Posted on 11/28/2004 6:47:46 PM PST by withteeth
If I was a better writer, maybe I could get across just what’s wrong with The History Channel. I wish Lileks would tackle the subject someday.
It’s not just the conspiracy series. It’s not even their fascination with UFOs, Area 51, and Ghosts (though that can make me furious). Perhaps what bothers me the most is the spiraling narrative technique, and the repetitive presentation of the same “re-enactments”.
For instance, tonight about the Lincoln assassination. I think they showed John Wilkes Booth ascending the stairs and patting his vest-pocket for the derringer at least eight times, while the narrator explains what most of us have known since 5th grade. Eventually, over the hour, some detail is fleshed out as the scene is shown again and again, but I’m almost sure they got some important facts wrong. (Wasn’t Seward in his sick bed? They portrayed him napping on the couch when he was attacked.) Maybe I’ve got that wrong.
The History Channel also loves to present their re-enactments in black and white, and with a shaky camera, like it’s the Blair Witch Project or something. I know better, I know that photography in those days couldn’t even capture a moving figure, but what about future generations? What will they make of this sleight of hand? Will they think there were hidden cameras, showing JW Booth making a bank deposit?
I want to see old photos. And for f_sake, not the ones from the text-books and encyclopedias either, everyone is so familiar with.
This puts me in mind of modern history museums, as well. I was disappointed with much of the Smithsonian, a few years back. All that interactive video. Touch screens. It was like being at home with the internet.
Speaking of the internet, I must be terrible with search engines. There must be a few sights that show old newspaper articles. I’m interested in “contemporary accounts” and the best site I’ve been able to find is the New York Times’ “This Day In History”. I have a lot of complaints about that too, but for another day.
Now that the election is over and we’ve made some history, I want to go back to reading some history (or watching some decent documentaries). But I’ve got to stay away from the usual cable fare.
Pardon this Sunday evening rant. I should have gone to the video store, maybe.
I’m going to start going to the library again, for some interesting out of print books. Cable TV and the internet are over, for awhile.
and what about all the bad weather we've been having lately?
Good idea about showing old interviews with historical figures. I'd love to see some.
I'm glad you posted this. Look at what's showing tonight:
Flying Pyramids Soaring Stones
HISTORY 48 Nov 28 11:15pm EST
The ancient Egyptians may have used kites to fly two-ton stones into place.
Again, in case someone missed that:
THE ANCIENT EGYPTIANS MAY HAVE USED KITES TO FLY TWO-TON STONES INTO PLACE.
Kites?
"and what about all the bad weather we've been having lately?"
THAT TOO !
"Speaking of the internet, I must be terrible with search engines. There must be a few sights that show old newspaper articles. I’m interested in “contemporary accounts” and the best site I’ve been able to find is the New York Times’ “This Day In History”.
That's probably as good as you are going to get on a search engine, for free and not leaving the house. You could try Harper's Magazine site (sorry, can't give you the link, but you could search it!), they go back over 100 years and it would be interesting to see if they reveal or hide their old issues, some of which are tremendously politically incorrect by today's standard. FWIW I think they were anti-slavery, but also very, extremely anti-Catholic. For the full editions of the old NY Times, etc. I'm pretty sure you'd have to go to the library and get the microfilm out. I say this based on trying to help my daughter with her research paper. With her college ID she can access the school's library from anywhere, you can get into an amazing amount of stuff, even Lexis/Nexus but you can't get much from the Times, just an abstract. She was stumped, but I said, I think you need to go to the microfilm.
We'll see how that assignment works out in the end. Happy surfing through history!
Not just any kites. Egyptian Sikorski Kites.
they're using actors playing the key historical figures, with the faces of hitler, roosevelt, etc., digitally projected on top of the actors bodies.
You got me. LOL
Thank you. I tried Harper's, could have sworn it worked a few years ago, but now I don't see any links to their (truly historic) archives.
Once at the library I found several bound volumes of Harpers from the Civil War era. Fantastic. Hours of great reading, contradicting my history teachers.
I guess I've been holding out hope that such material would eventually be available to me at home. Surely someday.
OMG, you're not kidding.
This is the most irresponsible thing I've ever seen since, well, Oliver Stone's JFK.
Have you tried searching the terms 'eyewitness' or 'contemporaneous?'
Chicago Trib and NY Daily News also have features similar to "This Day In History" on their websites.
Here' a fun site for "This Day In History" articles:
http://www.dmarie.com/timecap/
first google looks promising for 'eyewitness'. heck i figured that would take me to the latest car-wreck.
Forgive me if this is condescending, but "contemporary" is "at the same time as now" whereas "contemporaneous" is "at the same time as events." At least, in the legal world it is. I have seen the distinction in historical texts too.
thanks for the tips, Palladin! look good.
Thus, for example, Hitler's contemporaries would have left contemporaneous accounts.
Not at all. Advice and a little help with my education is welcome. I hadn't realized the difference. Maybe now I'll get somewhere.
This is the most irresponsible thing I've ever seen since, well, Oliver Stone's JFK.
yeah, it was pretty horrifying.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.