Ken Burns Video E-Mail Discussion

Original URL for this document retrieved 3/5/1995: gopher://gopher.uic.edu:70/00/research/history/hnetxx/40227000/40401004/40506028.document
(Discussions of this Group)


BURNS VIDEO

Index
LINES         AUTHORS             SUBJECTS
15            Zoglin              TV review
84            Knupfer             Video in the class
134           Censer              Video in the class
175           Burton              Censer review
188           Knupfer             Video music
209           Rollins             Video press kit





======================================================================
ZOGLIN
Date:         Sat, 4 Sep 1993 10:54:32 ECT
From:         H-NET 
Subject:      Lincoln as TV star

Lincoln._
TIME, 12/28/92

By Richard Zoglin
   SHOW: LINCOLN
   TIME: DEC.  26 AND 27, ABC
   THE BOTTOM LINE: A network attempt to duplicate The Civil War is
filled with stars but short of eloquence.
     The Civil War was not just the pivotal event of American
history.  It provided a milestone in TV history as well.  The
astonishing popularity of Ken Burns' 12-hour mini-series, which
aired on PBS in September 1990, profoundly shook the TV world.  On
PBS, attempts to duplicate The Civil War's success have ranged from
big-event mini-series like Columbus and the Age of Disovery to
countless American Experience documentaries.  The commercial
networks too have jealously eyed the program's hefty ratings.  It
was only a matter of time before one of them took a chance on a
similar effort. Which is the reason for Lincoln.
     Airing in two parts on ABC, this four-hour documentary follows
the Civil War model by combining archival photographs with excerpts
from contemporaneous diaries and letters.  The producers -- Philip
Kunhardt Jr., a former managing editor of LIFE magazine, and his two
sons Peter and Philip III -- have drawn on famous Mathew Brady
portraits, as well as an extraordinary collection of Lincoln photos
assembled by the elder Kunhardt's grandfather, Frederick Hill
Meserve.  There is music by Alan Menken (Aladdin), narration by
James Earl Jones and readings by a stellar cast of Hollywood
celebrities as the voices of the principals.  All of them paying
tribute to the most sainted figure in American history.  How could
it miss?
     It misses.  Lincoln, despite good intentions and a great
subject, is a textbook case of wrongheaded network decision making.
One problem is the all-star voice-overs.  Richard Dreyfuss, Oprah
Winfrey, Glenn Close, Richard Widmark, Rod Steiger and Arnold
Schwarzenegger (as Lincoln's Bavarian-born secretary, John G.
Nicolay), among many others, seem to have been recruited mainly for
marquee value.  Their too famous voices distract from the subject
matter; nor do they bring any particular eloquence to their tasks,
least of all Jason Robards, who overdoes the corn-pone twang as the
most uncharismatic Lincoln imaginable.
     Because it is framed around the Civil War (Lincoln's early life
is covered only briefly in flashbacks), the series seems unduly
repetitive of Burns' work.  The writing is uninspired (on the Battle
of Gettysburg: "It was the showdown of the war.  Whoever won here
might well claim victory overall").  And there is a woeful shortage
of analysis.  Significantly, one element of The Civil War that the
Kunhardts did not copy was the use of historians to provide onscreen
commentary.  They are missed.  We get plenty of piquant details
about Lincoln's personal life -- his fits of depression, his
estrangement from his father, his big feet -- but virtually no
attempt to relate these to his public life, or to explain the
qualities that made him a great President.
     Even basic political matters are left hazy.  Before the
election of 1864, Lincoln predicted, "I am going to be beaten, and
beaten badly." Another fit of depression, or was he in real
political trouble?  He wound up, of course, winning decisively.
Why?  No clues here.  The documentary spends far more time on
melodrama, especially the events leading up to Lincoln's
assassination.  It's an effort to hype a story that, as The Civil
War should have proved, doesn't need it.
   CAPTION: PRESIDENTIAL PORTRAIT: Piquant personal details, little
analysis
=====================================================================
KNUPFER
Date:         Tue, 12 Oct 1993 18:01:57 ECT
From:         Peter Knupfer 
Subject:      Re: Gettysburg, etc.

