We have had numerous discussions in many of our classes about some of the issues that exist with historically inspired films and historical fiction. They are entertaining forms of communication; however they lack the historical accuracy of scholarly publications, and yet many people receive a lot of their information about history from these mediums. This makes professional historians wary of these forms interpretation.
The other side of this issue is that these forms of communication, whether it is a historical film like Saving Private Ryan or a historically inspired piece of fiction such as The Da Vinci Code, at the very least, has the potential to get people interested in whatever history is being presented.
I think that film and historical fiction are two very popular forms of communication and they reach the greatest number of people. Although most history that is interpreted through these mediums is not always as accurate as I think they should be, they do accomplish something else. They have the potential to make people aware of whatever history is being presented. That said, I think that there is more that needs to be done to make the general public also aware that the history that is being presented is neither fully factual nor complete and that there is more you can learn. And I would like to point out some of the ways, I think, that can and has been accomplished.
Let us take the already much talked about book, The Da Vinci Code. This book generated so much hype when it came out. It was controversial, exciting, interesting, and in many ways, quite convincing. However, this was a "fictional" novel and many took it very seriously because of some of the things that were suggested in it. Then there was the much anticipated film based on this novel that again caused a multitude of media coverage. The spin off of both the novel and film produced an array of documentaries and books. What I found so interesting, particularly when watching the documentaries (as I have to admit I have not read any of the books that were published in reaction to The Da Vinci Code), was that many of the documentaries looked at different points of view. Some focused on supporting some of the claims made in The Da Vinci Code – almost attempting to try and find further proof. Others however focused on showcasing all of the elements within the book that were fictional. The greatest debate seemed to focus on whether there was the possibility of whether or not Jesus Christ could have been married. There were those that acknowledged, at the very least, the possibility that he could have been. Then there were those that outlined all the reasons why this could not have been the case. It was all very interesting, because I felt like I was being presented with all these different points of view. All the documentaries were gathering their information and opinions from, in many cases, historians who were either on the fence over the issue, were intrigued by what was being suggested and were therefore open to some of the possibilities, and then there were those that had definitive answers one way or the other. It allowed the viewers to be given more information than was presented to them in the book or the film. There are also books that have been written “decoding” The Da Vinci Code. I have not read any of them, and therefore cannot comment on them. However, they provide additional information that may or may not have been presented in the documentaries. So, for anyone that was intrigued by The Da Vinci Code, can at the very least, learn more about the subject and what is historically accurate.
What I particularly liked about the whole phenomenon (if you can call it that) of The Da Vinci Code, is that it was openly questioning a part of history – and a controversial history at that. I think that we need to be open to the fact that we cannot know everything there is to know about history – especially ancient history. It is a mystery and we will continue to find new clues that may alter what we think we know. It is like an adventure.
Thus, The Da Vinci Code, both the fictional novel and film, arguably produced greater interest in conducting scholarly research into this piece of history. And it arguably made people more aware of that history. In general, it made people want to learn more…
There was another book I read not too long ago that made me want to learn more about a particular history. That book was called, ironically, The Historian by Elizabeth Kostova. The novel was based on a rather popular subject matter: Dracula. However, this one provided information about the real Dracula, the one who was known as Drakulya or Vlad the Impaler, ruler of Wallachia (which is in present day Romania) during the 15th century . First of all (and I think I have said this before in one of my previous blogs) the book is very good, and I highly recommend it. Especially curled up with a hot chocolate on a rainy thunderstorm type night - it is great! I also found it so interesting that I watched many of the documentaries that had been produced on this real life Dracula. They included: Dracula’s Underground, Vlad the Impaler, Real Dracula, and the True Story of Dracula. What was also very “refreshing” if you don’t mind me saying so, was that the author, Elizabeth Kostova, included a section at the end of her book entitled: Elizabeth Kostova’s suggestions for further reading. The bibliography was divided into the following section (which I think is very smart, because it addresses different people’s interests): 1) Dracula/Vlad Tepes; 2) History and Folklore; 3) Travel. It would be wonderful if every piece of historical fiction went to that trouble. In the beginning of the book I think she also introduces the fact that not everything is factual, but a lot is based on the actual history of Vlad the Impaler and some of the conflicts he was involved in during his 15th century rule.
I guess the point is that there are ways of accessing more information about the type of history that is being interpreted, whether in a historically inspired film or piece of historical fiction. What these more popular stories are able to do is grab people’s attention. Not everyone will want to watch the numerous documentaries or read the books that are in response to a film like The Da Vinci Code, or dive into the “suggested for further reading” section of a novel, but people have the option. And I think that these films and books also have the potential to get more people interested in the subject matter more than they would have been before it was popularized. This means by producing these forms of interpretation, we are probably increasing the amount of people who are becoming interested in history. I can probably provide one more example to that affect. In my undergraduate studies, I remember when The Da Vinci Code (the film) came out. A year later, a course was introduced focusing on Leonardo Da Vinci and people enrolled in it immediately. It seemed to make people want to learn more about Da Vinci and I don't think that is a negative outcome.
