History 598 Hollywood and History:

Accuracy and Authenticity in Historical Films

Mondays 1:30-4:18 Smith Lab 1186

Prof. Childs

Dulles 204

Office Hours: Monday and Wednesday, 12:30 – 1:30 pm, and by appointment.

Alec Guinness, Omar Sharif and Peter O'Toole

Lawrence of Arabia (1962) Alec Guinees, Omar Sharif, Peter O’Toole

All students must be officially enrolled in the course by the end of the second full week of the quarter. No requests to add the course will be approved by the department chair after that time. Enrolling officially and on time is solely the responsibility of each student.

How History 598 fits into the curriclum:

This course is required of all History Majors.

It cannot be taken for GEC credit.

Introduction.

In the early twenty-first century, many of us learn “history” not from books or university courses but rather from media productions – feature feature films, docudramas, and documentaries presented on the wide screen, television, and the internet (and other “apps”). As the subtitle to the course text suggests, many of us learn “history according to the movies.” While some filmmakers attempt to present “accurate” or “true” historical stories, many do not understand professional history (or care to) and take liberties with or outright ignore historical facts, chronology, and context in order to serve their interests in fashioning character development, creating dramatic conflict, and attracting a large audience. On the other hand, some professional historians and serious students of history do not understand or appreciate the demands on filmmakers, and simply dismiss all historical films as unworthy of consideration.

What are the implications of “Hollywood history” for the transmission of historical information and analysis? for the development of “national histories”? for the history profession? Can historians reconcile their focus on facts, chronology, and context with the filmmakers’ focus on visual presentation, dramatic arcs, and entertainment? Given that both historians and filmmakers “tell stories,” why cannot there be more effective collaboration? Can historians help historical filmmakers do a better job?

Before answering these questions, we must understand the similarities and differences between the tasks of writing and filming history. Fortunately, a few historians and filmmakers have attempted to reconcile the demands of history with those of film making, although there is as yet no consensus on the answers to the questions above.

This course will investigate how the tools of the historian can aid students of history in understanding how effective or not Hollywood historical films are at conveying meaningful history. (We will not investigate docudramas or documentaries.) This investigation might lead students to suggest better ways for filmmakers to meet both the needs of the film patrons and the standards of professional history. Although time will be limited, we will also focus on the question of how historical films reflect, perhaps, more of the historical times in which they are made than the times they depict.

Ben- Hur (1959) Charleton Heston before the chariot race.

Objectives of 598.

History 598 is the GEC Capstone course for the History Major. As such, it is designed to help students pull together some of the information and skills they have learned in other History courses. The course will help students refine their research, analytical, and writing skills. Students will do 80% of the work for this course on their own: reading the textbook and articles; taking notes on those readings, class discussions, and one “Hollywood” history film viewed by the class; choosing and viewing two Hollywood history films and conducting research on them on the internet and in the library; and, writing an extended essay on what they have learned.

Class discussion will help students exchange ideas and, especially, develop definitions of historical accuracy and historical authenticity. The instructor’s choice of textbook, articles on the subject, and a common film to view will help students shape their work. The written assignments are designed to keep the students focused throughout the quarter and to improve their writing skills (all sections will be rewritten for the final draft of the paper). Students will produce 20-to-25-page essays in which they present their understanding of the material and their analyses of both films within the context of the course material.

Depending on the particular films students choose to analyze, they will acquire a perspective on history and an understanding of the factors that shape human activity to gain knowledge of the origins and nature of contemporary issues and a foundation for future comparative understanding; develop critical thinking through the study of diverse interpretations of historical events; apply critical thinking through historical analysis of primary and secondary sources; and sharpen communications skills in essay exams, papers, and discussions.

Assigned Readings.

1.Mark C. Carnes, Past Imperfect: History According to the Movies (1996). Available at SBX.

2. Various articles (see Schedule of Class Meetings and Assignments).

These articles are available through various ejournal sites in the OSU Library system or a direct link from this course syllabus.

Your Grade in this course.

15% Class Discussion. (Attendance, contributions to discussion; interim reports).