Last year I used the entire Burns set in an intersession course on
Critical Campaigns of the Civil War.  The class lasted only about 3
wks, about 3 hrs/day.  The class divided into groups, ea. assigned to
a campaign -- and I defined campaign very broadly and way beyond the
stricter and more focused military and operational use of the term.  Thus,
one group worked on  political campaigns, focusing esp. on 1864 election
& CSA politics; another worked on the naval campaigns; one on diplomacy; a
couple on the West & East, etc.  Each group was to devise an argument, based
on research at the library (esp. in reference & maps) for the ultimate
significance (& if possible, determining influence) of assigned campaign
and present it before the class as a group project.  The class met in
the morning and viewed one of the Burns videos; took a break; then discussed
the video; then spent some time reviewing with the course text; then broke
into groups for discussion and research.  I found the Burns set too exhausting
to use in its entirety -- without a week's break between segments, the
film became too ponderous, heavy-handed, and repetitious.  By the 3rd segment
students were whistling Jay Ungar's "Ashokan Farewell" back at the screen.
I felt like offering Saturday Night Live's hilarious takeoff on the series
for comic relief.

Since then I've shifted to selections -- based more on the amount of time
I have available than on the content of the tapes.  There is an extensive
teaching packet that comes with the deluxe edition of the series, from PBS.
It includes handouts, teachers aids, transparencies, and an index to the
tapes.  The latter would be esp. useful, although I haven't used it.  I
had prepared my own rough index while watching the series.  I like the
episode that culminates at Antietam -- the series still has a freshness
and sense of unpredictability at that juncture, and it provides a good
opportunity to explore problems related to northern dissent, limited
war strategy, and CSA opportunities to reformulate strategy.

I think it's a wonderful film that very effectively incorporates maps,
photographs, impressionistic sources, and narrative -- its general
thrust, (a rehash of the late 19th c. view that Americans were trapped
in a clash of institutions that deprives most of the participants of
any special responsibility for starting it or fighting it a certain way,
a kind of Simpsons fight over slavery or the "dysfunctional family at war,")
tends to overstress the heroic and futile nature of the conflict, but it
also provokes some thoughtful and reflective discussions by students.

I'd be very interested to hear how others are using or not using the series.

Peter Knupfer
Kansas State University
=======================================================================
CENSER
Date:         Thu, 14 Oct 1993 09:22:00 ECT
From:         Jane Turner Censer 
Subject:      teaching ken burns

Dear Susan and fellow teachers,
        When "The Civil War" was released, i was interested in possibly using
it in the classroom and I spent a lot of time watching it, virtually slow mo.
I came away dizzy but also rather sceptical about it as a teaching aid, unless
the instructor is willing to use a lot of other materials and significant time
pointing out Burns's interpretation.  I think the single best stand-alone
Episode is No. 3, "Forever Free."  But even in that one, I personally thought
that Burns's fixation on great men--with Lincoln as the prime example--skewed
his presentation; the Prelim. Emancip. Procl. comes through as the work of
Lincoln with little indication of the intense pressure the abolitionists and
some members of his own party were putting on him in that regard.

        I happen to be one of those who believes that you can't teach the
Civil War without attention to battles and how the war was going.  But that
said,  I found "The Civil War" paying too little attention to political,
intellectual, and social aspects of the war.  Many of my research interests
lie in southern history, and the South comes across virtually as a
monolith in Burns's films--with little thought given to explaining
southerners' acceptance of secession or to showing dissent (before the
closing days of the war).

        Despite all these nasty criticisms (and I can come up with more),
I have to say "The Civil War" is beautifully produced and visually stunning.
Perhaps if you can, with the help of secondary accounts, other primary
sources, promote the students' seeing it as an interpretation (rather than
just a showy montage) and help them see how it differs from others, you
will have done a lot in promoting critical thinking and close examination
of texts.  But that will take you away from the enjoyment of its beauty,
and I suspect you will find significant resistance among your students.

