awareness of the relationship between America and Japan
during the World Wars. Jason and Jessica both partially enjoyed the film and its samurai
because they are martial artists. This led them to focus their attention on the samurai's
philosophy and training. Additionally, it is apparent that Jason's and Jessica's prior
knowledge of the period, or lack thereof, influenced their decision to discern the film's
historical basis. Lori, on the other hand, found more value in the film's main message on
multicultural awareness and progression.
Despite Rick's, Jason's, and Jessica's attraction to the film, they were cognizant
of the films re-construction of history. Rick was aware of the film's use of fictional
characters and period detail while Jason discussed film's impact on history regarding
scope and representation. He noted that America was not the only Western influence in
164
Japan and, like Rick, that the characters were more than likely representational of
historical persons. Jessica, on the other hand, was genuinely curious about the film's
historical representation while Lori was more interested by the film's multicultural
lesson, illustrating the variable and multivalent aspects of film reception and audience
meanings and motivations.
In addition, with very little prior knowledge, Jessica learned about westernization
in Japan and samurai during the late nineteenth century. While the film aroused her
interest in Japanese and samurai history, the fact that she has yet to fulfill this desire
indicates the agency of films as central sources of history in modem society. In other
words, while films may motivate further historical inquiry, the hectic schedule of daily
life may cause historical film to become the primary source of historical knowledge.
Jessica's interaction with the film and its influence on her historical knowledge went
beyond the viewing of the film. The mentioning of the Spartan Battle at Thermopylae in
the film prompted a discussion with her father, and also motivated her to go see the new
film 300.
Lastly, and most interestingly, it is important that Rick and Jason were not
confused about the film's intention as a period film and that Jessica was unsure whether
or not the film was based on a true story. Comparing this with the fact that she knows that
other films are based on true stories, this illuminates a problem of period films. Without
previous knowledge and without strong formal hints from the film, it is possible that
viewers are encouraged to wonder if the events being portrayed are true. It is important
that Jessica quickly questioned herself on whether The Last Samurai was based on a true
165
story or not. She did not just take the film as fact. Jessica notices a difference between
The Last Samurai, a period film, and other films that are Inspirationals-a type of
bio/eventpic. Comparing Jessica's hope that Nathan Algren could be a real historical
person with her category of Inspirational films demonstrates that whether a person was
real or not does have a qualitative effect on the emotions a film arouses. Since Lori
focused more on the film's multicultural lesson than the confusing historical signifier-
the ending narration of the fictional Nathan Algren-Lori' s perception of the film
stresses that a film's overall feel can still impede mishaps due to historical signifiers.
Most importantly, these instances serve as evidence to the importance of captions,
voiceovers, or narration in projecting the film's historical intention.
Notes
I John-Pierre Lehmann, The image ofJapan.from Feudal Isolation to World Power, 1850-1905 (London:
Allen & Unwin, 1978),21.
2 Quoted in Lehmann, The Image ofJapan, 32.
3 Ibid.
4 Mark Ravina, The Last Samurai: the Life and Battles ofSaigo Takamori (Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley &
Sons, Inc., 2003) 31-32.
5 Ravina, The Last Samurai, 146-147.
6 Ibid., 170.
7 Ibid., 198.
8 Lehman, The Image ofJapan 105.
9 Ibid., 136, 141.
10 Ravina, The Last Samurai, 199.
166
II Ibid., 195.
12 Ibid., 194.
13 Ibid., 66.
14 This commentary by Edward Zwick can be found on Disc One of The Last Samurai, minutes 1: 12:17-
1:13:05.
15 Geoffrey Wawro, "History VS. Hollywood: The Last Samurai," Disc 2. The Last Samurai.
16 Rosenstone, Visions ofthe Past, 129-131.
17 Michael Pickering, Stereotyping: The Politics ofRepresentation (Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire:
Palgrave, 2001), 169.
18This commentary by Edward Zwick can be found on Disc One of The Last Samurai, minutes 23:40-
26:05.
19 Lehmann, The Image ofJapan, 24.
20 This commentary by Edward Zwick can be found on Disc One of The Last Samurai, minutes] 3:34-
14:20.
21 For a sample of reviews discussing the production and attention to period detail, see J. Calhoun "Re-
creating Two Very Different Pasts for Cold Mountain and the Last Samurai." Entertainment Design
38 no. 2 (2004): 2; D. Shuler, "'The Last Samurai': The Return to a Code of Honor," New York
Amsterdam News 94 no. 51, (2003): 22; D.D, "The Last Samurai (Film)." New Yorker 79, no. 39
(2003): 35.
