Learning History Through Film

       Movies may not seem like a great way to teach a group of students, because they’re correlated with ‘fun’. However, I have learned a lot from the two that we have seen in class. Movies can make us feel like we are a part of the story. Movies not only allow us to experience these events, but they allow us to develop great analytical skills, explore real events, and attitudes by watching them in a critical way, and doing some research.

    The movie Glory won many awards for its excellence. Some included, the Academy Award for Best Performance and the Academy Award for Best Cinematography. These categories help with understanding the movie, and actually learning something from it. An article from the New York Times says, “Glory is the first serious American movie about the civil war to be made in years.” Meaning that all the other movies have been done poorly, and that they did not teach the audience what it really was like. In Glory, the actors do a great job in showing us what it was really like back then. For example, “[Denzel Washington]... brings an anguish to Trip that seems to go beyond the role itself.” (LA Times). Good acting helps us to be analytical when watching a movie because, the actors allow us to think about things like “why are they making that face?” or “why does he do that”. Asking questions like this allows us to understand and learn more about the events happening in the movie.

        There are many challenges in making a movie so that the audience can learn something from it. For instance, budget. Glory had a budget of $18 million, and they were able to make a ‘good, moving, complicated film’ (New York Times). 12 Years a Slave had a budget of $20 million, and they were able to make a movie that ‘may be the one that finally makes it impossible for American cinema to continue to sell the ugly lies it’s been hawking for more than a century.’ (New York Times). The more money a production company has the better that movie is in depicting accurate events.  Filmmakers also have to make sure that they convey a specific message, they have goals and intentions. Edward Zwick, director of Glory tells Michelle P. Perry from ‘The Tech’ ‘I think the choice was to try to focus on neither blacks nor whites, but on the regiment. One of the points of the story was to explore a time in which both blacks and whites found some commonality of purpose!’

    Movies allow us to make arguments too. After watching 12 Years a Slave, I concluded that slavery is terrible. I know this is a known fact, but I can use the movie to support my argument. Also Chiwetel Ejiofor won many awards for his acting, because he truly showed us what it was like to be a slave back then. Lupita Nyong'o does the same An article from The Guardian says, "Chiwetel Ejiofor gives a performance of incomparable heroism and presence as Northup; Lupita Nyong'o is passionate and defiant in the role of his fellow prisoner Patsey, and Michael Fassbende is the sadistic slaves master Epps, whose habitual sexual abuse and angry self-hate is revealed to be pathological and under-reported part of the system; a system which in the words of one character enables the abuser's violence to 'trample his guilt'". This review shows that since the actors gave such an excellent performance, the audience is able to see the true problems of slavery. By critically watching an actor's performance, a viewer can conclude many things, and if the director has done a well enough job, those things can teach the viewer many true things.     

    Historical accuracy is the only major thing that can effect what the viewer learns from a movie. Fortunately, both 12 Years a Slave and Glory  were fairly accurate. 12 Years a Slave was based on 'Sloman Northup's 1853 narrative 'Twelve Years a Slave' and according to hisorians.org two historians have verified that his narrative portrayed an accurate representation of slavery in some parts of Louisiana. The main historical issues that the New York Times found in 12 Years a Slave was that Mcqueen made slavery look 'unrelentingly hellish', when in fact some slaves would be allowed to get time off during the holiday season to rest. However for Glory, Mackubin T. Owens from Ashland University  says that 'Glory' has many historical inaccuracies. The fifty fourth regime in the movie was mostly made up of runaway slaves, it was actually a regiment of freedom, and they were recruited from Massachusetts, New York, and Pennsylvania. Also Frederick Douglas had two sons that were one of the first people to volunteer for the regiment, and the eldest, Lewis, ended up serving as sergeant-major for the regiment. In the same article Owens says "by inaccurately depicting the 54th as a regiment of former slaves, 'Glory' reveals the deeper truth that blacks in general were not the natural slaves that Southerners believed to be and that abolitionists feared they might be." It is important for a movie to be historically accurate because if it is not, the audience leaves the movie with something that may or may not be true.

         Movies are in fact a great way of learning about the past. By doing some research and watching a movie in a critical way, movie viewers can develop analytical skills, broaden their knowledge on real events, and what the attitudes that actors use mean. I think that teachers should start watching movies in their history classes, because they really do teach us a lot.  