        The recent AHA Perspectives covered a Boston conference which
dealt with many of these questions.  Perhaps I am overly critical of
Burns, but I would be interested in seeing the comments of others who
have taught it (I did see Kelly's) or who have considered it.
Sincerely,  Jane Turner Censer   George Mason University
===================================================================
BURTON
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1993 13:49:26 -0600 (CST)
From: "Vernon Burton" 
To: H-CIVWAR@uicvm.bitnet
Subject: RE: teaching ken burns

[Moderator's note:  the cite is _AQ_ 44 (June '92): 244-54]

From:  Vernon Burton
As usual Jane Censer is being too modest.  She has an exceptional review in
American Quarterly on the Burns series.  This is a must read for all.  I
forget the issue, but about a year ago.  Vernon Burton
====================================================================
KNUPFER
Date:         Thu, 14 Oct 1993 09:23:09 ECT
From:         Peter Knupfer 
Subject:      CW music

Re Woodard's request.  Ken Burns produced a music of the Civil
War tape, based in part on his documentary.  It's a 1 hour program, broadcast
about a year after the series came out.  PBS video probably has info. on it.
I'm a bluegrass fiddler, and found the work by Jay Ungar & Fiddle Fever
to be very enjoyable; there are selections from army songs, spirituals,
campaigns, etc., some very moving, some rather contrived -- a half-hour
would probably have worked better.  There's a full rendition of Ashokan
Farewell on it; but the tune wasn't a period piece, so it's more evocative
than instructive at that point.  Definitely worth using, though.  A number
of reenactor bands have recorded army songs -- I remember there was a
1st or 3rd brigade band up in Madison when I was there years ago, and
it was quite popular.  The group used period instruments and recorded at
least one album.  Does Schwann's catalog list those kinds of things anymore?

Peter Knupfer
Kansas State University
====================================================================
ROLLINS
Date:    Tue, 7 Dec 1993 12:07:12 -0600
From     X - H-Film
Subject: Re: Ken Burns's Civil War
From: Rollins%osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu@UICVM.UIC.EDU

RE: Request for info on Burns video.
        Good to see your query on the board! Hope all goes well with
you!  Here are two standard items for research on  THE CIVIL WAR:

1. Contact PBS and ask for a "Press Kit."  The Kit will have three or
four stills, sample reviews, profiles on the filmmaker and on some of
the actors/technicians/archives/historians, etc.  While such items are
always self-serving, they often provide production details you will find
nowhere else.
        Here is the telephone number for PBS:(703)739-5000

2. PBS may have the number for Burns' production company and he may, with
all the money he has made in the last five years, have a "researcher" within
the company or a publicist who could supply you with reviews.

3. The Massachusetts Council for the Humanitiesmam conducted a special
conference on Film and History which featured Burns and his epic.  The
Council offices are in Boston:(617)

4. The Film people at the National Endowment for the Humanities are very
proud of the series. They received more kudos for it than any other series
they have supported over they years.  A very helpful person there is as
follows:
Mr. James Daugherty
General Programs Div.
NEH
1100 Penn. Ave, NW--Rm 424
Washington, DC 20506
(202)786-0267

5. Once you have collected your set of reviews, I would love to have a clopy.
Should you write a really good essay on the series, please share it with me.
I would like to assemble essays on it and other recent Civil War films for
The Popular Peress.

   I look foraward to seeing you in May when the American Studies Association
of Germany meets on your campus.  Please look for the best tap room for us to
talk and dance with the assembled men and women of American Studies-Germany
as per our meeting in Paderborn!

        Will you attend the Popular Culture meetings in Kalamazoo and
Chicago in the Spring?

        Must close......

***********************************************


Information provider:
  Unit:    H-Net program at UIC History Department
  Email:   H-Net@uicvm.uic.edu
  Posted:  6 May 1994
.

From The Civil War and the Internet, Copyright 1995. R. Muns.