167
CHAPTER VII
CONCLUSION
"I mean, if I were to put something in a category that I would call historical [film], I
would probably name the genre boring [he laughs]. You know it would be like
documentary or something." -Jason Gray
As much as I have been stressing that historical films are not merely
entertainment, it is clear that they are principally perceived by viewers as entertainment
in initial discussions of the topic. Jason's comments above are representative of the
typical responses from individuals when questioned on film genres. While preparing my
initial research questions it became clear that individuals quickly associate history with
documentaries, schooling, or as Jason's comment implies, even with "boring." In closing
my interviews, I asked Lori about her thoughts on history. Her connotation of the term
was somewhat typical, "I never liked history when I was in school. To me it was just
memorizing a bunch of dates so that I could pass a test, so I never delved more into
events." Similar to the participants in Roy Rosenzweig and David Thelen's study on the
everyday perceptions of history, Lori's initial connotation of the word history was to
think back to school, memorizing dates, and taking tests. I
On the surface, films are entertainment; history is documentary. But beneath the
surface, historical films can be more than entertainment. In the case ofperiod films, they
can strongly emotionalize, personalize, and dramatize a historical era for audiences. In
the case of bio/eventpics, they can illustrate historical lessons through the impact of
168
actual events. Or, in the case ofhistorical-entertainment films, they can simply make
history fun again and encourage viewers to reflect on temporality, causality, and
multicultural awareness. But overall, historical films remain a paradox: entertainment or
historical informant?
One thing is certain: more research is needed to truly understand the functions of
historical films beyond the mere entertainment level. Part of this oversight is due to the
juxtaposition of theoretical assumption and practical activity. Both viewers and
historians initially associate films with entertainment and history with schooling.
Historians need to be aware of the ideology of mass culture and its emotional appeal
while realizing that not all historical films use history for the same purposes. With the
attraction ofvisual media in relation to leisure time, we cannot ignore the impact these
films have on viewers' historical consciousness at the practical level by focusing on the
inadequate conclusions of textual analyses and grand theories alone. Part ofmy goal has
been to initiate a strategy for examining this phenomenon. Through fieldwork, the
theoretical subgenres that categorize films based on their use ofhistory-rather than by
historical period-have shown to be useful heuristics for investigating historical films,
and Ang's three conceptions of realism--empirical, classical, and emotional-prove to
be a starting point for analyzing research participants' responses. Most importantly, the
responses reveal that historical accuracy matters with regards to advertised intention.
As a result, filmmakers need to be aware of their aims in telling historical stories.
They need to be mindful of communicating these intentions honestly. Historical
intention and truth is an attraction, and viewers do not enjoy being lied to. Filmmakers,
169
above all, cannot hide behind the shroud ofmere entertainment if they are advertising
historical knowledge. Real events have real impacts on viewers. Filmmakers must deny
ego or the theoretical assumption that it is "good business" when they manipulate stories
that are already moneymakers. History is drama. If filmmakers are more aware of the
different subgenres of historical films and better able to adapt their film's advertising to
the different degrees of fiction, this could possibly affect the criticism these filmmakers
and their films receive from critics, scholars, and audiences. Is it too much to ask that a
film advertises its historical interpretation based on its degree of fiction? If you want to
have fun with history, make a historical-entertainment film or even a period film. If you
want to tell a true story that has real meaning, tell a bio/eventpic and stick to the facts.
"Narrativising" history, borrowing from White, necessitates enough historical
imagination of its own. Of course, filmmakers can insist that truth is relative, but true
historical interpretations still employ facts. Interpretation may be negotiable; lying is not.
While this folkloristic and ethnographic approach to the Gray family's reception
ofhistorical films has illustrated that these films can function at different pedagogical
levels, this research has also offered other findings significant to folklore studies and
public history. Folklorists can move from textual analyses of media and focus on media
in our everyday life by shifting the focus from folklore in media to media as folklore. By
focusing on small group interactions, folklorists can aid general audience studies by
emphasizing the informal, common, and personal aspects of media culture. Some of
these aspects of media culture for folklorists to begin with include quoting films, dyadic
traditions-both behavioral and linguistic-and new media traditions within small
170
groups. Folklorists can even follow religious studies scholar John Lyden as he examines
film's function as religion, "And the experience ofwatching film on video is often
communal, too, as friends are invited over, popcorn is made, and a discussion of the film
surrounds its viewing. Many memorize dialogue from movies that they can repeat with
their friends as a sort of 'in joke' that defines their groups. Clearly, the communal nature
of film viewing and its ritual aspects are linked.,,2 This study has taken a similar
functional approach to examine the communal and historical insights of films, and this
brings us to this study's insights in the field of public/popular history.
