Joshism
Captain
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2012
- Location
- Jupiter, FL
Ken Burn's Civil War: Historians Respond
edited by Robert Brent Toplin
Oxford University Press (1996)
Ken Burn's Civil War documentary miniseries debuted on PBS almost exactly 30 years ago. I must admit I haven't watched it since it's original run when I was not quite 9 years old. Nevertheless, coming across this slim volume at my local public library made me curious enough to give it a read.
This is a small book - less than 200 pages and not as wide or not as tall as a typical book either. There are nine essays. One by Ken Burns himself about the process of making the series and two by his collaborators on the project are obviously positive. One by the book's editor I would rate neutral. The other five are negative, mostly criticizing what Burns did or did not focus on in the course of 9 episodes totaling 11 hours. Not enough about women, blacks, or Reconstruction. Too much focus on the Virginia theater in particular and the military events (battles and generals). Too safe and conventional.
Some of the criticism seems especially misguided. Reconstruction could (and should) be the subject of its own 11 hour documentary. But the criticism that seemed almost absurd to me was that women disguised as men is mentioned "only in passing." Between the Union and Confederates, roughly 3 million men served in the war. The most generous estimate of disguised women soldiers is less than 1,000 for both sides combined. In other words, less than 0.03% and probably none as officers. Some fascinating stories I'm sure, but extremely trivial in the big picture.
The biggest takeaway I got from the book is the divide between the film Ken Burns made and the modern interpretation of history - what might be called social/cultural history. In brief, this mindset places the focus on a much broader spectrum of common men and women, contrasting to the old "great men" view of history. It's interesting to see how strong this school of thought was even in the 1980s and 1990s. Perhaps Burns' work marked the end of an interpretive era.
If Ken Burns is your gateway to the Civil War, by all means give this a read afterwards to broaden your horizons. But if you're a Civil War buff you're already familiar with the larger issues this book addresses, especially in 2020.
edited by Robert Brent Toplin
Oxford University Press (1996)
Ken Burn's Civil War documentary miniseries debuted on PBS almost exactly 30 years ago. I must admit I haven't watched it since it's original run when I was not quite 9 years old. Nevertheless, coming across this slim volume at my local public library made me curious enough to give it a read.
This is a small book - less than 200 pages and not as wide or not as tall as a typical book either. There are nine essays. One by Ken Burns himself about the process of making the series and two by his collaborators on the project are obviously positive. One by the book's editor I would rate neutral. The other five are negative, mostly criticizing what Burns did or did not focus on in the course of 9 episodes totaling 11 hours. Not enough about women, blacks, or Reconstruction. Too much focus on the Virginia theater in particular and the military events (battles and generals). Too safe and conventional.
Some of the criticism seems especially misguided. Reconstruction could (and should) be the subject of its own 11 hour documentary. But the criticism that seemed almost absurd to me was that women disguised as men is mentioned "only in passing." Between the Union and Confederates, roughly 3 million men served in the war. The most generous estimate of disguised women soldiers is less than 1,000 for both sides combined. In other words, less than 0.03% and probably none as officers. Some fascinating stories I'm sure, but extremely trivial in the big picture.
The biggest takeaway I got from the book is the divide between the film Ken Burns made and the modern interpretation of history - what might be called social/cultural history. In brief, this mindset places the focus on a much broader spectrum of common men and women, contrasting to the old "great men" view of history. It's interesting to see how strong this school of thought was even in the 1980s and 1990s. Perhaps Burns' work marked the end of an interpretive era.
If Ken Burns is your gateway to the Civil War, by all means give this a read afterwards to broaden your horizons. But if you're a Civil War buff you're already familiar with the larger issues this book addresses, especially in 2020.