5% One-page précis of Davis article. Due Jan. 12^th.

15% Oral Reports.

30% First Drafts. (I will average the grades of all of the first drafts). The first drafts will consist of:

First Draft Writing Assignment: Review of Past Imperfect (3-4 pages) and definition/analysis of the concepts of historical accuracy and historical authenticity (1.5-2 pages). Due Feb. 2^nd.

Second Draft Writing Assignment: Rough draft of Film #1. (7-10 pages). Due Feb. 9^th.

Third Draft Writing Assignment: Rough draft of Film #2. (7-10 pages) Tentative introduction and conclusion sections. (1-2 pages). Due Feb. 23^rd.

35% Final Paper. Revised first, second, and third draft writing assignments.

10 % of this grade will be your final oral report.

Final papers are due on Tuesday March 13 in Dulles Hall 204 between 1:30 and 3:18pm. Electronic submissions to Carmen are due by 3:30pm that day.

See this link for Choosing films.

Your writing assignments will be graded not only on the content and analyses, but also on how well-organized and written they are. Poor organization (e.g., too-long or too-short paragraphs; too many ideas in one paragraph; lack of sustained focus on your thesis) and/or poor grammar will reduce your grade.

In addition to our class- and office hour-discussions on writing well, see the Center for the Study of Teaching and Writing home page (CSTW) for tips on writing, and especially its web page on plagiarism.

Here are the grade breakdowns:

A: 92.6 and above; A-: 89.6-92.5; B+: 87.6-89.5; B: 82.6-87.5; B-: 79.6-82.5; C+: 77.6-79.5; C: 72.6-77.5; C-: 69.6-72.5; D+: 67.6-69.5; D: 62-67.5; E: below 62

You are forewarned that I will pursue cases of academic misconduct to the appropriate University committee.

(1965)

Special notes.

1. You must turn in an electronic copy of your assignment to the Carmen Dropbox by the designated times and a hard copy to me during class. If you turn in an assignment late, you will receive a full-grade deduction on that assignment; if you do not submit an assignment within two days of its due date, you will receive a zero for that assignment.

2. If you miss more than one scheduled class meeting, you will have your course grade reduced one full grade for each meeting missed. For example, if you have 2 absences and your average is a C+, you course grade will be reduced to a D+ (which would not earn you credit for the course on the History Major).

3. Any student who misses one of the last two scheduled meetings in which fellow students present their final oral reports will have his/her course grade reduced one full grade; missing both will result in two full-grade reductions.

4. A student must earn a course grade of C- or better for this course to count on the History Major or History Minor.

Seven Samurai (1954)

Requirements for the Final Paper.

Note: In addition to submitting an electronic copy of the Final Paper to the Carmen web site, you must turn in an electronic copy (i.e., a Word attachment to an e-mail) and a paper copy to Prof. Childs. The electronic copy, with your name deleted, will be used in the Department’s program that assesses the Major.

Your Final Paper will follow this outline:

Introduction (1–1.5 pages).

I Review of Past Imperfect. (3–4 pages)

II Discussion of historical accuracy and historical authenticity. (1.5–2 pages).

III Film #1 (7–10 pages).

IV Film #2 (7–10 pages).

V Conclusion (1.5–2 pages).

Bibliography of Sources Consulted (1–2 pages).

The organization of III and IV above will include the following, but you may determine the order of presentation:

synopsis of the film;

analysis of its historical accuracy and its historical authenticity;

other pertinent analyses (e.g., director’s approach; acting; sets and costumes; music; how the film reflected the times in which it was made);

inclusion of at least three newspaper/magazine reviews—one from the East Coast, one from the Midwest, and one from the West Coast. Reviews from international sources are good, if they are translated in English.

You must employ correct foot/endnote styles consistently. See this site for handouts: CSTW

Instructions for the one-page précis.