Although films are initially perceived as entertainment by both scholars and the
Grays in initial discussions, it is clear that some historical films promote understanding of
significant issues and contribute to democratic citizenship. For instance, Lori enjoyed the
multicultural message in The Last Samurai and Jason noted he enjoys films that play with
temporality and causation. If ''the most valuable objective of history teaching is to enable
young people to situate themselves in time, to recognize the centrality of change and
development in accounting for the world around them, to grasp the merits-and the
drawbacks--of historical comparison, and to draw on the past for a richer sense of
possibilities in the future," than it is clear that historical films often fulfill this objective. 3
All members of the Gray family noted the importance of history and its lessons.
In Jessica's case, visual stimulants from historical films enhanced her historical
recognition in other mediums, further emphasizing the importance of Universal Design
for Learners both in and outside educational contexts. Historical films can also motivate
further exploration of the topics at hand or overall historical inquiry. As a mentor of
171
mine often paraphrases Aristotle, "All Knowledge begins in Wonder." Both the
folkloristic and public history perspective of this study illustrate the way in which social
networks affect viewers' choices, motivation, and reception of historical films.
Additionally, this framework for audience ethnography can be applied to other
public/popular history areas that concern audiences-such such as historical biographies,
documentaries, museums, and landmarks-as well as across other disciplinary focuses:
literature, film, television, new media; race, gender, sexuality, and class-to name a few.
Of course, this study can only provide specific answers to specific questions
regarding specific contexts. Annette-Markham offers a succinct review of the limits of
qualitative studies in her more specific discussion of qualitative internet studies:
The interdisciplinary quality of the field of inquiry means that most researchers
will fall short of someone else's expectations for adequacy in reviewing
literatures. The task ofcovering one's bases is monumental: Required reading
can potentially include all previous studies of ... phenomena across multiple
disciplines ... It requires no great leap to realize that one's research will more
often than not fail to satisfactorily address even a fraction of those issues,
theories, and previous studies relevant to individual readers. This situation
therefore requires a keen sensibility to rhetorical strategies, whereby the
researcher is able to situate the self and the study.4
As a qualitative study that focuses on representational participants, this examination has
focused on a "movie family" that can be extrapolated to represent other "movie groups."
Further research objectives in folklore studies have already been noted. In terms of
historical films, this study offers preliminary findings regarding the formal conventions
of historical films and their impact on reception. Further research needs to be done on
the perception of historical films' intentions with regards to historical signifiers. A wider
172
sample of research participants could narrow or broaden our understanding of the actual
effects of titles, captions, narrations, and historical overtures. While I focus on historical
films, this study could be expanded to focus on television programs that depict historical
events. For example, HBO's past miniseries Band ofBrothers and the networks current
miniseries The Pacific will offer excellent case studies of the impact, reception, and
function of made for cable bio/eventpics.
In addition, it is clear that new media has a role to play in the reception of films.
For example, Jessica mentioned that she Googled the story behind We Are Marshall to
get a brief overview of the films historical basis. In informal conversations regarding my
research topic, friends, coworkers, colleagues, and even acquaintances have noted that
they have used the Internet to investigate a film in relation to history for various reasons.
Theoretically, I would assume that the majority of viewers do not "check" a film's
historical accuracy; however, I believe things are changing with access to the Internet and
the growing reputation of search engines, such as Google.com and Wikipedia, which
offer a wealth of information, often on the historical accuracy of a film.
If this limited but significant endeavor has revealed anything, it is that historical
films do not merely entertain, do not merely impress bad history upon minds, and do not
necessarily stop affecting people's opinions, motivations, and desires in respect to their
historical interests when the viewing event is over. Historical films are not always
chimeras pretending to be something they are not, and it appears that viewers are often
critically aware ofthe formal signs that characterize a film's historicity. This project
hopefully has illuminated some of the issues surrounding historical film categorization
173
and reception while offering an approach for the examination of this phenomenon at a
more sophisticated, and yet practical, level.
Notes
I Roy Rosenzweig and David P. Thelen, The Presence ofthe Past: Popular Uses ofHistory in American
Life.
