Editor's Note
Go ahead. Take a break from writing up your abstracts for our #USIH2020 conference (due 15 April, CFP here), so you can sit back and enjoy our coming attractions! We’re thrilled to announce that this year’s annual meeting will feature a live edition of “Historians at The Movies” (#HATM on your local Twitter feed) on Friday, 6 Nov. 2020, film TBD. How does it work, and what can we gain from teaching film as a primary source? Here’s my conversation with #HATM founder Jason Herbert. See you all in Boston for “REVOLUTION & REFORM”!
Sara: Let’s talk about movies as a vital primary source for intellectual historians. From your #HATM lineup, can you tell us about a few films that changed your idea of American thought and culture?
Jason: One of the ways that #HATM has changed my thoughts on American thought and culture is really coming to terms with the ways in which film reflects society. Often people will ask “why this movie” or “why that movie–they’re not historical!” When of course, all films are historical. This became evident to me in our fourth week when we watched Trading Places. Sure it’s a 1984 comedy, but it’s also a powerful commentary on 1980s capitalism. Moreso, it offers some interesting questions–does the film serve as an indictment of capitalism or an endorsement? Coco became a powerful way to think about immigration and Mexican-American culture. Jaws served to think about mass hysteria. Spider-Man into the Spider-Verse was a way to think about families and kinship in the 21st century. All of these films reflected something Americans were chewing on. And that means something.
Sara: I have fond memories of cheering whenever high school teachers rolled in a VCR (Yes, a VCR). But movies are complex sources to interpret and to teach. How do you use films in the classroom?
Jason: I have to admit that at times I get a little worried about firing up a film in class, too. Am I really teaching? Of course I am. Films, like primary and secondary sources, should be curated with students to ensure they are learning the lessons I am putting forth. But because of the way they engage multiple senses, they can have huge impacts on student learning in ways that other mediums cannot. History Channel’s The Men Who Built America is incredibly problematic, but can also be an effective tool, if wisely used. Students love the series. I, as the instructor, can use film as a way to teach students how to critique a book, film, or viewpoint. At the same time, Amistad depicts the Middle Passage in ways that I can never come close to replicating in class. We as scholars should not shy away from film; I really believe we should embrace it.
Sara: Tell us about your current scholarship, and how visual culture informs your approach.
Jason: I am a scholar of Indigenous Florida. My dissertation examines the social, political, and environmental transformation of Florida after the introduction of livestock in the 16th century. Cattle, in particular, had a demonstrably transformative effect on the peninsula. I’m trying to tie together Native American cattle culture prior to the end of the Third Seminole War (1858), when cattle were finally taken from Seminoles as a way of ending their resistance, to modern Seminole cattle culture, which is among the largest producers of beef in the United States. A lot of what I am doing in the way of visual culture is looking at 20th century Seminole artwork to see how livestock husbandry is represented in Seminole lives. It helps to understand what these animals mean to Seminoles now, and hopefully, in earlier generations.
Sara: Colleagues at #USIH2020 will enjoy a #HATM Friday movie night after an exciting day of scholarly sessions, led by a plenary on indigenous approaches to the history of revolution and reform. Can you offer some insights on Native representations in popular film?
Jason: Unfortunately, Native representations on film have often been racist depictions of “hostile” people thundering over the horizon to steal from “innocent” settler pioneers. This comes largely from films of the 1950s and 1960s, which in turn created a popular memory of Indians as belonging to the past. Even worse, Native peoples were often depicted in redface by white actors. There’s an excellent documentary by Cree filmmaker Neil Diamond called Reel Injun that explores all of this. It’s really good and I highly recommend it. There are some amazing American Indian actors doing phenomenal work, most famously Wes Studi, who recently became the first Native American to win an Oscar. But films also offer the opportunity to think about indigeneity, and I’m thinking about Taika Waititi’s recent success and Oscar win. I think what I hope to see, not as a historian, but as someone who has been privileged to learn from contemporary Seminoles (as well as my other Indigenous friends, peers, and colleagues) is for modern Indigenous lives to continue to be depicted on film so that audience understand we are all part of one global society. History is about learning from the past to create a better future. I think film can help us do that.
One Thought on this Post
S-USIH Comment Policy
We ask that those who participate in the discussions generated in the Comments section do so with the same decorum as they would in any other academic setting or context. Since the USIH bloggers write under our real names, we would prefer that our commenters also identify themselves by their real name. As our primary goal is to stimulate and engage in fruitful and productive discussion, ad hominem attacks (personal or professional), unnecessary insults, and/or mean-spiritedness have no place in the USIH Blog’s Comments section. Therefore, we reserve the right to remove any comments that contain any of the above and/or are not intended to further the discussion of the topic of the post. We welcome suggestions for corrections to any of our posts. As the official blog of the Society of US Intellectual History, we hope to foster a diverse community of scholars and readers who engage with one another in discussions of US intellectual history, broadly understood.
Are there concerns that #HATM is historicizing, so to speak, in the wrong direction? Does this focus on how a film reflects the historical record comes at the expense of the history of the industry, its genres, and its understanding of its public?