1. Substantive requirements: The précis is a summary in your own words of the material you have read. It should focus on the author’s most important arguments and the reasoning behind those arguments. This is one of the most difficult assignments you will ever face! To be done well, you will need to read the material carefully, take notes on the key points, perhaps reread the material, and write more than one draft. Economy in prose is a must. Eliminate all unnecessary words (adjectives, adverbs, passive constructions) and less significant points. You are not to analyze or judge the content; you should simply summarize the most significant points that the author has made in the order s/he made them. Do not use quotations. Each précis will be graded on clarity, grammar, and the understanding you exhibit of the chapter being summarized.

2. Mechanical instructions: The précis will be no longer than one page, double-spaced (about 250 words). On the first line of the page, you will type your name, date, and course assignment title (e.g., History 598 One-Page Précis). Please employ one-inch margins top, bottom, and sides. Use type no smaller than 11 point.

3. A few tips for good writing:

a. Avoid using the passive construction; use “active” verbs.

b. Avoid using the phrase “due to.” Writers often employ this term incorrectly (see a dictionary for the correct use).

c. I do not like the use of contractions in formal written work.

d. It is acceptable to use the first person: “I believe ....”

e. Do not use “lead” when you mean “led” or “it’s” when you mean “its.”

f. Do not use excessive quotations (none in the précis).

e. Avoid use of adjectives and adverbs; use them sparingly and thus effectively.

Schedule of Class Meetings and Assignments

Week 1. January 5.

Introduction to the course. View the film, The Return of Martin Guerre.

Should you want to see the film again, or if one or more of your chosen films is in the OSU Media Library, you can go to this link:

https://drm.osu.edu/

Sign in. Click Find Media. Type in the blank the title of the film and search. Click the title and watch the streaming version.

Week 2. January 12.

Writing Assignment due: One-page précis of Davis article. Natalie Z. Davis, ‘‘’Any Resemblance to Persons Living or Dead’: Film and the Challenge of Authenticity,’’ The Yale Review 76(September 1987)4, 457-482. Click here : NZDavisYaleart

(I strongly suggest that you download all of the articles to your computer as soon as possible.)

Discus the film The Return of Martin Guerre

Discuss the following articles (in addition to the Davis article above) :

Ed Benson, “Martin Guerre, the Historian and the Filmmakers: An Interview with Natalie Zemon Davis,” Film and History 13(September 1983)3, 49-65. OSU Library subscribes to this journal as an ejournal.

Natalie Zemon Davis, “Movie or Monograph? A Historian/Filmmaker's Perspective,” The Public Historian, Vol. 25, No. 3. (Summer, 2003), pp. 45-48. You may locate this article through OSU J-STOR search system or try this Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0272-3433%28200322%2925%3A3%3C45%3AMOMAHP%3E2.0.CO%3B2-A

Discuss Past Imperfect (Intro + 2 interviews).

Discussion on other issues, including review of how to write a book review (see Week 5 link).

(1983)

Week 3. January 19:

Continue discussion from last week and add the following:

Note: These may be found by clicking the “stable url” link if you are on an OSU computer; if not, then search on the OSU Library site via J-STOR or the ejournals list.

Robert A. Rosenstone, “History in Images/History in Words: Reflections on the Possibility of Really Putting History onto Film,” The American Historical Review, Vol. 93, No. 5. (Dec., 1988), pp. 1173-1185.

Stable URL:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-8762%28198812%2993%3A5%3C1173%3AHIIIWR%3E2.0.CO%3B2-P

Robert Brent Toplin, “The Filmmaker as Historian,” The American Historical Review, Vol. 93, No. 5. (Dec., 1988), pp. 1210-1227.

Stable URL:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-8762%28198812%2993%3A5%3C1210%3ATFAH%3E2.0.CO%3B2-I

Geoffrey B. Pingree, “Review: Visual Evidence Reconsidered: Reflections on Film and History,” The Public Historian, Vol. 21, No. 2. (Spring, 1999), pp. 99-107.

Reviewed Work(s):

Past Imperfect: History According to the Movies by Mark C. Carnes

History by Hollywood: The Use and Abuse of the American Past by Robert Brent Toplin

Visions of the Past: The Challenge of Film to Our Idea of History by Robert A. Rosenstone

Revisioning History: Film and the Construction of a New Past by Robert Rosenstone

Stable URL:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0272-3433%28199921%2921%3A2%3C99%3AVERROF%3E2.0.CO%3B2-U

Week 4. January 26.

