Concerning Professor Masur, I've often emphasized that in the 2012 New York Times op-ed "In Spielberg’s ‘Lincoln,’ Passive Black Characters," she charged that “it’s disappointing that in a movie devoted to explaining the abolition of slavery in the United States, African-American characters do almost nothing but passively wait for white men to liberate them,” even though for “some 30 years, historians have been demonstrating that slaves were crucial agents in their emancipation.” The movie, she says, “reinforces, even if inadvertently, the outdated assumption that white men are the primary movers of history.”
Kevin, concerning “Spielberg may not get every historical detail right,” it seems to me that in that spirit you tend to dismiss the insistence not only of Professor Masur but also of Professor Foner that the film hugely misrepresents the actual political evolution of emancipation during the war. I’m with them, even though I agree with you about actual nitpicking.
So again, I will say what I have said before when this outlook conflict between us has come up: you are a real historian of decades experience, and I am only a public history advocate and two-decade activist for fitting civic memory of emancipation’s evolution.
It is probably not fitting for one Substack author to press his own Substack in that of another Substack author, but our divergence here is so severe that I will transgress. I hope anyone interested will read my Substack’s very short (442 words) introductory essay from Juneteenth 2023: “Why ‘The Self-Emancipator?’”
I encourage everyone to check out your Substack. The more perspectives the better. Let me reiterate that I agree with Masur and Foner that our understanding of emancipation must acknowledge the central role that enslaved people played in emancipating themselves and helping to both save the Union and destroy the Confederacy. I just don't expect every work of art, whether it is Hollywood film, a work of historical fiction, etc. to adhere to any one historical interpretation. The movie Lincoln was not intended as an all-encompassing exploration of emancipation. It focused in on a few characters and proved to be an entertaining and thought-provoking depiction of Lincoln.
Concerning Professor Masur, I've often emphasized that in the 2012 New York Times op-ed "In Spielberg’s ‘Lincoln,’ Passive Black Characters," she charged that “it’s disappointing that in a movie devoted to explaining the abolition of slavery in the United States, African-American characters do almost nothing but passively wait for white men to liberate them,” even though for “some 30 years, historians have been demonstrating that slaves were crucial agents in their emancipation.” The movie, she says, “reinforces, even if inadvertently, the outdated assumption that white men are the primary movers of history.”
She made a good point, though I did try to respond in the Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/11/historians-need-to-give-steven-spielberg-a-break/265579/
I’m grateful to have been steered to read that thoughtful article. Here is the gift link if others want to read it:
https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/11/historians-need-to-give-steven-spielberg-a-break/265579/?gift=htqqU62BFnB8eTXgNWpJY0ADtwvoMrVb45uGHInCrpI&utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share
Kevin, concerning “Spielberg may not get every historical detail right,” it seems to me that in that spirit you tend to dismiss the insistence not only of Professor Masur but also of Professor Foner that the film hugely misrepresents the actual political evolution of emancipation during the war. I’m with them, even though I agree with you about actual nitpicking.
So again, I will say what I have said before when this outlook conflict between us has come up: you are a real historian of decades experience, and I am only a public history advocate and two-decade activist for fitting civic memory of emancipation’s evolution.
It is probably not fitting for one Substack author to press his own Substack in that of another Substack author, but our divergence here is so severe that I will transgress. I hope anyone interested will read my Substack’s very short (442 words) introductory essay from Juneteenth 2023: “Why ‘The Self-Emancipator?’”
https://selfemancipator.substack.com/p/why-the-self-emancipator
Thanks.
I encourage everyone to check out your Substack. The more perspectives the better. Let me reiterate that I agree with Masur and Foner that our understanding of emancipation must acknowledge the central role that enslaved people played in emancipating themselves and helping to both save the Union and destroy the Confederacy. I just don't expect every work of art, whether it is Hollywood film, a work of historical fiction, etc. to adhere to any one historical interpretation. The movie Lincoln was not intended as an all-encompassing exploration of emancipation. It focused in on a few characters and proved to be an entertaining and thought-provoking depiction of Lincoln.