Simply put, I think we need to continue to produce an array of films and pieces of historical fiction that are based on all kinds of history. That way we can popularize other subjects that people know little or nothing about.
The other side of this issue is that these forms of communication, whether it is a historical film like Saving Private Ryan or a historically inspired piece of fiction such as The Da Vinci Code, at the very least, has the potential to get people interested in whatever history is being presented.
I think that film and historical fiction are two very popular forms of communication and they reach the greatest number of people. Although most history that is interpreted through these mediums is not always as accurate as I think they should be, they do accomplish something else. They have the potential to make people aware of whatever history is being presented. That said, I think that there is more that needs to be done to make the general public also aware that the history that is being presented is neither fully factual nor complete and that there is more you can learn. And I would like to point out some of the ways, I think, that can and has been accomplished.
Let us take the already much talked about book, The Da Vinci Code. This book generated so much hype when it came out. It was controversial, exciting, interesting, and in many ways, quite convincing. However, this was a "fictional" novel and many took it very seriously because of some of the things that were suggested in it. Then there was the much anticipated film based on this novel that again caused a multitude of media coverage. The spin off of both the novel and film produced an array of documentaries and books. What I found so interesting, particularly when watching the documentaries (as I have to admit I have not read any of the books that were published in reaction to The Da Vinci Code), was that many of the documentaries looked at different points of view. Some focused on supporting some of the claims made in The Da Vinci Code – almost attempting to try and find further proof. Others however focused on showcasing all of the elements within the book that were fictional. The greatest debate seemed to focus on whether there was the possibility of whether or not Jesus Christ could have been married. There were those that acknowledged, at the very least, the possibility that he could have been. Then there were those that outlined all the reasons why this could not have been the case. It was all very interesting, because I felt like I was being presented with all these different points of view. All the documentaries were gathering their information and opinions from, in many cases, historians who were either on the fence over the issue, were intrigued by what was being suggested and were therefore open to some of the possibilities, and then there were those that had definitive answers one way or the other. It allowed the viewers to be given more information than was presented to them in the book or the film. There are also books that have been written “decoding” The Da Vinci Code. I have not read any of them, and therefore cannot comment on them. However, they provide additional information that may or may not have been presented in the documentaries. So, for anyone that was intrigued by The Da Vinci Code, can at the very least, learn more about the subject and what is historically accurate.
What I particularly liked about the whole phenomenon (if you can call it that) of The Da Vinci Code, is that it was openly questioning a part of history – and a controversial history at that. I think that we need to be open to the fact that we cannot know everything there is to know about history – especially ancient history. It is a mystery and we will continue to find new clues that may alter what we think we know. It is like an adventure.
Thus, The Da Vinci Code, both the fictional novel and film, arguably produced greater interest in conducting scholarly research into this piece of history. And it arguably made people more aware of that history. In general, it made people want to learn more…
There was another book I read not too long ago that made me want to learn more about a particular history. That book was called, ironically, The Historian by Elizabeth Kostova. The novel was based on a rather popular subject matter: Dracula. However, this one provided information about the real Dracula, the one who was known as Drakulya or Vlad the Impaler, ruler of Wallachia (which is in present day Romania) during the 15th century . First of all (and I think I have said this before in one of my previous blogs) the book is very good, and I highly recommend it. Especially curled up with a hot chocolate on a rainy thunderstorm type night - it is great! I also found it so interesting that I watched many of the documentaries that had been produced on this real life Dracula. They included: Dracula’s Underground, Vlad the Impaler, Real Dracula, and the True Story of Dracula. What was also very “refreshing” if you don’t mind me saying so, was that the author, Elizabeth Kostova, included a section at the end of her book entitled: Elizabeth Kostova’s suggestions for further reading. The bibliography was divided into the following section (which I think is very smart, because it addresses different people’s interests): 1) Dracula/Vlad Tepes; 2) History and Folklore; 3) Travel. It would be wonderful if every piece of historical fiction went to that trouble. In the beginning of the book I think she also introduces the fact that not everything is factual, but a lot is based on the actual history of Vlad the Impaler and some of the conflicts he was involved in during his 15th century rule.
I guess the point is that there are ways of accessing more information about the type of history that is being interpreted, whether in a historically inspired film or piece of historical fiction. What these more popular stories are able to do is grab people’s attention. Not everyone will want to watch the numerous documentaries or read the books that are in response to a film like The Da Vinci Code, or dive into the “suggested for further reading” section of a novel, but people have the option. And I think that these films and books also have the potential to get more people interested in the subject matter more than they would have been before it was popularized. This means by producing these forms of interpretation, we are probably increasing the amount of people who are becoming interested in history. I can probably provide one more example to that affect. In my undergraduate studies, I remember when The Da Vinci Code (the film) came out. A year later, a course was introduced focusing on Leonardo Da Vinci and people enrolled in it immediately. It seemed to make people want to learn more about Da Vinci and I don't think that is a negative outcome.
Simply put, I think we need to continue to produce an array of films and pieces of historical fiction that are based on all kinds of history. That way we can popularize other subjects that people know little or nothing about.
No comments:
Post a Comment