Report to class on two films you have chosen. (See link above, Choosing films)

Continue to discuss Past Imperfect and the articles listed above.

Week 5. February 2.

First Writing Assignment Due: Review of Past Imperfect (3-4 pages) and definition and analyses of the concepts of historical accuracy and historical authenticity (1.5-2 pages).

See this link: Instructions for First Assignment

Brief oral summaries of your first writing assignment. 5 to 7 minutes.

(2000)

Week 6. February 9.

Second Writing Assignment Due: Rough draft of Film #1. (7-10 pages)

Brief oral summaries of your second writing assignment. 5 to 7 minutes.

Return and discuss First Writing Assignment.

Discuss process/problems.

Week 7. February 16.

Return and discuss rough drafts of Film #1.

Discuss process/problems.

Schindler's List (1993)

Week 8. February 23.

Third Writing Assignment Due: Rough draft of Film #2. (7-10 pages) and tentative Introduction and Conclusion sections (1-2 pages each).

Brief oral summaries of your third writing assignment. 5 to 7 minutes.

Discuss process/problems.

Week 9. March 1.

Return Rough draft of Film #2 and Conclusion section.

Begin Oral Reports. See this link for instructions on your Oral Report.

Week 10. March 8.

Complete Oral Reports.

Note: Please complete your eSEIs for ALL of your courses by the last day of Winter Quarter classes.

Final papers are due on Tuesday March 13 in Dulles Hall 204 between 1:30 and 3:18pm. Electronic submissions to Carmen are due by 3:30pm that day.

Select Bibliography on Film and History

Secondary/print sources (in addition to those listed elsewhere):

Barbara Abrash and Janet Stenburg, editors, Historians & Filmakers: Toward Collaboration (1983).

Robert Burgoyne, Film Nation: Hollywood Looks at U.S. History (1997).

Robert Burgoyne, The Hollywood Historical Film (2008).

Kenneth M. Cameron, America on Film: Hollywood and American History (1997).

Mark C. Carnes, editor, Past Imperfect: History According to the Movies (1996).

Gary Crowdus, editor, The Political Companion to American Film (1994).

Giuliana Muscio, Hollywood’s New Deal (1997).

Peter C. Rollins, editor, Hollywood as Historian: American Film in a Cultural Context (1998).

Andre Sarris, Politics and Cinema (1978).

Robert A. Rosenstone, Visions of the Past: The Challenge of Film to Our Idea of History (1995).

Robert Brent Toplin, History by Hollywood: The Use and Abuse of the American Past (1996).

___________________, editor, Oliver Stone’s USA: Film, History, and Controversy (2000).

Tom Zaniello, Working Stiffs, Union Maids, Reds, and Riffraff: An Organized Guide to Films about Labor (1996).

Film Literature Index (Albany, NY: Filmdex, Inc. 1973- ). Volume 1- . Quarterly; annual.

Film Review Index. Edited by Patricia King Hanson and Stephen L Hanson (Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press, 1986).

Media Review Digest (Ann Arbor, MI: Pierian Press, 1970- ). Annual.

See also the Film Review sections of The Journal of American History and The American Historical Review. (You may peruse the indexes in the Library or use J-STOR search engine from one of the OSU computer terminals.)

In addition to the articles assigned above, consult the following:

Visual History: The Craft of the Historian-Filmmaker

Daniel J. Walkowitz

The Public Historian, Vol. 7, No. 1. (Winter, 1985), pp. 52-64.

Stable URL:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0272-3433%28198524%297%3A1%3C52%3AVHTCOT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-O

Am I a Camera? Other Reflections on Films and History

David Herlihy

The American Historical Review, Vol. 93, No. 5. (Dec., 1988), pp. 1186-1192.

Stable URL:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-8762%28198812%2993%3A5%3C1186%3AAIACOR%3E2.0.CO%3B2-N

Review: Does a Filmic Writing of History Exist?