2 John Lyden, Film as Religion: Myths, Morals, and Rituals (New York: New York University Press,
2003),47.
3 Tosh, Why History Matters, 127.
4 Annette N. Markham, "Question Five: How Can Qualitative Researchers Produce Work That is
Meaningful across Time, Space, and Culture?" in Internet Inquiry: Conversations about Method eds.
Annette N. Markham and Nancy K. Baym (Los Angeles: Sage Publications, 2009), 52.
174
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adorno, T. and Max Horkheimer. "The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass
Deception." In The Dialectic ofEnlightenment, 120-167. Translated by John
Cumming. NY: Seabury, 1972.
Anderson, Kathryn and Dana C. Jack. "Learning to Listen: Interview Techniques and
Analyses." In Womens's Words: The Feminist Practice ofOral History, 11-26.
Edited by Shema Berger Gluck and Daphne Patai. New York: Routledge, 1991.
Ang, len. Watching Dallas: Soap Opera and the Melodramatic Imagination. London:
Methuen, 1985.
Bacon-Smith, Camille. Enterprising Women: Television Fandom and the Creation of
Popular Myth. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1996.
Barton, Keith C., and Linda S. Levstik. Teaching History for the Common Good.
Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2004.
Bascom, William. "The Four Functions of Folklore." The Journal ofAmerican Folklore,
66, 266 (1954): 333-349.
------. "The Forms ofFolklore: Prose Narratives." In Contributions to Folkloristics, 195-
123. Meerut, India: Folklore Institute: Archana Publications, 1981.
Benson, Stephen. "Tales in Theory: The Role of the Folktale in the Development of
Narratology." In Cycles ofInfluence: Fiction, Folktale, Theory, 17-41. Detroit:
Wayne State University Press, 2003.
Bird, S. Elizabeth. Audience in Everyday Life: LiVing in a Media World. New York:
Routledge, 2003.
------. "Cultural Studies as Confluence: The Convergence of Folklore and Media
Studies." In Popular Culture Theory and Methodology, 344-55. Edited by Harold E.
Hinds. Bowling Green, Ohio: Bowling Green University Popular Press, 1996.
175
Bird, S. Elizabeth and Godwin, J. "Film in the Undergraduate Anthropology Classroom:
Applying Audience Response Research in Pedagogical Practice." Anthropology and
Education Quarterly 37, no. 3 (2006): 285-299.
Blank, Trevor J. Folklore and the Internet: Vernacular Expression in a Digital World.
Logan, Utah: Utah State University Press, 2009.
Cavender, Gray. "In Search of Community on Reality TV: America's Most Wanted and
Survivor." In Understanding Reality Television, 154-172. Edited by Su Holmes and
Deborah Jermyn. New York: Routledge, 2004.
Corner, John. "Performing the Real: Documentary Diversion." Television and New
Media 3, no. 3 (August 2002): 255-59.
Custen, George F. "Making History." In The Historical Film: History and Memory in
Media, 67-97. Edited by Marcia Landy. News Brunswick: Rutgers Univ. Press,
2001.
Degh, Linda. "The Variant and the Folklorization Process in the Basic Forms of
Narration: Marchen and Legend." In American Folklore and the Mass Media, 12-
33. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1994.
Fisher, Walter R. "The Narrative Paradigm: In the Beginning," Journal of
Communication 35 (1985): 74-89.
Fiske, John. Television Culture. London: Methuen, 1987.
Gibson, Timothy A. "Beyond Cultural Populism: Notes Toward the Critical Ethnography
ofMedia Audiences." Journal ofCommunication Inquiry 24 (2000): 253 - 273.
Gilman, Lisa. The Dance ofPolitics: Gender, Performance, and Democratization in
Malawi. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2009.
Gluck, Sherna Berger and Daphne Patai. Womens's Words: The Feminist Practice of
Oral History. New York: Routledge, 1991.
Goldstein, Diane E. Once Upon a Virus: AIDS Legends and Vernacular Risk Perception.
Logan: Utah State University Press, 2004.
Goodwin, Joseph P. More Man Than You'll Ever Be: Gay Folklore and Acculturation in
Middle America. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1989.
176
Herlihy, David. "Am I a Camera? Other Reflections on Film and History," American
Historical Review 93 (1988): 1186-1192.
Hills, Matt. Fan Cultures. London: Routledge, 2002.