Links:

Glory:

http://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Glory#tab=summary   (budget and box office)

http://www.nytimes.com/movies/movie/19993/Glory/awards  (awards)

http://www.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=950DE4D8113FF937A25751C1A96F948260 (review; Vincent Canby)

http://ashbrook.org/publications/oped-owens-00-patriot/ (historical accuarcy)

http://articles.latimes.com/1989-12-14/entertainment/ca-186_1_civil-war-epic (Glory Critique)

http://tech.mit.edu/V109/N60/zwick.60a.html (intentions)

12 Years a Slave:

http://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Twelve-Years-a-Slave#tab=summary (budget and box office)

google for awards

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/jan/09/12-years-a-slave-review (reviews, and intentions)

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/18/movies/12-years-a-slave-holds-nothing-back-in-show-of-suffering.html?_r=0 (Critique)

https://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/january-2014/12-years-a-slave-examines-the-old-souths-heart-of-darkness (historical accuracy)

Practice Incorporating a Quotation

"In the heat of the fight, men are color blind"

The movie "glory" illustrates how the white and black soldiers come together as one. As one critic says, "In the heat of the fight, men are color blind".

I learned that paraphrasing is used when I want to write about a writer's idea, and quotations are used when I want to use the exact words of an authors. 

This is what Mrs. Lawson wanted me to learn today:

• Only use a quote when it adds power and style to my writing.
• Always make it clear, from context, that I understand the full meaning of the quote.
• Whether I quote or paraphrase, always be transparent about the source and how I'm using it. 
• If I use another author's exact words or phrases, to any extent, I have to use quotation marks and give credit. 
• If I use another author's presentation of facts or ideas, but put their ideas in my own words, I better have a good reason for doing that, and I MUST give credit. 
• Hyperlinking is so easy, there is no excuse for not being transparent about my sources. 

I get it and I'm ready to move forward. 

Glory Paraphrase

“Glory could have easily become one-sided, but, instead of presenting just Shaw's perspective, Zwick successfully gives us five distinct points-of-view. We see events not only from Shaw's vantage point (his is the "dominant" voice, since much of the narration is taken directly from the real-life historical documents written by the Colonel), but from those of Trip, Jupiter, Thomas, and Rawlins. In the end, none of these men are shortchanged. The sense of balance presented between the characters is one of Glory's strengths.” This is from an article from reelviews.

An article from reelviews.net explains how Edward Zwick, could have created the movie, "Glory", from the perspective of just Colonel Shaw. He alternately created the film in 5 different perspectives, or "point-of views". It would have been easier to make the film in Colonel Shaw's perspective because there were actual historical documents that portrayed his life. Instead Zwick included the viewpoints of Trip, Jupiter, Thomas, and Rawlin. By the end of the movie, none of these men's stories outshines another's. 

Empathy Vs. Sympathy

    Empathy 

      Empathy and sympathy are often confused by many people, myself included. Empathy, based on what we learned in class, is the intellectual identification or vicarious experience of the feelings, thoughts, and attitudes of another.In other words, empathy is being able to understand what someone is going through because you have been in a similar situation, and can relate with them. While sympathy is feelings of pity and sorrow of someone else's misfortune.Empathy is being able to relate with someone, and sympathy is feeling pity for someone. Usually people empathize with other people when they have experienced something very similar, and they know how the other person is feeling, but there are also some situations where you have to empathize with an unknown event. Let's say that a friend of mine's dog dies, I have never had a pet so I have yet to experience that feeling. My immediate reaction would be "It's just a pet, why are you so upset?". However I know that that person had some kind of deep connection with that pet, so I would put myself in their shoes and try to empathize with them. Another difficult situation to empathize with, is when you completely disagree with something. For instance, if you were a young German man, and a Nazi solider came up to you and says that you have to kill one Jewish man, or he'll kill your family. Yes, it's morbid but it's just an example. So we all know that murdering the Jewish population during the Holocaust was terrible, and any sane person would disagree that the Holocaust was a great event. Yet, you are given this grim ultimatum, you are most definitely going to do whatever it takes to save your family, and you will most likely end up taking the life of that Jewish man. Now think of all those Nazis during the time of the Holocaust who were given a similar ultimatum. It's now easier to empathize with the Nazis, even though what they did is incredibly barbaric and cruel. When dealing with an unknown situation, you almost have to crawl into that other person's brain and view the situation from their perspective. It's vital that we learn to empathize with any kind of situation, no matter how appalling the situation is, because with this skill we can enhance our understanding of any historical event.