“Those who fail to learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.” – Santayana
“Those who fail to learn from the past are doomed to repeat it next semester.” – Tilley
Accurate or not, I’ll tell you one thing: My 11 year old daughter was glued to the TV as we were watching it. Out of sheer coinkydink, she just so happens to be studying that aspect of history in her Social Studies class. She was fascinated by it because it placed human faces to what she was learning. It wasn’t just words in a book (or web pages on the school-issued iPad). Now she felt more of a connection to what happened in history because she got to see the action happen in front of her on TV.
Was it 100% accurate? I have no doubt that it was not and I tried to correct things as we watched the show. But I’ll definitely say that she’s taken a far greater interest in the subject in school because of the show.
Eric
“Those who fail to learn from the past are called politicians”- Morrison
Echolmberg makes an important point - the same one my wife makes about “Pocahontas.”
I want kids to get interested in history. (For cryin’ out loud, I’d be happy if they’d get interested in anything constructive.) But I continue to question whether a TV show or movie has to distort the truth - or tell outright lies - in order to be interesting.
I was particularly galled by the way “Sons of Liberty” depicted the Battle of Bunker Hill. It’s a fascinating battle. (It’s been called “the only engagement of the Revolution that’s of any real tactical interest.”) Would the show’s depiction of it have been hurt if the right British general (Howe, a pivotal figure of the Revolution who didn’t make it into the script at all) had been in command? Did that ridiculous scene of Gage shooting Dr. Joseph Warren and ordering “mutilate the body” really improve the show? (In reality, Gage wasn’t even present at the battle.) Couldn’t the producers have found a site that resembled the topography of the battle site at least a little bit? And what on earth did that hokey shot of a fleet of British ships-of-the-line arriving just in time for the battle add to the story? (No such thing happened. The British troops were carried across Boston Harbor from Boston to Charlestown in boats.)
There’s no way that a three-night TV miniseries can tell the whole story of the coming of the Revolution. (Most good university history departments in the country offer entire courses on the subject.) Some simplification and omission is unavoidable. I hope we can agree that there’s a line somewhere between real history and sheer entertainment. In my opinion (with which anybody’s free to disagree), “Sons of Liberty” was way on the wrong side of that line.
Echolmberg, it’s great news that your daughter’s picked up some interest in American history. If she’s receptive to learning more, this thread discusses quite a few good flicks that you can rent or buy. (I’d particularly recommend “The Crossing.” Maybe she’d recognize Jeff Daniels - who actually doesn’t make a bad George Washington.
I was in a used bookstore the other day and found a history of the Battle of Bunker Hill, written by Nate Philbrick. I didn’t know he’d put out that subject, and i look forward to reading it.
Philbrick is a good scholar. I haven’t gotten around to reading this book, but my wife gave it to me for my birthday a couple of years back. I’ve thumbed through it enough to see that it doesn’t try to make complex subjects into black/white, right/wrong issues (which were just as rare in the eighteenth century as they are today).
Per your earlier post, of course that’s why I bought it.
Seriously, thank you for noting that and its meaningful.
Philbrick and I share roots in the same family tree, but so many generations ago that if we passed each other on Main Street he at least wouldn’t know me, lols. As most probably know, my forum name is an alias, my true family name is the same as that of a somewhat famous mutineer.
Think Philbrick, not Nordhoff or Hall.
AFA comparing the American Revolution to Indochina, an interesting and valid point. I wonder what the French historical perspective would be on that?