HoImes, Su., and Deborah Jermyn. "Understanding Reality TV." In Understanding
Reality Television, Edited by Su Holmes and Deborah Jermyn, 1-31. New York:
Routledge, 2004.
Jackson, Bruce. Fieldwork. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1987.
Jenkins, Henry. "Buying into American Idol." In Convergence Culture: Where Old and
New Media Collide, 59-92. New York: New York University Press, 2006.
------. Fans, Bloggers, and Gamers: Exploring Participatory Culture. New York: New
York University Press, 2006.
------. Textual Poachers: Television Fans & Participatory Culture. New York:
Routledge, 1992.
Jones, Michael Owen. "Creating and Using Argot at the Jayhawk Cafe: Communication,
Ambience, and Identity." In Exploring Folk Art: Twenty years of Thought on Craft,
Work, and Aesthetics, 109-117. Ann Arbor, Mi: UMI Research, 1986.
Joseph-Witham, Heather R. Star Trek Fans and Costume Art. Folk art and artists series.
Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 1996.
King Arthur: Director's Cut. Directed by Antoine Fuqua. 139 minutes. Touchstone
Pictures, 2004. DVD.
Koven, Michael J. Film, Folklore, and Urban Legends. Lanham, Md: Scarecrow Press,
2008.
------. "Folklore Studies and Popular Film and Television: A Necessary Critical Survey."
Journal ofAmerican Folklore 116, no. 460 (Spring 2003): 176-195.
Landy, Marcia., ed. The Historical Film: History and Memory in Media. New
Brunswick: Rutgers Univ. Press, 2001.
Lehmann, Jean-Pierre. The Image ofJapan: From Feudal Isolation to World Power,
1850-1905. London: Allen & Unwin, 1978.
177
Lewis, Lisa., ed. The Adoring Audience: Fan Culture and Popular Media. London:
Routledge, 1992.
Lull, James. Inside Family Viewing: Ethnographic Research on Television's Audiences.
London: Routledge, 1990.
Lyden, John C. Film as Religion: Myths, Morals, and Rituals. New York: New York
University Press, 2003.
Machin, David. Ethnographic Researchfor Media Studies. London: Arnold, 2002.
Marcus, Alan S, ed. Celluloid Blackboard: Teaching History with Film. Charlotte, NC:
IAP-Information Age Pub, 2007.
Markham, Annette N., and Nancy K. Baym. Internet Inquiry: Conversations about
Method. Los Angeles: Sage Publications, 2009.
Markham, Annette N. Life Online: Researching Real Experience in Virtual Space.
Ethnographic Alternatives Book Series. vol. 6. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press,
1998.
------. "Question Five: How Can Qualitative Researchers Produce Work That is
Meaningful across Time, Space, and Culture?" In Internet Inquiry: Conversations
about Method, 131-155. Edited by Annete N. Markham and Nancy K. Baym. Los
Angeles: Sage Publications, 2009.
Mechling, Jay. "Homo Narrans across Disciplines," Western Folklore 50 (1991): 41-52.
Mitchell, W. J. T. Picture Theory: Essays on Verbal and Visual Representation. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1994.
Morley, David. Family Television: Cultural Power and Domestic Leisure. London:
Comedia Pub. Group, 1986.
------. The Nationwide Audience: Structure and Decoding. London: British Film Institute,
1980.
------. Television, Audiences, and Cultural Studies. London: Routledge, 1992.
Murrell, Peter. "Wallace Commemoration." Scottish Nationalist Party.
http://www.snp.org/snpnews/2005/snp-pressJelease.2005-08-
24.1451923475/view?searchterm=braveheart (Accessed: August 24, 2005).
178
Narvaez, Peter, and Martin Laba, ed. Media Sense: The Folklore-Popular Culture
Continuum. Bowling Green, Ohio: Bowling Green State University Popular Press,
1984.
O'Conner, John. "History in Images/Images in History: Reflections on the Importance of
Film and Television Study for an Understanding ofthe Past," American Historical
Review 93 (1988): 1200-1209.
------. Image as Artifact: The Historical Analysis ofFilm and Television. Malabar:
Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company, 1990.
Oring, Elliott. "Anti Anti-'Fo1k10re'." Journal ofAmerican Folklore III (1998): 328-
338.
------. "Dyadic Traditions." Journal ofFolklore Research 21 (1984): 19-28.
------. "Folk Narratives." In Folk Groups and Folklore Genres: An Introduction, 121-145.
Logan, Ut: Utah State University Press, 1986.
------. "On the Concepts of Folklore." In Folk Groups and Folklore Genres: An
Introduction, 1-22. Logan, Ut: Utah State University Press, 1986.
------. "Theorizing Trivia: A Thought Experiment." Journal ofFolklore Research 33
(1996): 241-244.
Pickering, Michael. Stereotyping: The Politics ofRepresentation. Houndmills,
Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave, 2001.
Radway, Janice A. Reading the Romance: Women, Patriarchy, and Popular Literature.
Chapel Hill: University ofNorth Carolina Press, 1984.
Ravina, Mark. The Last Samurai: The Life and Battles ofSaigo Takamori. Hoboken,
N.J.: John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2003.
Rosenstone, Robert. "History in Images/History in Words: Reflections of the Possibility
of Really Putting History onto Film." American Historical Review 93 (1988): 1173-
1185.
Visions ofthe Past: The Challenge ofFilm to Our Idea ofHistory. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1995.
Rosenzweig, Roy, and David P. Thelen. The Presence ofthe Past: Popular Uses of
History in American Life. New York: Columbia University Press, 1998.
179
Seixas, Peter, "Popular Film and Young People's Understanding of the History of Native-
White Relations." In Celluloid Blackboard: Teaching History with Film, 99-119.
Edited by Alan S. Marcus. Charlotte, NC: lAP-Information Age Pub, 2007.
Sherman, Sharon R, and Mikel J. Koven, ed. Folklore/Cinema: Popular Film as
Vernacular Culture. Logan: Utah State University Press, 2007.
Sherman, Sharon R Documenting Ourselves: Film, Video, and Culture. Lexington, Ky:
University Press ofKentucky, 1998.
Silver, Alain. The Samurai Film. Woodstock, NY: Overlook Press, 2005.
Simon, Ron. "The Changing Definition ofReality Television." In Thinking Outside the
Box: A Contemporary Television Genre Reader, 179-200. Edited by Gary R
Edgerton and Brian Jeffrey Ross. Lexington: University Press ofKentucky, 2005.
Smyth, Willie. "Challenger Jokes and the Humor ofDisaster," Western Folklore 45
(1986): 243-260.
Sorlin, Pierre. The Film in History: Restaging the Past. Totowa: Barnes & Noble Books,
1980.
Strinati, Dominic. An Introduction to Theories ofPopular Culture. 2nd ed. London:
Routledge, 2004.
Summerton, Scott. "Plot Summary for King Arthur." The Internet Movie Database.com.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0349683/plotsummary (accessed March 25, 2010).
The Last Samurai. Directed by Eward Zwick. 154 minutes. Warner Home Video, 2003. 2
disc DVD.
The Last Samurai: The Offical Movie Guide. Time Inc Home Entertainment, 2003.
Toelken, Barre. "The End ofFolklore: The 1998 Archer Taylor Memorial Lecture."
Western Folklore 57 (1998): 81-101.
Toplin, Robert. "The Filmmaker as Historian." American Historical Review 93 (1988):
1210-1227.
------. History by Hollywood: The Use and Abuse ofthe American Past. Urbana:
University of Illinois Press, 1996.
180
---~~-. Reel History: In Defense ofHollywood. Lawrence: Univ. Press of Kansas, 2002.
Tosh, John. Why History Matters. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave
Macmillan, 2008.
Wawro, Geoffrey. "History VS. Hollywood: The Last Samurai." Disc 2. The Last
Samurai.
West, Amy. "Caught on Tape: A Legacy 0 Low-tech Reality." In Spectacle ofthe Real:
from Hollywood to 'Reality TV' and Beyond, 83-92. Edited by Goeff King. London:
Intellect Ltd, 2005.
White, Hayden. "Historiography and Historiophoty." American Historical Review 93
(1988): 1193-1199.
------. The Content ofthe Form: Narrative Discourse and Historical Representation.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987.
Wilson, William A. "The Deeper Necessity: Folklore and the Humanities." In Journal of
American Folklore 101 (1988): 156-167.
Wojcik, Daniel. Punk and Neo-Tribal Body Art. Jackson: University Press ofMississippi,
1995.
Wolk, Douglas. Reading Comics: How Graphic Novels Work and What They Mean.
Cambridge, Ma: Da Capo Press, 2007.
Wright, Bradford W. Comic BookNation: The Transformation ofYouth Culture in
America. Baltimore, Ma: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2001.